Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX_Walmart Expansion Site Plan ApprovalOFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes OWNER: Peter Bonnell Bonnell Family LLC 10047 Main Street, #509 Bellevue, WA 98004 CONTACT/APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: Jeff Chambers PACLAND 1505 Westlake Ave N, Ste. 305 Seattle, WA 98109 Walmart Expansion Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA 10-009, ECF, SA -H 743 Rainier Ave S May 13, 2010 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Site Plan Review for the construction of a additions to the existing Walmart retail facility, which would include 16,000 square feet of additions to the retail space and a reduction of 4,000 square feet in the Garden Center and an approximate 16,000 square foot area for outdoor retail sales. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on April 20, 2010. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: NE UTES The following minutes are a summary of the April 27, 2010 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, April 27, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Project file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Zoning and Neighborhood Detail Map application, reports, staff comments and other documentation pertinent to this request. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 2 The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Rocale Timmons Associate Planner, Community and Economic Development, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The site is located just west of Rainier Avenue S and Hardie Avenue SW between SW 7s' Street and S Grady Way. The site is 13.6 acres and is zoned Commercial Arterial and is located within the Commercial Land Use Designation. The applicant is proposing an expansion of the existing Walmart retail facility in the amount of 16,000 square feet. The applicant is further proposing a reduction in the Garden Center from 9,000 square feet to approximately 4,000 square feet. An area would be set aside just north of the expansion area for outdoor retail sales. The Examiner questioned conforming or non -conforming, parking is an example of non -conforming as well as other aspects of the project. Can a legal non -conforming use be expended under the Code? Ms. Timmons stated that as long as it is not more than a 50% expansion; with relation to the parking stalls there are approximately 618 existing, the applicant is proposing only 127 new parking stalls. The applicant is proposing improvements to existing landscaping, lighting and drainage from the site. Access would continue via the current curb cuts along the perimeter streets. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated with 6 measures. No appeals were filed. The project does comply with all policies within the Commercial Corridor Comprehensive Plan designation. The project is located within the Commercial Arterial Zoning designation and this project is permitted within this zone. Lot coverage for this site is limited to 65%, the applicant is proposing 840,000 square foot footprint on the site, which results in a lot coverage of 25.3%. CA zone requires a 10 -foot minimum front yard setback with a maximum 15 -foot setback. There are no other setbacks required in this zone. The front yard setback would be assessed from Hardie Avenue SW and Rainier Avenue S. The proposal does not comply with the maximum front yard setback; however the expansion does increase the conformity of the project in that it moves closer towards Hardie Ave SW and Rainier Ave S, which then does not require a variance. A short plat was recently approved for the site which would allow Walmart to site structure on its own building pad. The short plat has not been recorded and this must be done. Height in the CA zone is limited to 50 feet; the applicant has proposed a maximum height of 32' 4". The applicant has provided various roof shapes and heights along the eastern fagade to break up the massing of the structure. There are 99 existing trees on site; the applicant proposes to remove 15 trees. Mature vegetation on site should be retained as much as possible. The existing parking layout presented a challenge to the layout; the spacing of the landscape islands could not be reorganized. The CA zone requires a 10 -foot landscape strip along all street Exhibit No. 3: Site Plan Exhibit No. 4: Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 5: Tree Inventory Plan Exhibit No. 6: East and West Elevations Exhibit No. 7: North and South Elevations Exhibit No. 8: Large Page Short Plat Plan (9 pages) The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Rocale Timmons Associate Planner, Community and Economic Development, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The site is located just west of Rainier Avenue S and Hardie Avenue SW between SW 7s' Street and S Grady Way. The site is 13.6 acres and is zoned Commercial Arterial and is located within the Commercial Land Use Designation. The applicant is proposing an expansion of the existing Walmart retail facility in the amount of 16,000 square feet. The applicant is further proposing a reduction in the Garden Center from 9,000 square feet to approximately 4,000 square feet. An area would be set aside just north of the expansion area for outdoor retail sales. The Examiner questioned conforming or non -conforming, parking is an example of non -conforming as well as other aspects of the project. Can a legal non -conforming use be expended under the Code? Ms. Timmons stated that as long as it is not more than a 50% expansion; with relation to the parking stalls there are approximately 618 existing, the applicant is proposing only 127 new parking stalls. The applicant is proposing improvements to existing landscaping, lighting and drainage from the site. Access would continue via the current curb cuts along the perimeter streets. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated with 6 measures. No appeals were filed. The project does comply with all policies within the Commercial Corridor Comprehensive Plan designation. The project is located within the Commercial Arterial Zoning designation and this project is permitted within this zone. Lot coverage for this site is limited to 65%, the applicant is proposing 840,000 square foot footprint on the site, which results in a lot coverage of 25.3%. CA zone requires a 10 -foot minimum front yard setback with a maximum 15 -foot setback. There are no other setbacks required in this zone. The front yard setback would be assessed from Hardie Avenue SW and Rainier Avenue S. The proposal does not comply with the maximum front yard setback; however the expansion does increase the conformity of the project in that it moves closer towards Hardie Ave SW and Rainier Ave S, which then does not require a variance. A short plat was recently approved for the site which would allow Walmart to site structure on its own building pad. The short plat has not been recorded and this must be done. Height in the CA zone is limited to 50 feet; the applicant has proposed a maximum height of 32' 4". The applicant has provided various roof shapes and heights along the eastern fagade to break up the massing of the structure. There are 99 existing trees on site; the applicant proposes to remove 15 trees. Mature vegetation on site should be retained as much as possible. The existing parking layout presented a challenge to the layout; the spacing of the landscape islands could not be reorganized. The CA zone requires a 10 -foot landscape strip along all street Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 3 frontages. The applicant has proposed to enhance all existing landscaping in the interior as well as the perimeter of the site. Approximately 55 feet of landscaping would be provided along Rainier Ave as well as 20 feet of landscaping along SW 7"' Street. The code requires intervening landscaping every six parking stalls and that is being done in the parking area. Thirty-five feet of landscaping must be provided for each parking stall, 745 parking stalls are proposed, which requires 26,000 square feet in landscaping. The applicant has proposed 30,000 square feet of landscaping thereby meeting the requirements. Fire and Traffic mitigation fees have been imposed by ERC. The applicant has applied for a Refuse Modification in order to reduce the refuse area from 1,500 square feet to 30 cubic yards. The modification was granted administratively due to the proposed compactor that is engineered for high volume usage. No screening detail has been provided and must be submitted to show compliance with refuse and recycle standards. Staff has received several letters as well as a petition that demonstrate the community support for this expansion. Property values in the area are anticipated to be maintained or increased as a result of the project. Vehicular circulation was looked at and found that the access would remain the same as currently used by the retail facility. There was one existing pedestrian connection that runs from the center of the east elevation to Rainier Ave S, the applicant has proposed to increase the width of that pedestrian walkway as well as enhance it with pedestrian scale lighting. An additional pedestrian connection has been proposed from the northern portion of the structure to SW 7a' Street. The applicant has proposed 3-5 additional parking lot lighting poles with a height of 40 -feet that will match the existing lights on site and surrounding properties. A lighting plan needs to be provided showing both existing and new lighting plans that conform with spillover requirements of the Code. A drainage report has been submitted stating that the proposed project improvements generate less than .5 cubic feet per second; therefore, the project is exempt from the flow control requirements. Water quality treatment has been provided in the form of a new bio-swale just north of the expanded parking lot area. The project is located within Design District D, which includes minimum design standard that are to be met and if not met, they must demonstrate how they meet the intent of the code. The proposal complies with the Urban Design District D. The proposed elevations meet the Site Design and Building Location minimum standards with the exception of refuse and recycle elevations. Those were discussed earlier. The proposal does not comply with the minimum standards for parking and vehicular access mainly due to the location of existing surface parking. The situation is existing and the applicant has met the intent to reduce the visual impacts of the parking lot with the use of landscaping. The proposal does comply with all minimum standards within the pedestrian environment. Most of the minimum standards have been met for landscaping. A landscaping maintenance surety device and an irrigation plan must be provided. There are many limitations on building architecture due to the need for altering an existing structure, the intent for the front elevation has been met due to the visual interest provided with the exception of the human scale element. Additional elements could be provided in the area and staff has recommended that that be done. Additional elements need to be provided to the eastern elevation of the fagade. A building materials and colors board must be provided to staff in order to insure that quality materials have been provided. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 4 Jack McCullough, McCullough & Hill, 701 5u' Avenue, Ste. 7220, Seattle, WA 98104 stated that the applicant looked at a larger expansion, the site is very tight and decided that they could not make it work. The proposal presented today seems appropriate for the site. There has been a lot of attention to the landscaping, some of the planters have been expanded rather than building more landscape bays. The parking requirements of the code do create a range within which the project must fall, one is to look at code compliance for this project and then looking at parking from a demand point of view. The 745 stalls proposed for this site are necessary in order to provide an adequate level of parking to support this facility. Jeff Chambers, PACLAND, 1505 Westland Ave N, Ste. 305, Seattle, WA 98109 stated he wanted to discuss some of the items previously brought forward. In relation to landscaping, during the discussions with staff they expressed interest in definitely keeping as many of the mature trees as possible on the site. The current sidewalk is approximately 3-4 feet wide, that walkway would be widened out and some compact stalls were created in that location. The landscape islands went from approximately six feet wide to approximately 12 feet wide. Rather than adding additional islands to the site, which constrains the stall size, they agreed with staff to expand the existing islands to 10-12 feet wide. By doing that they do meet all code requirements. Some parking stalls were lost along Hardie with the proposed new landscaping. Other parking stalls were lost with the additional landscaping along 7b, which was part of the request from staff. The proposed trash compactor is widely used by many large stores and has been working very efficiently in those facilities. In addition to the compactor there is a bale and pallet area for additional storage. The existing 40 -foot lights give a more uniformed lighting level across the site. Industry standard encourages parking areas around four foot candles and front of store areas around 10 -foot candles. The current parking lot meets that uniformity. When 25 -foot lights are used the spacing ends up about 50 -feet apart, the uniformity of the lighting goes from one foot candle to about 8-9 foot candles throughout the parking lot. This creates a bigger safety concern with lighting being too bright and too dark. The number of lighting standards would increase, there would be more conduits and circuits added to the parking lot. The only lights being added to this site are in the area where the Billy McHale's restaurant was located. Usunobun Osa�, Larry D. Craighead Architects, 211 N Record Street, Ste. 222, Dallas, TX 75202 stated that they would be able to make the suggested changes to the fagade with a variety of colors for a more pleasant look. The refuse area will meet the screening requirements as well as gates and a roof on the compactor area. The design of this area does allow for a portion of the roof to remain open for ventilation. The will continue to work with staff to create a workable resolution in regards to the elevation, providing pedestrian amenities and finalize a workable solution that will make everyone happy. They want the City to be happy with this expansion. Jack McCullough stated that they were going to take an existing facility that is non -conforming in some respects and make it better. Code does not require full conformance. They are consistently working with staff to make the project better. Kgyren Kittrick'Community and Economic Development stated that most utilities were covered under the Short Plat. All the issues regarding storm drains etc have been worked out to the City's satisfaction. It is still subject to final review and permitting. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 5 Parking lot lighting usually does not come under her control, at the time the Walmart was originally built, they were subject to the foot candles being at a level that was common throughout the City at that time. It mostly was a matter of a nice even distribution of light. A lighting plan should be provided, showing that the light is not going to wander off the property. There is some concern about excess lighting on the drainage swale on the west, that lighting should not be increased as it could interfere with the existing bioswale as well as the new one. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:56 am. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Jeff Chambers for PACLAND, filed a request for a Site Plan approval. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. There was no opposition from the public regarding the subject proposal. 6. The subject site is located at 743 Rainier Avenue South. The subject site includes the existing Walmart store and parking area as well as the former Billy McHale's building and parking area. The site does not include other buildings or parking areas to the north, south and east that includes the Columbia Bank and Jimmy Mac's. 7. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial corridor uses and employment area valley use, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 8. The subject site is currently zoned CA (Commercial Arterial) and IM (Medium Industrial). The vast majority of the subject site is zoned for commercial uses with the most westerly portion of the site limited to IM uses. The subject site is also governed by the Urban Design District D guidelines. 9. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1745 enacted in February 1959. 10. The underlying ownership has submitted a short plat to separate the existing and future Walmart areas from surrounding properties. That short plat has been approved but not recorded. 11. The subject site is approximately 594,553 square feet or 13.6 acres. 12. The subject site is essentially level. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 6 13. The subject site contains 99 significant trees. Code requires 10% of the trees be retained. The applicant proposes removing 5 coniferous trees and 10 deciduous trees or 15 trees in total. The trees that would be removed are in the expansion areas north and east of the main building. Additional landscaping is proposed (see below). 14. Access to the subject site will be unchanged. 15. The applicant proposes remodeling and expanding the existing Walmart complex. The existing complex contains approximately 134,352 square feet of retail space along with 9,000 square feet in its garden center. The applicant proposes adding 16,000 square feet to the store and reducing its garden space to 5,000 square feet. The expansion will occur in five areas. There will be two expansion areas along the eastern or front facade near the main entrance and near the southeast corner of the front facade. The other additions will be a large area along the north facade near its northeast corner and two smaller additions near the northwest corner of the building. The applicant also proposes adding 127 additional parking stalls to its complement of 618 stalls for a total of 745 stalls. 16. The applicant proposes changes to its front or eastern facade to provide more visual interest. The applicant will remodel the inside of the store as part of its proposed expansion and modification. There will be two entrances into the store from the east. The two entrances will generally divide access to the general merchandize areas and the grocery areas of the store. The entrances will be defined by parapet rooflines that curve in wing -like facades with clerestory windows on either side of a larger curving central entrance wall with a focal point niche containing a larger tree alcove. These vestibule areas would contain seating and. trash cans. The roofline will rise to approximately 32 feet 4 inches. 17. The applicant will be redeveloping the garden area to contain more retail space. The new garden center will be located along the northern end of the eastern facade. The roofline along the north will be 21 feet 4 inches matching the existing roofline or that facade's tallest extreme. 18. The applicant requested and was granted a modification to allow a smaller than required refuse and recycling area due to its proposed use of an efficient, high volume compactor unit. These units have been demonstrated to handle waste/recycling materials in other locations. The unit will be located in an area away from public areas of the subject site. The screening details were not submitted for this aspect of the proposal. 19. The facade treatment includes additional modulations, the changes in the height of elements along eastern roofline as well as a mix of facade materials. Lighting is also proposed to add to visual interest around the prominent facades. Staff recommended additional elements be added to enhance the appearance and feel of the building for pedestrians on the subject site. In addition, staff wanted the applicant to submit materials boards to verify the quality and appearance features of the exterior treatments. 20. The CA Zone requires a maximum front yard setback of 15 feet in order to locate structures closer to the street and reduce the visual impact of parking along thoroughfares. The proposed expansion would not comply with this requirement providing a setback of approximately 555 feet from Hardie -Rainier. Staff found that since the expansion encompasses a small portion of the proposed existing complex it does not trigger a need to conform to the newer, current standards. The setbacks on the north, west and south are respectively 150 feet, 65 feet and 15 feet. Yard coverage of 65 percent is permitted whereas the proposed coverage is 25.3 percent meeting code requirements. The proposed maximum height of 32 feet 4 inches meets the height limit of the CA Zone's 50 feet. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 7 21. As noted, the applicant will be increasing the number of parking stalls, mainly in the northern portion of the site in the area where Billy McHale's was located. Code permits a range of parking and the proposed use's range would be between 601 stalls to 751 stalls. The applicant proposes just under the top range of 745 stalls. The applicant's review of parking on site demonstrates the need for the larger complement of parking. 22. Code requires 26,075 square feet of landscaping for the 745 stall parking lots. The applicant proposes 65,690 square feet or approximately 40,000 square feet of additional landscaping than required. The new parking areas will comply with code as to the amount and spacing of interior landscaping. The older parking areas will have enlarged landscape pads but will take advantage of the existing conditions to maintain landscape spacing in parking aisles. The applicant suggested that attempting to modify the existing configuration would eliminate many of the larger, mature trees located in the parking areas. Perimeter landscaping already meets code and contains some of the larger, mature trees. These landscape areas will be enlarged although they are limited to ingress and egress areas, the perimeter of the site is dominated by third party properties, not part of the subject site or expansion plans. 23. The development will increase traffic approximately 600 trips per day. The ERC imposed a mitigation fee to help offset the impacts of those additional trips. 24. The uses surrounding the subject site are restaurants, a bank, tire store, retail pad and car dealership. Staff noted that the proposed use has been and will continue to be compatible with these various uses. 25. Stormwater will be handled by providing for an additional bio-swale to treat surface parking lot runoff. The proposal does comply with the impervious surface requirements of Code. There was concern that lighting might affect the functioning of the bioswales. 26. As noted, the subject site straddles two zoning districts and two comprehensive plan use areas but the vast majority of the subject site is governed by the CA Zone and the Commercial Corridor policies. Staff determined as a practical matter that the majority zoning, CA, and use designations, Commercial Corridor, should be applied. 27. The existing parking areas are currently served by light standards that are approximately 40 feet tall. Code currently restricts lighting standards to not more than 25 feet in height. The applicant has proposed matching the existing pole height. The applicant noted that the taller lights provide better overall lighting. Any change to light standards should be done by code amendment. There is nothing critical or unique to justify deviation from the adopted standards. Those standards apply to all development and if they are inadequate then they would be inadequate for all development. While the expanded parking area will be part of the existing complex, the more aesthetically pleasing shorter poles should prevail as it would require strict observation for someone to notice the asymmetry of pole heights throughout the complex. 28. The following Table contains staff s analysis of the proposal's compliance with the Design District D Guidelines: a) Review of Compliance to District 'D' Design Guidelines, The site is located within Design District V. The proposed project must meet the intent of the Design Regulations where the regulations are applicable. As demonstrated in the table below the proposal Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 8 meets the intent of the Design Regulations on the basis of individual merit if all conditions of approval are met. A. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. 1. Site Design and Street Pattern: Intent: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts; plan districts that are organized for efficiency while maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use; create and maintain a safe, convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. Minimum Standard: Provide a network of public and/or private local streets in addition to N/A public arterials. Minimum Standard: Maintain a hierarchy of streets to provide organized circulation that N/A promotes use by multiple transportation modes and to avoid overburdening the roadway system. The hierarchy shall consist of (from greatest in size to smallest): (a) High Visibility Street. A highly visible arterial street that warrants special design treatment to improve its appearance and maintain its transportation function. (b) Arterial Street. A street classified as a principal arterial on the City's Arterial Street Plan. (c) Pedestrian -Oriented Streets. Streets that are intended to feature a concentration of pedestrian activity. Such streets feature slow moving traffic, narrow travel lanes, on -street parking, and wide sidewalks. (d) Internal or local roads (public or private). 2. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space; enhance the visual character and definition of streets within the district; provide an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses and the street; and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. ✓ Minimum Standard: Orient buildings to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. Minimum Standard: The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but ✓ instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian -only courtyard. 3. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Minimum Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing ✓ a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements. Minimum Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network N/A of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. Minimum Standard: Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open N/A space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. ✓ Minimum Standard: Secondary access (not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least 4-1/2 feet wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. ✓ Minimum Standard: Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. a Trnncitinn to Surrounding Develonment: Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 9 Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Minimum Standard: Careful siting and design treatment are necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: a. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased by the Reviewing Official in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; b. Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels; c. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or d. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. S. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Minimum Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adiacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7e1. Minimum Standard: Garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed, consistent with RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclables Standards, and RMC 4-4-095, Screening Not Compliant and Storage Height/Location Limitations. Staff Comment: Elevations for the refuse and recycle enclosure were not provided with the site plan application. Staff has recommended as a condition of approval the applicant submit elevations for the refuse and recyclable enclosure. Minimum Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened Not Compliant around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Staff Comment: See comments above. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: The use of chain link, plastic, or wire fencing is prohibited. Staff Comment: See comments above. Minimum Standard: If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian - oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility. 6. Gateways: Not Applicable B. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Location of Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Minimum Standard: No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front Not Compliant property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. Staff Comment: The bulk of the parking is existing and located in between the retail store and Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 10 Rainier Ave S/SR 167. The applicant is proposing to add a total of 127 additional parking stalls of which most would be located to the north of the proposed expansion area and existing parking lot. The parking areas could have negative impacts on the pedestrian environment and the abutting properties without adequate landscape buffers. The applicant is proposing a substantial amount of interior parking lot landscaping in order to minimize to the visual impact in addition to increases in the width of landscape buffers on the perimeter of the site. Specifically perimeter landscaping along Rainier Ave S/SR 167 is proposed at a width of approximately 55 feet and SW 7rh St would have a landscape strip width of approximately 20 feet. The applicant's proposal is successful in meeting the intent of the design standard to minimize the visual impact of the parking located between the building and the street. 2. Design of Surface Parking: Intent: To ensure safety of users of parking areas, convenience to businesses, and reduce the impact of parking lots wherever possible. Minimum Standard: Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties. Staff Comment: A lighting plan was not submitted as part of the application materials, therefore staff could not verify whether or not there would be light spillover onto adjacent Not Compliant properties. Staff has recommended, as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a site lighting plan to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction or building permit approval. ✓ Minimum Standard: All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact (see RMC 4-4-080F7 Landscape Requirements). 3. Structured Parking Garages: Not Applicable C. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi -modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pathways through Parking Lots: Intent: To provide safe and attractive pedestrian connections to buildings, parking garages, and parking lots. ✓ Minimum Standard: Clearly delineated pedestrian pathways and/or private streets shall be provided throughout parking areas. ✓ Minimum Standard: Within parking areas, pedestrian pathways shall be provided perpendicular to the applicable building facade, at a maximum distance of 150 feet apart. 2. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. ✓ Minimum Standard: Developments shall include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings, open space, and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system and adjacent properties. ✓ Minimum Standard: Sidewalks located between buildings and streets shall be raised above the level of vehicular travel. ✓ Minimum Standard: Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials. ✓ Minimum Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: N/A (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed walking surface and street Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 11 trees (see illustration, subsection RMC-4-3-100.G4d). ✓ (b) To increase business visibility and accessibility, breaks in the tree coverage adjacent to major building entries shall be allowed. ✓ (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. ✓ Minimum Standard: Locate pathways with clear sight lines to increase safety. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of walkway or sight lines to building entries. ✓ Minimum Standard: All pedestrian walkways shall provide an all-weather walking surface unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities, at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. ✓ Minimum Standard: Provide pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs. These elements shall be a minimum of 4-1/2 feet wide along at least 75 percent of the length of the building facade, a maximum height of 15 feet above the ground elevation, and no lower than 8 feet above ground level. ✓ Minimum Standard: Site furniture provided in public spaces shall be made of durable, vandal - and weather -resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. ✓ Minimum Standard: Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. D. LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. To have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors; provide these areas in sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activity. 1. Landscaping: Intent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area; provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. ✓ Minimum Standard: All pervious areas shall be landscaped (see RMC 4-4-070 Landscaping) ✓ Minimum Standard: Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as determined by the City of Renton. N/A Minimum Standard: On designated pedestrian -oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with tree grates. For all other streets, street tree treatment shall be as determined by the City of Renton (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.1-13a). ✓ Minimum Standard: The proposed landscaping shall be consistent with the design intent and program of the building, the site, and use. ✓ Minimum Standard: The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping, through the use of plant material and nonvegetative elements, reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. ✓ Minimum Standard: Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets (see RMC 4-4-080F7 Landscape Requirements) Such landscaping shall be at least 10 feet in width as measured from the sidewalk (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.1-13b). ✓ Minimum Standard: Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per 30 lineal feet of street frontage. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 12 Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. ✓ Minimum Standard: Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per 20 square feet of landscaped area. Shrubs shall be at least 12 inches tall at planting and have a mature height between three and four feet. ✓ Minimum Standard: Ground cover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least 90 percent coverage of the landscaped area within three years of installation. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device, prior to occupancy, for a period of not less than three years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. Staff Comment: Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a landscape maintenance surety device for a period of no less than three years in sufficient amount as determined by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to temporary occupancy permit. ✓ Minimum Standard: Surface parking with more than 14 stalls shall be landscaped as follows: (1) Required Amount: Total Number of Spaces Minimum Required Landscape Area* 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space ✓ (2) Provide trees, shrubs, and ground cover in the required interior parking lot landscape areas. Not Compliant (3) Plant at least one tree for every six parking spaces. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet. Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing to retain most of the trees on site in order to maintain the mature tree cover. As a result of the preservation of the mature vegetation the existing location and spacing of landscape islands had to be maintained. Therefore the landscape spacing, which does not comply with the design requirements of the code, could not be brought into conformity. However, as the situation is existing a modification is not necessary. All new parking areas would comply with the minimum standard for tree spacing. ✓ (4) Up to 50 percent of shrubs may be deciduous. ✓ (5) Select and plant ground cover so as to provide 90 percent coverage within three years of planting; provided, that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete. ✓ (6) Do not locate a parking stall more than 50 feet from a landscape area. ✓ Minimum Standard: Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Underground, automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. Staff Comment: An irrigation plan was not submitted as part of the application. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant submit an irrigation plan to and be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction or building permit approval. 2. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space: Not Applicable E. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 13. retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). Staff Comment: The proposal does not include alterations to the blanks walls located on the southern and western facades. Therefore, the applicant would not be required to comply with the modulation requirements for the southern and western facades. The two street facing elevations, the north and eastern facades, are proposed to be expanded and enhanced with architectural elements, however these facades would also not comply with the minimum modulation requirement. The applicant is proposing two 80 foot vestibules along the approximate 500 foot eastern fagade which creates horizontal modulation at spacing which exceeds the 40 foot intervals. However, extending parapets, clerestories, canopies, ornamental lighting and a large planter box with an iconic tree have been provided in order to distinguish the two building entrances as well as to break up the monotony of the large fagade. Based on the limitations of altering the existing structure in addition to the many architectural features provided staff has found that the applicant has achieved visual interest along the eastern fagade thereby meeting the intent of the code. Alternatively, the SW 7th St facing fagade has not provided adequate visual interest. The northern fagade includes the use of three pilaster elements similar to that which is used to wrap around the Garden Center. While the proposed architectural elements add visual interest, which break up the wall plane, there are additional elements that could be added or used to replace the pilaster elements which would reduce the apparent size of the facade. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant submit revised elevations, for the northern fagade, that depict alternative methods to mass and treat the proposed facade. Revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Z. Ground -Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human -scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b) Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Staff Comment: See comments above. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Where blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following: (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. Staff Comment: See comments above. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 14 ✓ Minimum Standard: Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. ✓ Minimum Standard: Provide human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Facades on designated pedestrian -oriented streets shall have at least 75 percent of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade (as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian -oriented street) comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. Staff Comment: The applicant has not provided glazing in the amount specified along the eastern fagade. However, the applicant has provided extending parapets, clerestories, canopies, ornamental lighting, pedestrian furniture and a large planter box with an iconic tree in order to break up the monotony of the large fagade and provide human scale elements. Based on the limitations of altering the existing structure in addition to the many architectural features and pedestrian amenities provided staff has found that the applicant has achieved visual interest along the eastern fagode for the distant public. However, additional elements could be included in the pedestrian plaza area, beneath the northern canopy that extends to south of the northern entrance, in order to reinforce the intended human -scale character of the pedestrian environment. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant provide revised elevations for the eastern fa;ade prior to building permit approval. The revised elevations shall include additional human scale elements in the pedestrian plaza are, beneath the northern canopy that extends to south of the northern entrance. The applicant is encouraged to include one or more of the following in order to achieve a human scale character. additional glazing, artwork and/or planting beds containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the facade. Minimum Standard: Other facade window requirements include the following: ✓ (a) Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50percent. ✓ (b) Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. ✓ (c) Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. ✓ (d) Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. ✓ Minimum Standard: Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles: (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs. ✓ Minimum Standard: Locate and screen roof -mounted mechanical equipment so that the equipment is not visible within 150 feet of the structure when viewed from ground level. ✓ Minimum Standard: Screening features shall blend with the architectural character of the building consistent with RMC 4-4-095E, Roof -Top Equipment. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Match color of roof -mounted mechanical equipment to color of exposed portions of the roof to minimize visual impacts when equipment is visible from higher elevations. Staff Comment: Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant match the color of the roof -mounted mechanical equipment to the color of exposed portions of the roof. 4. Building Materials: Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 15 Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. Staff Comment: It appears that all sides of the structure are finished using the some color scheme and materials. However, in order to ensure that quality materials are used staff recommends the applicant submit a material and colors board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Materials, individually or in combination, shall have an attractive texture, pattern, and quality of detailing for all visible facades. Staff Comment: See comments above. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and reasonably maintained. Staff Comment: See Condition above. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. Staff Comment: See comments above. F. SIGNAGE: Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses; provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. N/A Minimum Standard: Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. N/A Minimum Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. N/A Minimum Standard: Prohibited signs include: L Pole signs; ii. Roof signs; iii. Back -lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back -lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are permitted as are signs with only the individual letters back -lit. N/A Minimum Standard: In mixed use and multi -use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. N/A Minimum Standard: Freestanding ground -related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to five feet above finished grade, including support structure. All such signs shall include decorative landscaping (ground cover and/or shrubs) to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. N/A Minimum Standard: Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. G. LIGHTING: Intent: To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Lighting shall conform to on-site exterior lighting regulations located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On -Site. Staff Comment: Staff has recommended, as a condition of Approval, the applicant be required to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 16 Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Lighting shall be provided on-site to increase security, but shall not be allowed to directly project off-site. Staff Comment: See comments above Not Compliant Minimum Standard: Pedestrian -scale lighting shall be provided, for both safety and aesthetics, along all streets, at primary and secondary building entrances, at building facades, and at pedestrian -oriented spaces. Staff Comment: See comments above CONCLUSIONS: The site plan ordinance provides a number of specific criteria for reviewing a site plan. Those criteria are generally represented in part by the following enumeration: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; b. Conformance with the Building and Zoning Codes; C. Mitigation of impacts on surrounding properties and uses; d. Mitigation of the impacts of the proposal on the subject site itself, e. Conservation of property values; £ Provision for safe and efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation; g. Provision of adequate light and air; h. Adequacy of public services to accommodate the proposed use; The proposed use satisfies these and other particulars of the ordinance. 2. The proposal is appropriate given either the "employment area valley" or "commercial corridor" goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The expansion of an existing retail operation could create new jobs and certainly help revitalize the commercial uses of the subject site. The use could also attract patrons to other businesses on this large commercial block. The new design features will also create a more aesthetic focal point in this area of the City. The existing use, a large "big box" establishment does not meet current code requirements for the setback along its frontage street, the Hardie -Rainier complex. Only an incredibly large expansion or complete rebuild could move the front of the store to the street and parking to the rear. The proposed approximately 16,000 square foot expansion cannot be expected to accomplish the maximum front yard setback of 15 feet. As a practical matter the tradeoff is allowing a reasonably well-designed expansion and revitalized store or probably permitting no change weighs in favor of the excessive setback. The building and expansion in its other particulars, height, other setbacks and lot coverage meets the Zoning Code. Similarly, the parking lot landscaping standards would require a complete redesign of the parking area for what is a modest remodel. In addition, attempting to meet the newer standards would remove the larger, mature specimen trees. Compliance with Building and Fire codes will be determined when actual permits for construction are submitted. 4. The two-story facade of the main complex is not substantially higher than the surrounding uses and the Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 17 large, somewhat landscaped parking areas provide wide separation permitting light and air to enter the site and surrounding sites. The extensive setback, while non -conforming as to the Zoning Code, actually helps the transition between a rather large big box store and its neighboring uses. The neighboring uses to the south, north and east work to ease the transition to the much larger background Walmart store. The new facade treatment with the curved parapets also soften the visual lines of the store. Parking is the dominant feature and while the older landscape spacing does not meet code, the existing larger trees do help to soften the appearance and the parking islands will be enlarged and the newer parking will meet code. The expanded building will probably be a better neighbor than the existing more utilitarian store. Staff noted that while the site has an exceptional amount of parking, the applicant has gone beyond code requirements to provide additional interior landscaping and perimeter landscaping to shield and buffer the parking lot. The new facade features, the new landscape feature at the front of the store and the new landscaping in the northern parking areas all help to mitigate impacts of the development on the site. As noted, parking is a dominant feature and frankly, it is hard to disguise the large surface parking areas. The applicant does propose approximately 4,000 square feet of landscaping in excess of the parking lot landscape requirements and over 65,000 square feet of overall landscaping. Pedestrian links through the site and to the surrounding sidewalks help mitigate some of the impacts and do allow pedestrians to circulate on the site and to and from the site. 6. The redevelopment of the site should preserve or enhance overall property values. 7. Access to the subject site will not be changed. The additional parking, while obviously adding to the asphalt jungle, should also reduce the number of cars circling the lot looking for parking thereby cutting down air pollution and conflicts with pedestrians walking to and from parking stalls. As indicated, pedestrian pathways and amenities near the front of the store have been enhanced. While the store has a large footprint, it is rather low -scale and therefore, adequate light and air should be available to adjoining uses that share the block with the applicant's use. 9. The store is served by existing urban infrastructure. The applicant will be providing additional stormwater treatment with an additional bioswale. 10. In addition to the general site plan review criteria discussed above, there are District Guidelines that are applicable to the subject site. The staff analysis is contained above and except as noted or highlighted in ,this discussion, that analysis and its conclusions are adopted by this decision. Staff has noted that in most cases the applicant's modest expansion meets the guidelines and the minimum standards or has justified why their project may not precisely meet some of the standards. 11. The applicant sought and received a modification for the refuse and recycling center and equipment and it appears that the proposed area and methods meet the objectives of the standards. The enclosure will have to meet the standards for containment and screening. 12. As noted above, the 16,000 square feet of remodeled area cannot be expected to close the distance to the street to 15 feet. Taking advantage of the building's existing placement in the overall block and its surrounding stores help achieve a reasonable proposal. Additional or larger landscape specimens should be used where smaller or stunted trees might exist. The additional or better landscaping can help fill in the large space between the street and actual store. 13. The applicant did not submit appropriate lighting details with the exception of proposing light standards Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 18 that do not meet code specifications. There is no reason for the applicant to deviate from the existing standards limiting lighting poles to 25 feet. As discussed above, visitors to the site will more than likely not notice the difference in height and changes in zoning and standards should be applied unless there is an overriding reason not to be conforming. The limited aesthetic of shorter poles in the new parking lot does not provide any justification. If the lighting standards that City has adopted are inadequate then that should be addressed in an amendment to code. The applicant shall comply with the newer standards. 14. On the other hand, the loss of mature trees to redesign a compliant parking lot is not an adequate tradeoff. The applicant will be providing more parking lot landscaping than required and will be supplementing the existing landscaping on the limited perimeter areas of the site. The applicant will have to meet irrigation requirements for all landscaping. 15. Staff noted that the facade could use more relief to break up the various facades of the building. Decorative treatment in the way of contrasting or complementary paints or additional molding trim or other architectural features including additional glazing or false windows shall be used to comply with the guidelines. 16. In conclusion, while it might be nice to start again and comply with newer code provisions, the proposed expansion is modest overall and clearly enhances the existing building's appearance. The additional landscaping will also enhance the site. "Big Box" appears to invite "Big Parking" but as noted, additional parking cuts down on circulating cars and their attendant noise and pollution. Maybe the next remodel will include an elevated parking structure to reduce the sea of asphalt. DECISION: The proposed site plan for the expansion is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the six mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non - Significance Mitigated, dated March 22, 2010. 2. The applicant shall be required to record the Short Plat reflecting the property's lot lines as depicted on Exhibit 2 prior to building permit approval. As an alternative the applicant may submit a modification to the approved Site Plan which reflects the surveyed lot lines, at the time of building permit, as long as all development standards of the CA zone can be met. 3. The applicant shall submit screening detail for the refuse and recyclable deposit area prior to building permit approval. Elevations shall include a roof, screening around the perimeter of the wall and have self-closing doors. Chain link, plastic or wire fencing is prohibited. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a lighting plan that will adequately provide for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. The applicant shall comply with the newer standards including 25 -foot height limitations. 5. The applicant shall submit a landscape maintenance surety device for a period of no less than three years in sufficient amount as determined by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to temporary occupancy permit. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 19 6. The applicant shall submit an irrigation plan to and be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction or building permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit revised elevations, for the northern fagade, which depict alternative methods to mass and treat the proposed facade. Revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 8. The applicant shall provide revised elevations for the eastern fagade prior to building permit approval subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager. The revised elevations shall include additional human scale elements in the pedestrian plaza area, beneath the northern canopy that extends to south of the northern entrance. Decorative treatment in the way of contrasting or complementary paints or additional molding trim or other architectural features including additional glazing or false windows shall be used to comply with the guidelines. 9. The applicant shall match the color of the roof -mounted mechanical equipment to the color of exposed portions of the roof. 10. The applicant shall submit a materials and color board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 11. Additional or larger landscape specimens should be use where smaller or stunted trees might exist. ORDERED THIS 13th day of May 2010. FRED J. IKAUFAAN HEARING EXAMANER TRANSMITTED THIS 13" day of May 2010 to the parties of record: Rocale Timmons Community & Economic Dev City of Renton Jack McCullough McCullough & Hill 701 56 Avenue, Ste. 7220 Seattle, WA 98104 Peter Bonnell Bonnell Family LLC 10047 Main Street, Ste. 509 Bellevue, WA 98004 Kayren Kittrick Community & Economic Dev City of Renton Jeff Chambers PACLAND 1505 Westland Ave N, Ste. 305 Seattle, WA 98109 Jeremy Smith, Manager Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Usunobun Osagie, Larry D. Craighead Architects 211 N Record Street, Ste. 222 Dallas, TX 75202 Sharon Ajibade, Asst. Manager Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Huy Tran, Asst. Manager Sophorn Chan, Assistant Anapogi Toleafoa, ICS Loader Walmart 42516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval Josh Smith, Mgr. Pets/Chem/Paper File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 May 13, 2010 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Page 20 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Tilesa L. Swehla, Mgr. Foods Traffaney Black, Mgr. Electronics Brandi Hansen, Mgr Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Sierra Schavrien, ICS Asssociate Mark Goodman Tauasi Paaga, HR Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Nancy Chase, Dept Manager William Carey, Jr. Safety Team Ld. Francis Canapi Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Automotive Cheryl Harrelson Josh Smith, Mgr. Pets/Chem/Paper Levan, Dept. Mgr. Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Josie Merveus, Dept. Mgr. Abram Sparrow, Dept. Mgr Valerie Reyes, ICS Lead Supv. 2 Shift Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Irish Joy E. Layador, Ent. Supv. Walmart #2516 743 Rainier Ave S Renton, WA 98057 TRANSMITTED THIS 13th day of May 2010 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Marty Wine, Assistant CAO Dave Pargas, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Renton Reporter Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., May 27,20 Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. Drofiak Apartments Site Plan Approval File No.: LUA-09-112, SA -H May 13, 2010 Page 21 An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $250.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., May 27, 2010. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. Site Area: 594,553 SF (13.6 ac) Total Building Area GSF.• 150,244 SF F3 -18 T23N R5E W 1/2 6 sW lto IM j vlw. CA[ w CO IMI HOs wn FIGS F" W - da �, IM co IM !M— g IM a —IM _ `Nfm swlmm �'`� sw,sikst er � N ^' I { 4. CQ If AMA � SITE -i IM 1M IL CO IL ZONING MAP BOOK I' H3 - 30 T23N PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 1Na dmmentka papNcrtpewaalbn,rpt punnmed maurvryammcy,aMk kudos uaracutln�e�awkkia..armadm,kn,,. 0 200 400 ,-p k m:ndetl mr nN dkplay Pumuac o^�M „_..cf •ofr�:---, __ _13 Feet 1:4,800 2 r 6 e` CA CO Yl R-1 --�N JR -8 IIT 2 s3 19 T23N R5E W 1/2 5319 PxIetHe CMU PNM EFaM aWNGVaa TMT eWa2eA inw Front Elevation palnlerAve (Easu U...w EPBPIdRTWUAetlV6 MEI�LGGPIRG PaIM on. Troon—LArswa2U2 BMGGiRF _W EI(E2eIGGMVPAMf 'eWMwG Wrswfaea RMSETANIOnaaa 21,E 'Eva Phu Rear Elevation (We:u EXHIBIT 6 Walmart :='. City of Renton Renton, WA #2516 APR 19 Guiu RECOMCD Left Elevation 5W G.dy Way (Smh) Right Elevation SW 7th St. (North) Renton, WA #2516 HIECMVIED