Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD_HEX_Decision_Park5_2111221 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Park 5 Apartments Hearing examiner site plan, conditional use, density bonus and street modification. PR20-000100 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION SUMMARY The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan, conditional use, density bonus and parking and mixed-use development standard modification applications for a 69-dwelling unit 7- story mixed use building to be located at the intersection of NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Ave NE. The applications are approved subject to conditions. TESTIMONY Jill Ding, City of Renton senior planner, summarized the staff report. In response to Examiner questions Ms. Ding clarified that the parking spaces in the proposed parking elevator are included in the staff report’s identification of total number of proposed parking spaces. EXHIBITS The 22 exhibits identified at the Exhibit List prepared by staff were admitted into the record at the November 16, 2021 hearing. The following exhibits were also admitted: Exhibit 23: Staff power point presentation 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 2 Exhibit 24: City of Renton COR Maps of project vicinity Exhibit 25: Google Earth of project site. FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Owner/Applicant. Zamoor Associates, LLC, 5887 155th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98006. 2. Hearing. A hearing on the application was held on November 16, 2021 at 11:00 am on-line via the Zoom meeting application. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The Applicant is requesting approvals of hearing examiner site plan, conditional use, density bonus and parking and mixed-use development standard modification applications for a 69-dwelling unit 7-story mixed use building to be located at the intersection of NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Ave NE. The project site is currently developed with a 2,500 sq. ft. Pizza Hut and a 2,330 sq. ft. Subway. Both existing structures are proposed for removal. The proposal would include 4,124 sq. ft. of commercial space on the first floor and 60,300 sq. ft. of multi-family residential apartments. Of the proposed multi-family units, a total of 8 units would be considered affordable housing units. A Conditional Use Permit has been requested to exceed the zoning height limit of 70 feet with a proposed height of 78 feet, 6 inches. The Applicant requests a density bonus to increase the net density of the project site from the maximum 80 dwelling units per acre allowed to the 102 dwelling units per acre proposed. This translates to an additional 16 dwelling units for the 0.67-acre project site. The Applicant proposes eight affordable housing units to qualify for the density bonus. The mixed-use modifications are to RMC 4-4-150D.2.b to reduce the floor to ceiling height from 18 feet to 17 feet and to RMC 4-4-150D.1 to reduce the commercial gross floor area percentage from 50 percent to approximately 22 percent. The Applicant also requests a modification to RMC 4-4-150B.2 for an increase in the maximum percentage allowed for interior entrances, lobbies, and areas/facilities developed for the exclusive use of the building’s residents along the Harrington Ave NE street frontage. The proposal would increase the amount of allowable residential frontage from 25% to 31.9% of the overall façade frontage. The parking modification is to RMC 4-4-150D.2.a to utilize the structured parking stall requirements for all parking proposed on the project site. The Applicant also requests a modification to 4-4- 080F9b to reduce the drive aisle width from 24 feet to 20 feet. Finally, he Applicant also seeks a modification to utilize a parking lift for required parking spaces. Parking lifts are not expressly 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 3 recognized in the parking standards of RMC 4-4-080. It isn’t immediately apparent if use of a lift is inconsistent with any of the requirements of RMC 4-4-080. To avoid any potential argument that the lift is not authorized, the lift is included in the Applicant’s request for parking modifications. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate and appropriate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer service will be provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 12” water main on the north side of NE Sunset Boulevard and on the east side of Harrington Avenue NE that can provide 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm). There is an existing 8” lined concrete main sewer to the north on NE Sunset Boulevard, and a 15” ductile iron main west of the site on Harrington Avenue NE. There is also an existing 18” PVC trunk sewer west of the site running north to south down the middle of NE Sunset Boulevard. B. Police and Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the Renton Regional Fire Authority and police service by the Renton Police Department. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposal. C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City’s stormwater regulations, the proposal mitigates all significant drainage impacts and provides for adequate and appropriate stormwater facilities. Public works staff have reviewed the Applicant’s preliminary drainage design, Ex. 11, and found it to conform to the City’s stormwater standards. Storm drainage improvements along all public street frontages are required to conform to the stormwater standards. Any new storm drain installed on or off-site shall be designed and sized in accordance with standards found in the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (RSWDM). The proposed project will be required to install a storm drain along Harrington Avenue NE, 200 feet north of the existing catch basin on the east side of Harrington Avenue NE, in accordance with the RSWDM. If the proposed project results in new pollution generating impervious surface (PGIS) that exceeds 5,000 sq. ft., the Applicant will be required to provide enhanced basic water quality treatment. Any proposed detention and/or water quality vault shall be designed in accordance with the RSWDM that is current at the time of civil construction permit application. Separate structural plans will be required to be submitted for review and approval under a separate building permit for the detention and/or water quality vault. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 4 The Applicant shall ensure that the proposed water quality facility is sized to accommodate all PGIS, including the roof area. Roof runoff is not required to be treated if a leachable materials covenant, that ensure that the roof will be constructed with non-leachable materials, is provided. Appropriate on-site Best Management Practices (BMPs) satisfying Core Requirement #9 will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development to the maximum extent feasible. Permeable pavement is proposed to be installed as a BMP where feasible as part of the development proposal. Stormwater system-wide impacts will be mitigated by payment of a waster system development fee, payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for adequate parks and open space. The Design District D standards of RMC 4-3-100E4 govern how much open space is required of the project. The standard requires 50 square feet of common open space or recreation area per dwelling unit for the proposal, which totals 3,450 sq. ft. for the proposal. The Applicant proposes 3,500 square feet of open space comprised of an 800 sq. ft. lobby/waiting area on the ground floor, a total of 1,800 sq. ft. of fitness and gathering areas proposed on the second floor and a 900 sq. ft. recreational area on the sixth floor composed of outdoor patio space adjacent to the corner of Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd to take advantage of the view of downtown Renton. The sixth-floor outdoor patio area and landscaped commercial entryways along Sunset and Harrington serves as focal points and social gathering places for the project site. The gym and patio areas also serve as areas for active and passive recreation. The proposed lobby/waiting area does not qualify as open space. To qualify, the lobby/waiting area would need to include programming as approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. A condition of approval requires that the open space programming plan be submitted with the Building Permit application. The plan shall provide clear details of all amenity spaces and the programming consistent with the common open space standards. E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposal provides for a safe and effective pedestrian circulation system. Pedestrian walkways are proposed to provide access from the public sidewalk to building entries and to provide access from the structured parking to the public sidewalk. The proposed sidewalks along the Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 5 Street frontages would be designed in accordance with the Capital Improvement Plan for NE Sunset Blvd and for Harrington Ave NE the Sunset Area Surface Water Plan for Green Streets. F. Transportation. The proposal is served by adequate and appropriate transportation infrastructure. Access to the site is proposed via one existing curb cut off NE Sunset Blvd and via an existing access easement over the property to the south off of Harrington Ave NE. There are no side streets or alley ways available for access, so access via those routes is not available as required by City design standards. However, the proposal would reduce the number of curb cuts onto the project site by two (2). These abandoned curb cuts would be replaced with curb and gutter, street frontage landscaping and sidewalk and would increase the continuity of pedestrian circulation. The proposal provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties. The proposal includes building entries along the NE Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE street frontages with direct pedestrian connections to the public sidewalk. In addition, the Applicant is required to construct frontage improvements along the site’s street frontages NE Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE, which would include the construction of sidewalks. The project proposal does not include a designated loading area with dock doors. It is anticipated that any loading or deliveries would occur within the proposed parking garage, adjacent to the back entry of the retail tenant spaces. The City’s Transportation Department has a capital improvement project along NE Sunset Blvd, fronting the project site. The City’s 30% preliminary design plans have delineated additional right of way that is needed to construct the improvements. Right- -of-way on this site that has been preliminarily determined as needed varies along the NE Sunset Blvd frontage. Dedication would be required in accordance with the most current version of the capital improvement project plans along the NE Sunset Boulevard frontage and at the NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Avenue NE corner. Required frontage improvements would require the installation of paving, curb and gutter, a street tree planting strip and sidewalk all to be designed in accordance with the most current version of the capital improvement plan. To assess the need for any project specific off-site traffic mitigation, the Applicant prepared a traffic impact study, Ex. 13. The study assessed congestion impacts to the intersection of 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 6 NE Sunset Boulevard and Harrington Avenue, as this was the only intersection that would be impacted by more than 20 PM project generated trips. The study found that the trip generation would not cause any reduction in level of service at the intersection, which would remain at Level of Service A. Consequently, the proposal does not necessitate any off-site traffic improvements. The proposal also meets the City’s concurrency (congestion level) standards as determined by the City’s Development Engineering Manager in Ex. 16. The Applicant’s proportionate share impact to system wide transportation impacts will be mitigated by payment of traffic impact fees during building permit review as required by the City’s traffic impact fee standards, RMC 4-1-190. The project site is adjacent to a 240 metro transit bus stop that could provide transit service to Bellevue for new residents living in the proposed dwelling units. G. Schools. The proposal will be adequately served by schools. According to the staff report, it is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Kennydale Elementary, McKnight Middle School and Hazen High School. A School Impact Fee plus a 5% surcharge fee, based on new multi-family unit, will be required to mitigate the proposal’s potential impacts to the Renton School District during building permit review. H. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate parking as staff has determined that the proposal complies with applicable parking regulations. For the proposal, City parking standards require that attached residential dwelling units provide a minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit up to a maximum of 1.75 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Attached residential low income dwelling units require a minimum of 1 parking space per 4 dwelling units, up to a maximum of 1.75 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Eating and drinking establishments require a minimum and a maximum of 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of dining area. Based on the uses, dwelling unit count, and square footage proposed, the proposal would require a minimum of 61 parking spaces for the market rate attached dwelling units, two (2) spaces for the low-income units, with a maximum of 121 spaces for all 69 proposed attached dwelling units. Based on a total dining area of 1,200 sq. ft. the proposal would be required to provide a minimum and a maximum of 12 parking spaces for the eating and drinking establishments. In total, the proposal is required to provide 73 parking spaces up to a maximum of 133 parking spaces. The Applicant has provided a total of 64 parking spaces, which is nine short. A twenty five percent (25%) reduction or increase from the minimum or maximum 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 7 number of parking spaces may be granted for non-residential uses through site plan review if the Applicant can justify the modification to the satisfaction of the Administrator. Justification might include, but is not limited to, quantitative information such as sales receipts, documentation of customer frequency, and parking standards of nearby cities. The Applicant has requested a 25 percent reduction in the number of total spaces required for the commercial uses proposed. The proposal requires 12 spaces for the commercial uses and the requested 25 percent reduction would approve a decrease in 3 commercial spaces on the project site. To justify the reduction, the Applicant submitted a parking analysis (Exhibit 20). The submitted parking analysis utilizes the parking ratios within the ITE manual as a justification for the proposed parking reduction. According to the ITE manual, 0.84 parking spaces would be required for the multi-family dwelling units and 6.47 spaces would be required per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for the restaurant use. Based on the parking ratios identified in the ITE manual, the proposed project would generate a maximum parking demand of 64 parking spaces. In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-4-080E.3, the Applicant is proposing that the onsite parking be considered as a joint-use parking facility. The area available for parking would be maximized through the use of an automated parking lift that would provide storage for eleven vehicles in an area where three (3) parking spaces could be accommodated. In addition, the Applicant has indicated that the demand for residential parking would decrease during the daytime, which is when the parking demand would increase for the eating and drinking establishment. Conversely, the parking demand for the eating and drinking establishment would decrease over night and the demand for the residential dwelling units would increase at nighttime. Therefore, it is anticipated that there would be a parking surplus during the daytime, available for use by the patrons of the eating and drinking establishments. This surplus of parking would revert back to tenants of the residential dwelling units at night when the eating and drinking establishments have closed for the evening. Based on the justification provided, staff is in support of the requested 3- space reduction in minimum number of required parking spaces as well as the approval of the onsite parking as a joint-use parking facility. A condition of approval requires a parking agreement ensuring that joint use parking is available for the duration of the uses be submitted for review and approval at the time of building permit review. For bicycle parking, City standards require 35 bicycle parking spaces for the residential units and one (1) space would be required for the eating and drinking establishment. The Applicant has proposed a secure bicycle parking area for the residential tenants that would provide parking for 35 bicycles and an ADA accessible bike rack that would provide the minimum 3 bicycle spaces for the commercial use, which complies with the bicycle parking requirements. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Pertinent impacts are addressed individually as follows: A. Critical Areas. There are no critical areas mapped for the project site and it is currently fully developed. The Applicant’s geotechnical report and SEPA review finds no critical 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 8 areas on-site. According to the geotech report, Ex. 12, most of the project site is covered with asphalt. B. Tree Retention. The proposal provides for adequate preservation of trees because it is consistent with the City’s tree retention standards. The City’s tree retention standards (RMC 4-4-130H1aiii) require the retention of 10 percent (10%) of significant trees in commercial development. There are three (3) significant trees located on the project site, therefore, 0.3 trees rounding down to zero trees would be required to be retained on the project site. The proposal to remove all existing on-site trees complies with the City’s tree retention requirements. C. Compatibility. The proposal is compatible with surrounding uses. All surrounding uses are in the same CV zone. Mixed-use residential development is located to the north, a Safeway shopping center to the east, multifamily to the south and a vacant lot to the west. The proposed use is of similar character to these surrounding uses. The City’s landscaping and design standards further enhance compatibility. The Applicant has submitted a conceptual landscape plan, Ex. 4, to demonstrate compliance with the City’s landscaping standards. The landscape plan includes the required minimum 10-foot wide landscape strip along the project site’s Harrington Ave NE and NE Sunset Blvd frontages outside of the areas to be utilized for pedestrian areas and entries. There is also a minimum 8-foot wide planting strip proposed along the Site’s NE Sunset Blvd frontage and a minimum 6-foot wide planting strip proposed within the public right-of-way between the curb and sidewalk along Harrington Ave NE. These required landscape amenities provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project. D. Noise, Light, Glare and Privacy. The proposed increase in height will not create any noise, light or glare impacts. None of the portions of the building proposed above the height limit would include light sources that would generate excessive light or glare to adjacent neighbors or the public right-of-way. There is nothing about the proposed uses that suggest any significant noise impacts. For the building overall, the Applicant has not submitted a lighting plan. Therefore, a condition of approval requires that a lighting plan be provided at the time of building permit review. The proposed building has been configured to provide the commercial tenant spaces closest to the intersection of NE Sunset Blvd and Harrington Ave NE. Upper -level building step- backs are proposed for the residential dwelling units proposed on levels three through seven, which would provide privacy for the residents as well as provide a noise buffer. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 9 E. Views. According to uncontested findings of the staff report, the proposal will not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier or any other natural features. F. Shade and Shadow. It is not anticipated that the requested additional height would result in excessive shade or shadows onto abutting or adjacent properties. A shade and shadow study (Exhibit 21) was submitted with the application materials. The neighboring property to the south of the project site is similar in scale to the proposed project and will not be adversely affected for the additional height requested above the 70-foot height limit. In addition, the use of the neighboring property to the east, abutting the project site is currently a surface parking lot with no nearby buildings. Further, upper-level building step-backs are proposed to mitigate the height impacts of the proposed building where it would abut the public right-of-way. G. Scale and Overconcentration. The scale and location of the proposal are fully appropriate for its location. The use of building modulation and articulation adequately mitigates against the scale of the proposal. Building modulation would be achieved at intervals of less than 40 feet through changes in plane and depth as well as contrasting major massing with minor/competing massing gestures and further enhanced through changes in building color. In addition, levels three through seven have been stepped back from the first two (2) stories, which further breaks up the size and scale of the proposed building. The location of the building does not create an overconcentration of use. It is a use specifically planned for and encouraged in the Sunset Area Planned Action Ordinance in an area designated by that ordinance as Sunset Mixed Use. As previously noted, surrounding uses are fully compatible with the proposed mixed use. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 1. Authority. RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies Hearing Examiner conditional use and site plan applications1 as Type III permits. The modification requests are classified by RMC 4-8-080(G) as a Type I review. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the highest-number procedure”. The Type III reviews are the “highest-number procedure” and therefore must be employed for all the permit applications. As outlined in RMC 4-8-080(G), the Hearing Examiner is authorized to hold hearings and issue final decisions on Type III applications subject to closed record appeal to the Renton City Council. Substantive: 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is zoned Center Village (CV) and has a comprehensive plan land use designation of Commercial & Mixed Use (CMU). 1 RMC 4-9-200D2biv requires hearing examiner site plan review for projects in the CV zone that are over four stories in height 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 10 3. Review Criteria/Approval of Street Modification. RMC 4-9-200.E.3 governs the criteria for site plan review. RMC 4-9-030(D) governs the criteria for conditional use permit review for height increases. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. Parking and mixed use modification standards are governed by RMC 4-9-250.D. The findings and conclusions of Finding No. 21-23 of the staff report are adopted by reference and it is concluded that the proposal as conditioned meets the criteria for the parking and mixed-use development standard modifications identified in Finding of Fact (FOF) No. 3. The modifications identified in FOF No. 3 are approved on that basis. Site Plan RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be in compliance with the following: a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan; ii. Applicable land use regulations; iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC 4-3- 100. 4. The criterion is met. For the reasons outlined in Finding 16 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. For the reasons outlined in Finding 17 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with applicable land use regulations. For the reasons identified in Finding 18 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the design regulations of RMC 4-3-100. For the reasons identified in Finding No. 20, the proposal is consistent with the Sunset Area Planned Action Ordinance. All aforementioned staff report findings are adopted by reference. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses, including: i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site; ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties; 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 11 iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties; iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features; v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project; and vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. 5. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G for structures, FOF No. 4F for circulation and loading and storage, FOF No. 5E, FOF No. 5C for landscaping and 5D for lighting. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including: i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation; ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs; iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces; and iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. 6. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5D for structure placement; FOF No. 5G for structure scale and FOF No. 5C for landscaping. The proposal provides for adequate protection of natural features since trees are retained to the extent required by the City’s tree retention standards as identified in FOF No. 5B and there otherwise are no natural features or any critical areas as identified in FOF No. 5A. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users, including: 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 12 i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties; ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. 7. The criterion is met. The proposal provides for safe and efficient access and circulation as required by the criterion above for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4E and 4F. No loading or delivery spaces are proposed. The facility will be served by adequate transit and bicycle facilities (most notably bicycle parking spaces) for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4F and 4H. Safe and attractive pedestrian connections are provided as outlined FOF No. 4E, along with the landscaping provided for pedestrian entrances as depicted in the Applicant’s landscaping plan, Ex. 4. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site. 8. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 4D. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines. 9. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5E. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. 10. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5A. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 13 11. The criterion is met for the reasons identified FOF No. 4. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, for phased projects. 12. No phasing is proposed. Conditional Use – Height Increase RMC 4-9-030F. DECISION CRITERIA – HEIGHT INCREASES: In lieu of the criteria in subsection D of this Section, Decision Criteria, the following criteria in subsections F1 through 5 of this Section shall be considered in determining whether to issue a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum height allowed when indicated as an option in the development standards for the particular zone: RMC 4-9-030F 1. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed height increase shall be compatible with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the City. 13. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Findings No. 16 and 17 of the staff report. RMC 4-9-030F 2. Effect on Abutting and Adjacent Properties: Building heights shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent and abutting property. When a building in excess of the maximum height is proposed adjacent to or abutting a lot with a maximum height less than the subject property, increased setbacks and/or step-backs may be appropriate to reduce adverse effects on adjacent or abutting property. 14. The criterion is met. The building height is compatible with adjoining properties and setbacks and step-backs have been employed to mitigate against impacts as outlined in FOF No. 5A. The increase in height also enhances the ability to further the objectives of applicable design guidelines. The City’s Urban Design Regulations (RMC 4-3-100) require roofline variations. The additional requested height with the requested Conditional Use Permit would also be utilized to provide variation in the proposed roof line. The proposed design would provide shifting penthouse elements, a continuation of the building’s play of modulation, and intriguing roof overhang elements. This helps break up the massing scale and prevents the building from having an out of scale presence from the human perspective. RMC 4-9-030F 3. Bulk and Scale: Upper floor step-backs, varied tower heights with separation, and/or other architectural methods shall be integrated into the design to provide a human-scaled building edge along the street with access to sky views. Bulk reduction methods such as varied building geometry, variety in materials, texture, pattern or color, architectural rooftop elements, and/or other techniques shall be provided. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 14 15. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G. RMC 4-9-030F 4. Light and Glare: Building(s) shall be designed so that light and glare impacts upon streets, public facilities, and public open spaces are minimized. 16. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5D. RMC 4-9-030F 5. Shade and Shadow: Building(s) shall be designed so that shade and shadow impacts on adjacent shadow-sensitive uses (e.g., residential, outdoor restaurants, open spaces, and pedestrian areas) are minimized. 17. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF No. 5G. RMC 4-9-065D1: One bonus market-rate dwelling unit may be granted for each affordable dwelling unit constructed on site, up to the maximum bonus density allowed pursuant to subsection D3 of this Section, Maximum Bonus Units. Affordable dwelling units shall conform to the following standards:… 18. The criterion is met. The Applicant proposes eight affordable housing units to qualify for the additional 16 units over the applicable density limit as outlined in FOF No. 3. The additional 16 units over the maximum 53 units authorized for the project site is below the 30% maximum density increase authorized by RMC 4-9-065D3 for the CV zone. To ensure that the affordable unit remains affordable over time, the Applicant shall record an agreement in a form approved by the City with the King County Recorder’s Office requiring that the affordable housing unit remains affordable housing for fifty (50) years or the life of the development, whichever is less. This agreement shall be a covenant running with the land, binding on the assigns, heirs and successors of the Applicant to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. A condition of approval requires that a draft agreement be provided to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval by the Planning Project Manager and the City Attorney at the time of Building Permit review. DECISION The proposed site plan, conditional use permit, density bonus and development modifications identified in FOF No. 3 are all consistent with applicable review criteria as identified by the Conclusions of Law above, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. A draft agreement in a form approved by the City with the King County Recorder’s Office requiring that the one (1) affordable housing unit remain affordable housing for fifty (50) years or the life of the development, whichever is less, shall be provided for review and approval at the time of Building Permit 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 15 review to the Current Planning Project Manager and City Attorney. This agreement shall be a covenant running with the land, binding on the assigns, heirs and successors of the Applicant to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. Such agreement shall be recorded prior to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The existing London plane street trees shall be retained. To ensure that these trees are not adversely impacted during project construction, staff recommends that a certified arborist be onsite during installation of utilities and frontage improvements in the vicinity of these trees. Should it be determined that the trees are not able to be retained due to utility conflicts or other construction impacts as determined by the Current Planning Project Manager that would be detrimental to the viability of the street trees, the Applicant shall replace the large mature species trees with comparable species. 3. A detailed landscape plan shall be provided at the time of Construction Permit review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. The detailed landscape plan shall provide 15 sq. ft. of landscaping per parking space (see RMC 4-4-070H.4 and 5 for additional requirements) for all proposed surface parking lot spaces. 4. A parking agreement ensuring that joint use parking is available for the duration of the uses shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval at the time of Building Permit review. 5. The Applicant shall be required to submit a surface mounted utility plan that includes cross-section details with the civil construction permit application. The Applicant shall work with franchise utilities to ensure, as practical, utility boxes are located out of public ROW view, active common open spaces, and they shall not displace required landscaping areas. The plan shall provide and identify screening measures consistent with the overall design of the development. The surface mounted utility plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance. In addition, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the Applicant be required to submit a rooftop equipment exhibit with the elevation plans associated with the building permit application. The exhibit shall provide cross section details and identify proposed rooftop screening that is integral and complementary to architecture of the buildings. The exhibit shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. 6. Details shall be provided on the floor plans submitted with the building permit application including: ADA complaint bathrooms (common facilities are acceptable), central plumbing drain line and grease trap and ventilation system for a potential future commercial kitchen. The floor plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance. 7. Weather protection shall be expanded to encompass all building entries and outdoor pedestrian plaza areas. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 16 8. An open space programming plan shall be submitted with the Building Permit application. The plan shall provide clear details of all amenity spaces and the programming consistent with the common open space standards. The programming plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance. 9. Details of proposed outdoor seating area furniture shall be provided at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. Proposed outdoor furniture 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. 10. Architectural detailing shall be added to the blank wall proposed on the south portion of the west façade. The detailing shall be provided on the building permit application’s elevation sheets to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to permit issuance. 11. A materials board shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. The materials board shall include materials that a durable, high quality and consistent with more traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in-place concrete. 12. A cohesive sign package for the retail and residential portions of the building shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. 13. A pedestrian scale lighting plan and light fixture details shall be provided at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. 14. Implementation procedures for each of the mitigation measures identified in Attachment B of the Sunset Area Planned Action Ordinance #5813 or provide a written narrative of how the particular measure is not applicable to the project shall be provided. The Planned Action mitigation implementation procedures shall be submitted at the time of Building Permit Review for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager. 15. A pedestrian plaza exhibit shall be provided with the detailed landscaping plan submitted with the civil construction permit application. The pedestrian plaza exhibit and detailed landscaping plan shall remove the landscaping proposed between the sidewalk and building along the site’s Sunset Blvd NE frontage and portions of the Harrington Ave frontage and replace this landscaping with a pedestrian plaza area that provides amenities including but not limited to street furniture, planters, scored concrete, etc. to expand the commercial area in front of the proposed building. DATED this 22nd day of November, 2021. 1 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 Site Plan and Conditional Use (height) - 17 City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the consolidated application(s) subject to this decision as Type III 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 in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER DECISION EXHIBITS Project Name: Park 5 Apartments Project Number: LUA21-000323, SA-H, CU-H, MOD, MOD Date of Hearing November 16, 2021 Staff Contact Jill Ding Senior Planner Project Contact/Applicant Kyle Stevens Grouparchitect 1735 Westlake Ave N, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98109 Project Location 960 Harrington Ave NE, Renton, WA 98056 The following exhibits are included with the Hearing Examiner Decision: Exhibits 1-13: As shown in the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Report Exhibits 14-22: As shown in the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner Exhibit 23: Staff PowerPoint Exhibit 24: COR Maps, http://rp.rentonwa.gov/Html5Public/Index.html?viewer=CORMaps Exhibit 25: Google Earth, https://www.google.com/earth/