HomeMy WebLinkAboutDew ltr Denis Law Mayorsitz
City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC
June 12, 2018
Chris Dew
King County Wastewater Treatment Division
201 S. Jackson St.
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision
RE: KC South Plant Biogas & Hearing Systems Improvement Project
(LUA-18-000188)
Dear Mr. Dew:
Enclosed please find the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision dated June 12, 2018. This
document is immediately available:
• https://bit.ly/2KtHQDt. This link goes directly to our Hearing Examiner's
Decisions. The Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project
name.
I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you.
Sincerely,
c r
Jason A. Sth, CMC
City Clerk
L2.
cc: Hearing Examiner
Clark Close,Senior Planner
Jennifer Henning, Planning Director
Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager
Craig Burnell, Building Official
Kyle Wunderlin, Planning Technician
Julia Medzegian,City Council Liaison
Parties of Record (2)
1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
9 )
10 RE: King County South Plant Biogas and )
Heating Systems Improvements Project ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
11 ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
Conditional Use, Site Plan, Shoreline ) FINAL DECISION
12 Exemption and Street Modification )
13 )
LUA18-000188, SA-A, CU, SME, MOD )
14 )
15 Summary
16
King County (KC) is requesting Administrative Site Plan Review, a Hearing Examiner Conditional
17 Use Permit, a Shoreline Exemption, and a Street Modification to replace the South Plant's Biogas
Upgrading System and Heating System located at 1200 Monster Rd SW. The South Plant Biogas
18 and Heating Systems Project would include the construction of a heat and energy recovery
19 building, a new thermal oxidizer, heating system improvements within the Digester Equipment
Building, and utility connections. The applications are approved subject to conditions.
20
Testimony
21
22 Note: The following is a summary of testimony provided for the convenience of the reader only
and should not be construed as containing any findings of fact or conclusions of law. The focus
23 upon or exclusion of any particular testimony or hearing evidence in this summary is not
reflective of the priority or probative content of any particular hearing evidence and no assurance
24 is made as to accuracy. The findings and conclusions that serve as the basis for this permitting
25 decision commence at page 3 of this decision.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 1
1 Clark Close, Renton Senior Planner, summarized the staff report. Mr. Clark submitted a
2 memorandum from the Applicant, Ex. 27, which requested the removal of a condition requiring that
Wetland A be placed in a native growth protection easement "NGPE". In response to the concerns
3 raised in Ex. 27, Staff doesn't believe that placing the wetland in an NGPE would prevent the
applicant from altering the critical area or its buffers in conformance with critical area regulations.
4 Standard NGPE language allows changes in the future if consistent with applicable regulations.
The City would be amenable to drafting more specific language for King County prior to recording.
5 In response to examiner questions, Mr. Clark explained that RMC 4-3-050B.1.g.b requires the City
6 to provide notice with the Notice of Application that the City will be waiving buffer requirements
for Wetland B due to the presence of the road through the buffer. This wasn't done so staff is
7 proposing to provide the notice after the hearing. If anyone responded to the notice, the City could
hold another public hearing. The examiner noted that the wetland notice was not included in the
8 conditions of approval and Mr. Clark concurred that the condition could be added. In response to
9 additional questions, Mr. Clark was unsure if some of the trees proposed to be removed had been
retained to meet tree retention requirements for prior development stages of the site. The most
10 recent development review for prior stages of development was 2003.
11 Chris Dew, King County, requested removal of recommended Condition No. 4 or leave the record
12 open for King County to provide further information on the condition. King County believes the
condition to be overly restrictive for an essential public facility. Wetland A is an isolated wetland
13 located well within the project boundaries within an area contemplated for future project expansion.
The wetland is surrounded by impervious surfaces and maintained lawns. It exists due to poor on-
14 site drainage and trees and shrubs planted as a requirement of past development. The current
proposal will have no impact on Wetland A and any encroachments into the wetland or its buffers
15 can be addressed in future permit review. King County also does not agree that wetland qualifies
16 for protection under the City's wetland regulations.
17 In response to examiner questions, the Applicant stated they would waive any objection to a second
hearing if that becomes necessary in order to address any input received on the RMC 4-3-
18 050B.1.g.b notice to waive buffer requirements for Wetland B.
19
Exhibits
20
The April 17, 2018 Staff Report Exhibits 1-23 identified at Page 2 of the Staff Report were
21 admitted into the record during the hearing. The following exhibits have also been admitted:
22
Exhibit 24: Staff PowerPoint
23 Exhibit 25: City of Renton COR maps
Exhibit 26: Google Earth aerial of project vicinity
24 Exhibit 27: April 20, 2018 Applicant Note on Wetland A
25 Exhibit 28: May 11, 2018 Applicant Materials re Wetland A
Exhibit 29: May 22, 2018 City response to Applicant Wetland A argument
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN -2
1 Exhibit 30: April 24, 2018 Notice of Application
Exhibit 31: March 20, 2018 Affidavit of Posting
2 Exhibit 32: March 20, 2018 Affidavit of Mailing
3
4 FINDINGS OF FACT
5 Procedural:
6 1. Applicant. The Applicant is the King County Wastewater Treatment Division attn: Chris
7 Dew, King County WTD, King Street Center, 201 S Jackson St., Seattle, WA 98104.
8 2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the applications on April 24, 2018 in the City of Renton
Council Chambers. The hearing was left open through May 1, 2018 for the Applicant and
9 City to resolve disagreements over a staff recommended condition regarding Wetland A or in
10 the alternative to submit additional written statements. On April 26, 2018 the Applicant
requested that the close date of the hearing be extended to May 15, 2018 to provide for
11 additional time to submit Wetland A comments and also to include the public response
deadline for the RMC 4-3-050B.1.g.b response to the waiver of the Wetland B buffer. The
12 examiner authorized extension of the hearing to May 15, 2018 as requested. There was no
13 public response to the Wetland B buffer issue by May 15, 2018. On May 15, 2018 Mr. Close
requested extension of the hearing to May 22, 2018 because the Applicant had submitted a
14 343-page document addressing Wetlands A and B. The examiner authorized the extension to
May 22, 2018.
15
16 3. Project Description. King County (KC) is requesting Administrative Site Plan Review,
Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, Shoreline Exemption, and a Street Modification
17 to replace South Plant's Biogas Upgrading System and Heating System to improve the
beneficial use of digester gas at the KC Wastewater Treatment Division's South Treatment
18 Plant (STP) while also reliably supplying heat to meet process and space heating demands.
19 The proposed project is located on parcel nos. 423049006, -9097 and -9111. The South Plant
Biogas and Heating Systems Project would include the construction of a Heat and Energy
20 Recovery Building, a new thermal oxidizer, heating system improvements within the Digester
Equipment Building, and utility connections. The project site is located towards the
21 north/central portion of the lot. The construction of a new Heating and Energy Recovery
Building (HERB) and associated driveway, uncovered parking stalls, walkways, concrete
22 equipment pads, stormwater improvements, utility connections, and landscaping consists of
23 approximately 191,824 square feet of the site (Ex. 6).
24 The Applicant's request for a street standard modification is to RMC 4-6-060F.2, Minimum
Design Standards for Public Streets and Alleys, to waive the required street improvements on
25 Monster Rd SW (Ex. 22). Improvements would include 17 feet of right-of-way dedication,
26 11-foot center turn lane, 8-foot wide sidewalk, 8-foot wide planter strip, 0.5-foot curb and
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 3
1 gutter, 10-foot wide travel lane, 5-foot wide bike lane, and 8-foot wide parking lane on both
sides of the road.
2
3 Surrounding uses are all non-residential in nature. To the north is the Waterworks Gardens
and vacant land. To the east, south and west are office buildings. To the south and west are
4 also warehouses, a packaging plant, a minerals yard and vacant land.
5 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate and
6 appropriate infrastructure and public services as follows:
7 A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer service will be provided by the City of
8 Renton. Preliminary fire flow is 2,000 gpm. Water service for the existing building shall
be serviced by the existing private 12-inch water line that loops around the property.
9 The applicant must ensure that the water line that they connect to is the correct line.
Plans for the building permit would need to clearly show the connections to the private
10 lines for domestic water as well as the sprinkler system (if required). These plans must
also indicate the locations of the City of Renton 12-inch water meter.
11
12 B. Fire and Police. The City of Renton will provide police service and the Renton Fire
Authority will provide fire service. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that
13 sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; if the
applicant provides Code required improvements and fees.
14
15 C. Drainage. Public works staff have determined that the preliminary design and technical
drainage review submitted by the Applicant are consistent with adopted city standards.
16 As compliant with City standards, adequate provision is made for drainage.
17 A Preliminary Drainage Plan and Technical Information Report (TIR), dated February
18 2018 (Ex. 17) was submitted with the Land Use Application. The drainage report was
completed in accordance with the standards found in the 2017 Renton Surface Water
19 Design Manual (RSWDM) and all nine (9) core and six (6) special requirements were
addressed. Based on the City's flow control map, the site falls within the Peak Rate
20 Flow Control Standard area matching Existing Site Conditions and is within the Black
21 River Drainage Basin. The submitted geotechnical report and two (2) addendums
provided information on the water table and soil permeability with recommendations of
22 appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the
geotechnical engineer. There were three (3) PIT tests taken to measure the permeability
23 of the soil and the infiltration rates were measured at approximately 0.02 inch/hour
(without correction factors). The applicant is proposing to do a Treatment Trade as
24 described in section 1.2.8.2C that meets the City of Renton requirements as outlined in
25 the Surface Water design manual. For City approval, the applicant must show the 2,935
SF area of the offsite roadway that would flow onsite and be collected and treated to
26 compensate for the 2,844 SF of onsite area not collected and treated. A Civil
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN -4
1 Construction Plan and Permit would be required for the storm system improvements
proposed by the project. Staff also provided advisory notes to the Applicant with respect
2 to drainage (Ex. 23).
3
D. Parks/Open Space. The project is not residential in nature and no parks facilities or
4 impact fees are required. No additional open space is required. The proposed project
improvements allow for adequate passive and active recreation by occupants or users of
5 the site.
6
E. Transportation and Circulation. The proposed development is expected to maintain the
7 safety and efficiency of pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle circulation on the site. All
vehicular access entering the property would be provided from private internal streets
8 within the South Plant. The proposal utilizes existing interior linkages and public roads
9 to get to and circulate the South Plant. The existing circulation allows for safe ingress
and egress movements to and from the site. The primary access to the northern portion
10 of the Plant, where the project would be developed, is via SW 7th St. However,there are
additional driveways located off of Monster Rd SW, Longacres Dr SW and SW Grady
11 Way.No off-site improvements are proposed.
12 The Applicant submitted a trip generation memorandum prepared November 2017 (Ex.
13 18) which estimated that the new facilities would not have any impact on the number of
traffic trips following construction. The project design included utilizing existing roads
14 and driveways. It is anticipated that temporary impacts to traffic would result from the
proposed project during construction. According to the Memo, the project is generally
15 expected to require roughly 20 workers travelling to the site each weekday in personal
16 vehicles (on average). Truck traffic would almost be exclusively for delivery of
materials and equipment to the site and is expected to be on the order of 750 trips over
17 the course of the two-year construction period. The project currently does not include
any removal of excavation material from the site and as a result, truck traffic for hauling
18 spoils off-site is not expected by the project manager. Public works staff have
19 determined that the preliminary design for traffic circulation and improvements satisfies
applicable City standards. Since the proposal is consistent with City transportation
20 standards, it is found to provide for adequate and appropriate transportation facilities
and mitigation.
21
22 F. Schools. The project is not residential in nature. No impacts to schools are anticipated
and no fees are required.
23
G. Refuse and Recycling. RMC 4-4-090 sets the standard for adequate refuse and recycling
24 facilities. Specifically, RMC 4-4-090(E)(3) requires a minimum of two (2) square feet
per every thousand (1,000) square feet of building gross floor area for recyclables
25 deposit areas and a minimum of four (4) square feet per one thousand (1,000) square
26 feet of building gross floor area for refuse deposit areas. A total minimum area of one
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 5
1 hundred (100) square feet shall be provided for recycling and refuse deposit areas. The
2 staff report doesn't identify the area of proposed new building development, the area of
existing building development or the amount of space currently devoted for recycling
3 and refuse deposit areas. Consequently, it's not possible to ascertain from the
information in the record how much refuse and recycling area is required for the project.
4 A condition of approval requires conformance to RMC 4-4-090(E)(3) or the acquisition
of a waiver to the extent authorized by City regulations.
5
6 H. Parking. Adequate provisions are made for parking. The Applicant is proposing up to 10
new uncovered parking stalls (seven (7) on the north side of the new HERB and
7 potentially a few more east of the thermal oxidizer). The new stalls would comply with
the parking dimension of the code. The project would not eliminate any existing parking
8 spaces. The existing and proposed designated parking spaces appear to provide adequate
9 parking for employees.No additional onsite or off-site parking spaces is required.
10 I. Landscaping. It is determined that the proposal provides for adequate and appropriate
landscaping because the proposal complies with applicable City landscaping standards.
11
12 The applicant submitted a Conceptual Landscape Plan (Ex. 11) with the project
application materials. The conceptual landscape plan illustrates plant materials that
13 would be used to enhance the visual character of the building and site improvements.
Together the retained and new landscaping consists of a variety of vegetation along the
14 property edges and around the proposed and existing structures to help create human
scale, add visual interest along the building façades. As there are no vehicular parking
15 requirements for a wastewater treatment plant and the proposed number of stall is less
16 than 14, no interior parking lot landscaping would be required.
17 The landscape plan proposes 14 new sweetgum trees, 29 new Douglas fir trees and a
meadow seed mix for disturbed areas. At the time of building permit submittal, a
18 detailed landscape plan would be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning
19 Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. A condition of approval will
require the applicant to provide a final detailed landscape plan to be reviewed and
20 approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit
approval.
21
22 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. On
March 5, 2018, King County (SEPA lead agency), issued a Determination of Non-
23 significance (DNS) for the South Plant Biogas and Heating Systems Improvements (Ex. 2).
Adequate infrastructure serves the site as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. Impacts are
24 more specifically addressed as follows:
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 6
1 A. Views. No impact to views is anticipated. The proposed Heating and Energy Recovery
Building overall building height will be less than 30 feet (Ex. 7-9). The facility
2 improvements will not impact territorial views or views of Mt. Rainier.
3
B. Compatibility. The proposed use is compatible with the scale and character of the
4 neighborhood. The anticipated maximum building height is 30 feet. The exterior wall
treatment has been designed to match the other existing buildings onsite using similar
5 massing and materials.
6
C. Light, glare, noise and privacy. The proposal will not create any significant adverse
7 light, noise or glare impacts and will not impact privacy for residential uses. The new
improvements are not anticipated to increase impacts beyond the existing uses at the
8 site. All impacts from noise generated by construction would be short-term, temporary
9 in nature and would take place during daylight hours. Construction noise would likely
exceed existing background noise levels. Noise levels would vary depending on the
10 specific equipment use for particular activities. Based on similar construction projects,
typical noise levels can be expected to range from 70 to 90 decibels (dBA) measured at
11 a distance of 50 feet from the source. Throughout the project construction, short-term,
12 intermittent construction related noise may include engine and mechanical equipment
noises associated with the use of heavy equipment such as bulldozers, excavators,
13 cranes, haul trucks, generators, chainsaws, and air compressors. Construction-related
noises would be limited to the City of Renton construction hours. Work outside of
14 normal construction hours is by City of Renton permission only. No hauling or work is
allowed on Sunday (Ex. 23). Construction BMPs would be used to minimize
15 construction noise. See the Environmental Checklist for a list of BMPs (Ex. 3). The
16 noises generated, as a result of the proposed completed facilities, are not anticipated to
exceed City of Renton maximum permissible sound levels.
17
Temporary site lighting may be used at the beginning and end of work days during
18 construction when daylight hours are short. As a part of the completed project, the
19 entrances to Heating and Energy Recovery Building would be lit similar to existing site
lighting at STP for safety and security. All exterior lights would be focused or shielded
20 as necessary to cast light only in areas that require it and to minimize light spilling onto
neighboring properties.No glare impacts are anticipated by the project.
21
22 Surface mounted equipment located in industrial developments that are greater than one
hundred feet (100') from residentially zoned property and/or public streets are exempted
23 from general screening requirements.
24 D. Critical Areas and Natural Features. The proposal will not create any significant adverse
25 impacts to critical areas. The site is mapped with the following critical areas: regulated
slopes (>15% & <=90%), moderate/high coal mine hazards, high seismic hazard areas,
26 moderate/high landslide hazards, and a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA Zone - AE)
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 7
1 associated with Springbrook Creek(Exhibits 19 and 20) and a regulated shoreline. Each
of the critical areas is more individually assessed as follows:
2
3 (1) Wetlands. The project site affects two wetlands. Wetland A is located on the
project site and is exempt from the City's wetland regulations because it qualifies
4 as an artificially created landscape amenity. The buffer of Wetland B, an off-site
buffer, extends on to the project. The project is also exempt from the Wetland B
5 buffer because Wetland B is separated from the project site by a road that makes
6 the buffer portion on the project site nonfunctional.
7 Wetland A was initially identified as a "small palustrine scrub-shrub, depressional
wetland" by the Applicant in its wetland report, Ex. 19. The Applicant
8 subsequently contested the regulatory status of the wetland in response to staff
9 recommended Condition No. 4, which required that the wetland be protected by a
native growth protection easement. As a result of post-hearing briefing and an
10 updated wetland report, Ex. 28, the City and Applicant came to agreement that
Wetland A does not qualify as a protected wetland under City regulations because
11 it is exempted from the wetland definition as a landscaping amenity.
12 It is determined that the City and Applicant have correctly identified Wetland A as
13 exempt from the City's wetland regulations under RMC 4-30-050(B)(1) because
the wetland qualifies as a landscaping amenity. As detailed in the post-hearing
14 materials, Ex. 28 and 29, Wetland A was created in the last few years by the
installation of water tolerant plants into soils compacted by the Applicant. The
15 compacted soils resulted in poor drainage conditions and pooling of water. Since
16 all the attributes of Wetland A that qualify it as a wetland (mainly vegetation and
hydrology) were created by the landscaping features installed by the Applicant, it
17 is concluded that Wetland A is a landscaping amenity that is exempt from the
City's wetland regulations.
18
19 Wetland B corresponds to a Category II rating with moderate habitat function.
Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050B.1.g, the City or Renton has the authority to not
20 regulate certain upland sites separated from a critical area, if the site is separated
from critical areas by pre-existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures,
21 roads, or other substantial existing improvements. In this case, the project is
22 separated from Wetland B by the paved 20-foot wide north plant road with raised
vertical curbs. In addition, an approximately 8-foot wide paved path is located
23 adjacent to the road. The substantial width of the existing impervious road with
vertical curbs, combined with the width of the existing paved trail, serves as an
24 effective barrier. These improvements completely restrict and redirect the flow of
25 ground and surface water, and otherwise impair delivery of functions from upland
sites located within the project area to Wetland B. Upon further review of the
26 Wetland Assessment Report, staff concurs with the Wetland Assessment Report
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 8
1 findings that the existing road creates a barrier and the buffer regulations would
not extend beyond the road onto the project site.
2
3 (2) Steep Slopes. The geological characteristics of the project site have been fully
evaluated and all necessary mitigation measures have been recommended in a
4 geotechnical report prepared by the Applicant, Ex. 14. No portion of the project
will be built into or adversely affect protected slopes, so no adverse impacts so the
5 slopes are adequately protected.
6
(3) Coal Mining Hazards. According to City of Renton (COR) Maps, the site is
7 located within a critical area consisting of a moderate coal mine hazard because the
site is within approximately 200 feet of a mapped historical coal mine consisting
8 of a series of mine adits extending north from the former mine entrance near the
9 northeast corner of the Cogeneration Building (Ex. 16). The geotechnical engineer
states that they are of the opinion that the mine adits do not extend beneath the
10 footprint of the proposed Heat and Energy Recovery Building or the proposed
thermal oxidizer as a result of advanced borings. The conclusion of the
11 Geotechnical Report Addendum indicated that there was no subsurface or surface
12 evidence of past mining activity at the proposed Facility site and there is low
probability that construction of the proposed Facility is at risk of coal mine
13 hazards such as subsidence.
14 (4) Seismic Hazard. The geotechnical report, Ex. 14, mitigates against any seismic
risks. According to the report, slope instability due to ground shaking is low and
15 not considered a design issue for this project due to its distance to the nearest fault
16 zone (5 to 6 miles south to southwest of the Seattle Fault Zone) and the relatively
long repeat time for fault movement. Therefore, the geotechnical engineer is
17 recommending that the facility be supported on a mat foundation, which the report
concludes is sufficient to address seismic issues.
18
19 (5) Landslide Hazard Area. Critical areas regulations impose a 50-foot buffer and 15-
foot building setback are required from Very High Landslide Hazard Areas. As
20 best as can be ascertained from the record, the project complies with these buffer
requirements so impacts to landslide hazard areas are sufficiently addressed.
21
22 (6) Flood hazard area. A flood hazard area is mapped on a portion of the project site.
No work would be completed within either the wetland or the wetland buffer. No
23 permanent facilities or fill would be located within the mapped flood hazard area.
24 (7) Shorelines. The project is exempt from shoreline regulations as identified in the
25 Conclusions of Law and for that reason no adverse shoreline impacts are
anticipated from the permanent construction. The regulated shoreline is the
26 shoreline of Springbrook Creek, which flows along the east perimeter of the plant
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 9
1 site before joining the Black River to the north. The portion of the project within
2 shoreline jurisdiction has a fair market value of less than $6,900. It is also clear
that the proposal will not interfere with normal public use of the water or
3 shorelines of the state as no permanent part of the project will encroach into state
waters.
4
The proposal does involve temporary impacts that are fully mitigated. The
5 applicant is proposing a temporary construction entrance within a portion of the
6 shoreline jurisdiction of Springbrook Creek. No trees would be removed within
the shoreline, and there would be no impacts to the existing vegetated riparian
7 buffer.
8 In order to address the temporary impacts created by the construction entrance, the
9 Applicant submitted a Standard Stream Study (dated January 5, 2018; Ex. 20).
According to the Report, construction and use of the temporary construction
10 entrance would result in no net loss of ecological functions or processes. Existing
vegetation on the proposed temporary construction entrance site consists of
11 herbaceous species (grasses). The structural and species diversity was identified as
12 low. Minor grading would be required for construction of the temporary
construction entrance. As part of the civil construction plans, the Applicant will
13 develop and implement a temporary erosion and sediment control plan during
construction and operation of the temporary construction entrance to ensure no
14 changes in turbidity or water quality. The site of the proposed temporary
construction entrance is located in an area that was filled, to a depth of 25 feet with
15 silty sand and gravel and graded as part of the previous STP construction projects.
16 There are no wetlands, water bodies or steep slopes present within the proposed
temporary construction access.
17
Following construction, the temporary construction entrance (approximately 290
18 cubic yards of soil and 120 yards of quarry spalls) will be removed and the area be
19 regraded to existing grades and revegetated consistent with previously existing
vegetation. No permanent changes are proposed to the existing onsite drainage
20 conditions.
21 E. Tree Retention. Adequate provisions are made for tree retention as the Applicant has
22 demonstrated that trees will be retained as required by the City's tree retention
standards. The Applicant submitted a Tree Report (dated February 15, 2018; Ex. 10),
23 including a Level 1 (planning level) tree risk assessment for the 180 existing trees at the
King County South Treatment Plant near impacts associated with the proposed Biogas
24 and Heating System Improvements. Of the 180 assessed trees, 42 trees with a Diameter
25 at Breast Height (DBH) greater than 6" are proposed for removal. 39 trees would be
removed due to impacts of construction, three (3) trees would be removed due to the
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 10
1 poor condition of the trees which makes their location near construction and proposed
facilities high risk.
2
3 The existing assessed trees were planted as part of previous development projects with
sufficient space between them to allow development of even canopies. The proposed
4 tree removals would likely not impact the health or durability of existing trees to remain.
The project proposes to retain seventy-six (76%) of the existing significant trees onsite.
5 The significant trees range in size from 6 to 17 DBH. The proposed percentage of
6 retained trees exceeds the minimum required threshold to retain 10 percent (10%) of the
significant trees per RMC 4-4-130H.No replacement trees would be required by Renton
7 Municipal Code (RMC). Nevertheless, 43 new trees would be planted onsite as part of
the improvement project.
8
9 Conclusions of Law
10 1. Authority. A hearing conditional use permit (Type III review) is required by RMC 4-2-060
for sewage disposal and treatment plants in the IH zone. All other consolidated project applications
11 are Type II or lower. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under
12 "the highest-number procedure". The Type III review is the "highest-number procedure" and
therefore must be employed for the conditional use and site plan approval. As outlined in RMC 4-
13 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.
14
15 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is within the Employment
Area (EA) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Heavy Industrial (IH) zoning
16 classification.
17 3. Review Criteria/Street Modification. Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-
030(D), shoreline exemptions by 4-9-190(C) and site plan review standards by RMC 4-9-
18 200(E)(3). Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding
19 conclusions of law. The proposal satisfies all quoted standards as conditioned for the reasons
identified in the conclusions of law. The street standard modification identified in Finding of Fact
20 No. 3 is governed by RMC 4-9-250(D). The modification request is concluded to meet all
applicable review criteria for the reasons identified in Staff Report Findings of Fact No. 21.
21
CONDITIONAL USE
22
The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the
23 following factors for all applications:
24 RMC 4-9-030(C)(1): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be
25 compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan,
the zoning regulations and any other plans,programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 11
1 4. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and
development standards as outlined in Findings No. 16-17 of the staff report, adopted by this
2 reference as if set forth in full.
3
RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the
4 detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of
the proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use.
5
6 5. For the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4 and 5, the proposal is compatible with
surrounding uses, will be served by adequate infrastructure and will not create significant adverse
7 impacts to adjoining properties. For these reasons the proposed location is suited for the proposed
use. There is no evidence in the record of any overconcentrated sewage disposal and treatment
8 plants as these uses are limited in nature and serve a larger region.
9 RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location
10 shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.
11 6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned, there are no significant adverse
impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on
12 adjacent property.
13 RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and
14 character of the neighborhood.
15 7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposed use is compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
16
RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking:Adequate parking is, or will be made, available.
17
18 8. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, the proposal includes parking that is consistent with
applicable parking standards,which sets a legislative standard for adequate parking.
19
RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians
20 and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area.
21 9. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4, the proposal provides for safe circulation and adequate
traffic mitigation and facilities.
22
23 RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the
proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated.
24
10. As conditioned, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not result in any
25 adverse light, noise or glare impacts.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 12
1 RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by
2 buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent
properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
3
11. As shown in the site plans for the proposal, all undeveloped portions of the site are
4 landscaped.
5
6 SITE PLAN
7 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be
8 in compliance with the following:
9 a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and
approvals, including:
10
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and
11 policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community
12 Design Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
13 ii. Applicable land use regulations;
14 iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
15 iv. Design Regulations: Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in
RMC 4-3-100.
16
17 12. As concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 4 and as conditioned, the proposal is consistent with
the City's comprehensive plan, development regulations and design standards.
18
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
19 uses, including:
20 i. Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a
21 particular portion of the site;
22 ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways
and adjacent properties;
23
iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities,
24 rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from
25 surrounding properties;
26 iv. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility
to attractive natural features;
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 13
1 v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and
2 surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance
the appearance of the project; and
3
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid
4 excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
5 13. As conditioned, the criteria quoted above are met. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4(E),
the proposal provides for desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
6 adjacent properties. As conditioned, the proposal will comply with the City's refuse and recycling
7 standards. No new loading areas are proposed or required of the proposal. As determined in
Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not adversely affect any views. As determined in Finding
8 of Fact No. 4, as conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the City's landscaping standards,
which includes perimeter landscaping to provide buffering to adjacent uses. The proposal will not
9 create any significant light impacts, including excessive brightness or glare, for the reasons
10 identified in Finding of Fact No. 5.
11 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts:Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
12 i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement,
spacing and orientation;
13
14 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
15 and vehicle needs;
16 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
17 surfaces; and
18 iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parkingareas, to provide
19 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
20 of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian
movements.
21
22 14. The criterion quoted above are met. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will
not create any significant privacy or noise impacts. The scale of the proposal, composed of new
23 structures less than 30 feet in height, is entirely appropriate and compatible with existing
development on site and the industrial and commercial nature of the surrounding uses. Natural
24 features are adequately protected. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(D, E and G), natural
25 features (topography, trees and critical areas) are adequately protected. As conditioned, the
proposal complies with the City's landscaping standards as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 14
1 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all
2 users, including:
3 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
4 the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties;
5 ii. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system,
6 including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points,
drives,parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
7
iii. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and
8 pedestrian areas;
9 iv. Transit and Bicycles:Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
10 v. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas,
11 buildings,public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
12 15. The proposal as conditioned provides for adequate access and circulation as required by the
criterion above for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4. Per RMC 4-4-080F.11.a bicycle
13 parking spaces are required at 10 percent (10%) of the number of required off-street parking spaces.
The applicant is not proposing new bicycle parking with the new building. As there are no
14 vehicular parking requirements specified in RMC for a wastewater treatment plant, no bicycle
15 parking is required.No loading areas are proposed.
16 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
17 occupants/users of the site.
18 16. The site provides for open space that meets the criterion above for the reasons identified in
19 Finding of Fact No. 4.
20 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.
21
17. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal as
22 determined in Finding of Fact No. 5.
23 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems:Arranging project elements to protect existing natural
24 systems where applicable.
25 18. The proposed project elements, such as the temporary construction access, will be designed to
protect existing natural systems where applicable as described in Finding of Fact No. 5.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 15
1 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and
2 facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
3 19. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No.
4.
4
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases
5 and estimated time frames,for phased projects.
6 20. The project is not phased.
7 SHORELINE EXEMPTION
8
9 4-9-190(C): The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of
this Master Program and are exempt from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
10 (SSDP). An exemption from an SSDP is not an exemption from compliance with the Act or the
11 Shoreline Master Program, or from any other regulatory requirements.
12 ...
13 2. Projects Valued at $5,000 or Less: Any development of which the total cost or fair market
14 value does not exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), if such development does not
materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the State.
15
21. The proposal is exempt from a shoreline substantial development permit. As determined in
16 Finding of Fact No. 5,the portion of the project within shoreline jurisdiction has a fair market value
17 of less than $6,900. WAC 173-27-040(2)(a) requires that the $5,000 exemption level be adjusted
for inflation every five years. As noted in the staff report, as adjusted, the threshold amount for this
18 project is $7,047.00. It is also clear that the proposal will not interfere with normal public use of the
19 water or shorelines of the state.
20 DECISION
21 As conditioned below, the Site Plan, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, Shoreline
22 Exemption, and Street Modification applications meet all applicable permit criteria for the reasons
identified in the conclusions of law. The project is subject to the following conditions of approval:
23
1. The applicant, King County Wastewater Treatment Division's South Treatment Plant (STP),
24 shall complete a recording of a declaration of lot combination or lot line adjustment prior to
25 building permit issuance.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 16
1 2. The applicant shall provide a final detailed landscape plan for review and approval by the
2 Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval.
3 3. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the
Geotechnical Engineering Study and Addendums prepared by Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (dated
4 January 6, 2017, March 16, 2017 and December 8, 2017) or an updated report(s) submitted at
a later date.
5
6 4. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) shall be recorded over the top of Wetland B
and associated buffers. The NGPE shall be submitted with the construction permit application
7 to be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction
permit approval.
8
9 5. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without
casting excessive glare on adjacent properties or critical areas. Pedestrian scale and down-
10 lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement. The
lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application to be reviewed and
11 approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval.
12 6. The Applicant shall provide for the amount of recycling and refuse deposit area required by
13 RMC 4-4-090(E)(3) for the new building area as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4(G) or in
the alternative acquire a waiver/variance as authorized by City regulations.
14
15 DATED this 11th day of June, 2018.
16
17
Phi A.Olbrechts
18
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
19
20 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
21
As consolidated, RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III
22 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
23 decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-
24 day appeal period.
25 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
26
CONDITIONAL USE and SITE PLAN - 17