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