HomeMy WebLinkAboutC_Burroughs_Public Comment_210904CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Renton. Do not click links, reply or open
attachments unless you know the content is safe.
From:notification@civiclive.com
To:Party of Record
Subject:Party of Record/Public Comments 2021-09-04 11:56 PM(PST) Submission Notification
Date:Saturday, September 4, 2021 11:56:07 PM
Party of Record/Public Comments 2021-09-04 11:56 PM(PST) was submitted by Guest on
9/5/2021 2:56:01 AM (GMT-08:00) Canada/Pacific
Name Value
NameFile:LUA21-000323
Gender Ms.
Name Brianna Burroughs
Address:2300 NE 8th PL Renton WA 98056
Email brivburroughs@gmail.com
Phone 253-632-6554
Party of Record Only
My comments are in reference to the Project LUA21-000323, known
as the Park 5 Apartments project. Specifically, most of my comments
and concerns are directed to the Density and Parking modification
and Conditional Use requests. Pedestrian Path Prior to expanding on
my concerns of the Conditional Use and modification requests, I
would like to request that a pedestrian sidewalk or path be placed to
the south of the property along the driveway easement that leads to
the Safeway. Currently it does not appear that there is one to be built
from what the current site plan shows. Many pedestrians use this
connecting drive to walk to the store and there is no walking path and
it is a small driveway which makes this necessary through-faire very
dangerous for pedestrians and motorists. The Harrington apartments
to the South of the driveway did not provide a sidewalk that goes all
the way up the drive which renders a pedestrian access from their side
useless. With the project's proposal to add vehicular access to the
parking garage through the easement, many more cars will be driving
through, as well as many more pedestrians from the units above who
will want to walk to the store will also be access the area. It will be
important to create a safe passageway for both pedestrians and
drivers. Density & Parking After looking over the applicant's
response to the departure requirements, it is clear that there are
conflicting statements in each that should negate an approval of both
the density Conditional Use request and parking stall modification
requests. The density request asks for an increase from 54 units to 69
units. The applicant states in this request in regards to parking that
"parking will be provided on site" but continues in the same sentence
by saying that they will only be able to do so with "the support of a
parking reduction request." This leads to the conclusion that an
increase in unit density from 54 to 69 units would not be appropriate
because the project would not be able to meet the parking
Comments
requirements of the site. It is important to note that Harrington Ave
NE (the street to the west of the property), already has an issue with
off street parking due to the inadequate parking of the surrounding
apartment buildings. The parking request It is clear that there is no
hardship due to site constraints or unique circumstances that would
make it necessary or appropriate for this modification (or any of the
other requests) to be approved other than for economic gain. The
applicant simply wants to squeeze more units onto the site without
providing adequate parking, in a zone that is already more permissive
than other zones. If the density was 54 units, the applicant already
stated that they could provide 69 stalls which would then be ample
parking for both residents and commercial use. The applicant is
therefore asking for modifications that go beyond what the code
requires, what the zoning intended and what the comprehensive plan
envisioned for this area without providing a clear public benefit and
on the contrary, creates safety hazards for pedestrians and motorists
in the area. Without adequate residential unit and commercial parking
spaces the project will be placing undo hardship to the on-street
parking and other properties in the vicinity (which is in direct conflict
with requirements C and F on the modification request form). More
parking on the street means that the sidewalks are less safe for
pedestrians due to obstruction of vision. When pedestrians feel unsafe
on a street they won't walk there and if they won't walk there (and
they can't drive there because there is not enough parking), the
commercial spaces will go un-leased which will defeat the purpose
and the intent of the zoning district, which is to create a more vibrant,
pedestrian friendly, commercial/residential area. Please do not grant
these modifications and conditional use requests. The code for this
zone was put in place for a reason, it was thoughtfully codified to
create a balanced density for residents and retail/commercial use. By
granting these departures from the code you are going against the
intent of what kind of space the zoning district and the
comprehensive plan was trying to create in this area. With every little
exception granted to each different development such as this, (as was
done with the Harrington apartments and now all that their
commercial space is used for is a gym for its residents) the aesthetic
and the vibe of the neighborhood plan and district will never be
achieved. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Prefer US Mail
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://rentonwa.gov/form/one.aspx?
objectId=17987905&contextId=17174246&returnto=submissions