HomeMy WebLinkAboutJohnson Letter & Decision \
Denis Law Mayor
City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC
November 13, 2019
Anna Johnson
Washington Charter School Development
107 Spring Street, Suite 4025
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject: Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final Decision
RE: Charter Schools—K-12 Public School Site Plan & Conditional Use - LUA-
19-000035
Dear Ms. Johnson:
Enclosed please find the Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final
Decision dated November 5, 2019. Also, this document is immediately available on our
website:
• If you go to: Rentonwa.gov; "How do I"; Hearing Examiner (under Contact); "Land
Use 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,
Jason A. Seth, CMC
City Clerk
cc: Hearing Examiner
Alex Morganroth,Associate Planner
Jennifer Henning, Planning Director
Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager
Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager
Craig Burnell, Building Official
Jennifer Cisneros, Planning Technician
Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison
Parties of Record M(Z
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
)
RE: K-12 Public School )
) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
Site Plan and Conditional Use ) LAW AND FINAL DECISION
)
LUA19-000035, ECF, CU-H, SH )
)
)
)
Summary
The Applicant has applied for site plan and conditional use permit approval to convert a vacant grocery store
(former QFC) within the Cascade Village Shopping Center to a K — 12th grade Public Charter School. The
site plan and conditional use permit applications are approved subject to conditions.
Testimony
Alex Morganroth, Renton Associate Planner, summarized the staff report. In response to Examiner questions,
Mr. Morganroth responded that the parking estimates take into account student parking. He also responded
that not many students will be walking to school but that the recommended conditions require a pedestrian
access plan to provide for safe pedestrian access between the sidewalks and the school building. Mr.
Morgranroth also responded that the staff traffic analysis took into account potential night use of the building
and traffic and parking impacts with use of the rest of the shopping center area.
Exhibits
The October 22, 2019 Staff Report Exhibits 1-11 identified at Section B of the staff report were admitted into
the record during the hearing. In addition,the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing.
Exhibit 12 Google Earth
Exhibit 13 City of Renton COR Maps
Exhibit 14 City of Renton Power Point
Findings of Fact
Procedural:
1. Applicant. The Applicant is Washington Charter School Development(WCSD).
2. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on October 22, 2019 in the City of
Renton Council Chambers.
Substantive:
3. Project Description. The Applicant has applied for site plan and conditional use permit approval to
convert a vacant grocery store (former QFC) within the Cascade Village Shopping Center located at 17060
116th Ave SE. to a K— 12th grade Public Charter School. The building is 40,664 square feet in area and the
parcel is approximately 13.6 acres (APN 2823059009). The Applicant proposes to provide 60 parking spaces
in the existing parking lot and to convert several existing parking spaces (and some landscape areas) to bus
loading and outdoor sport courts. The school would serve approximately 525 students. The school day would
start at 8:00 am (Monday—Friday) and end at 3:30 pm. School clubs and tutoring may start as early as 7:00
am and end as late as 5:00pm (Monday—Thursday).The school seeks to occupy the existing structure by fall
of 2020. Renovations would include interior tenant improvements, seismic upgrades, new mechanical and
electrical systems, envelope improvements, landscaping and overall site improvements. The size of the
building would not increase as a result of the project. Approximately 2,300 sq. ft. of replaced impervious
surface is proposed.No critical areas are present on the project site.
4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and
public services as follows:
A. Water and Sewer Service. The proposal will be served by adequate water and sewer. The Applicant
submitted a water availability certificate and sewer availability certificate from Soos Creek Water
and Sewer District. The water and sewer plans approved by Soos Creek should be submitted with
the Construction Permit application for review by the Public Works Plan Reviewer.
B. Fire and Police. The proposal will be served by adequate police and fire service. Police and Fire
Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed
development, if the Applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. A SEPA mitigation
measure requires the Applicant to conduct a security survey of the site with a Renton Police Crime
Prevention Representative of the premises prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
Based on current code, no fire impact fees are anticipated to be collected for the new use.
C. Drainage. Adequate drainage facilities are proposed. The Applicant submitted a Preliminary
Drainage Plan and Technical Information Report (TIR), dated February 15, 2018, prepared by
Sitewise Design, PLLC. Public works staff determined that the Applicant's preliminary stormwater
facility design complies with the City's drainage standards, which includes requiring that off-site
generated flows match pre-developed forested conditions. According to the submitted TIR, the
project proposes less than 2,000 square feet of new impervious area and less than 5,000 square feet
of new plus replaced impervious area and is therefore exempt from Core Requirements#2 (Offsite
Analysis), #3 (Flow Control), and #8 (Water Quality). To pay for its impacts to the City's
stormwater system, the Applicant will be required to pay a surface water system development fee
prior to issuance of the civil construction permit.
D. Parks/Open Space. As conditioned, the proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parks and
open space.
The proposed use, a K-12 school, would serve children ranging from ages 5 to 18. Therefore, the
Applicant has proposed constructing areas for both active and passive recreation. The Applicant
has proposed multiple sport courts, a grassy open space area, and potentially a playground area.
Due to the security measures implemented by the proposed school including gating the play area
and installing "no trespassing" signs, the recreation space would be for the exclusive use of the
future students and would not be open to the public.
City regulations do not require any park land dedication or park impact fees for the project.
E. Transportation. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate transportation facilities.
Access points are consolidated to the extent feasible to provide for efficient and safe site access.
The Cascade Village Shopping Center site currently has five points of access including three off of
116th Ave SE and two off of SE 170th PI. In order to decrease the potential for increased traffic
volumes in the neighborhood to the north, the Applicant has proposed utilizing two existing
driveways off of 116th Ave SE. This would be achieved by blocking certain entrances via a gate,
utilizing pavement striping that directs the school traffic to a specific driveway, and providing
education to bus drivers, parents, and students on the preferred way to enter and exit the site. In
addition, a SEPA mitigation measure was added that requires the Applicant to submit a traffic
management plan with the Civil Construction Permit application for review and approval by the
Public Works Plan Reviewer.
The proposal will not create any need for off-site improvements. The Applicant submitted a
Transportation Technical Report prepared by Heffron Transportation Inc. (Exhibit 6). The report
included analysis related to site access and circulation, trip generation, parking needs and impact
fees for the proposed new school. The consultant utilized recent traffic counts to evaluate the
potential impact of the proposed project on the Level of Service (LOS) of multiple intersections
near the project site.The report concluded that while the proposal would generate additional vehicle
trips and delays at all studied intersections, the increase would be small relative to existing traffic
volumes and would not result in any LOS decreases in the surrounding area. The consultant
estimates that the school would generate approximately 1,300 new daily trips,the majority of which
would occur outside of the commuter AM and PM peak hours. In comparison to the previous use
on the site, a large supermarket, the proposal would generate a significantly lower number of trips
(1,200 vs. 5,183 trips).
Staff has determined that the development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements
when complete (Exhibit 10).
The project is exempt from constructing any frontage improvements since the footprint is proposed
for expansion (interior only).
The proposed school would utilize the existing loading and delivery area on the backside (south)
of the building. No parking or pedestrian areas would be impacted by delivery vehicles utilizing
the area.
As conditioned,public works staff has determined that the proposal provides for safe and efficient
internal circulation with desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
adjacent properties. The site allows for vehicle and pedestrian access via 116th Ave SE. Once on
the site, the existing series of drive aisles and internal roadways provides efficient and safe access
to the school for automobiles. Existing street frontage improvements along 116th Ave SE, which
consists of a five-foot wide sidewalk with no planter strip, would provide a safe connection for
pedestrians to use for access to the site. Some internal sidewalks are also present on the project site.
Vehicular connections to adjacent properties are already established and provide a safe and
effective way for visitors to access multiple businesses in the immediate vicinity. Pedestrian
connections to adjacent properties are provided via the public sidewalk along East Valley Rd.
However, the Cascade Village Center Shopping Center site is primarily auto oriented and once on
the site, the large expanse of surface parking may present safety challenges to visitors or students
walking to the school which is located approximately 400 feet from the nearest public sidewalk.
Although the Applicant indicated in their submittal materials that the majority of students would
utilize bus transportation or parental drop-off/pick-up due to the usual student make-up of a charter
school, a condition of approval requires that the Applicant submit a pedestrian access plan that
identifies a safe walking route for pedestrians between the public sidewalk and the school, as well
as how the school would implement the route.
F. Transit and Bicycles. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate transit and bicycle
facilities. The site plan submitted with the Applicant did not identify any bicycle parking on the
site. In order to ensure students, staff, or visitors to the school that utilize bicycles as their primary
mode of transportation have a safe and secure area to store their bicycles, a condition of approval
requires that the Applicant install a secure bike rack near either the north or east façade of the
building with enough space for at least 5 bicycles, as,required by RMC 4-4-080 (required bicycle
spaces equal to 10%of required vehicular spaces for use).
Transit beyond the school buses is provided by a bus stop with access to routes going to and from
the Renton Park and Ride that is located adjacent to the site on SE 168th Ave SE mile west of the
project site.King County DART service is also available at the same stop with service to the Valley
Medical Center and Southcenter shopping area.
G. Parking. The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate parking.
The Applicant has proposed a total of 65 parking spaces including 13 compact parking stalls and 52
standards parking stalls. According to the parking standards in RMC 4-4-080, the entire shopping
center would be required to provide a minimum of 265 stalls and a maximum of 530 stalls. The total
number of stalls in the Cascade Village Shopping Center is approximately 430 and is therefore
compliant with the parking standards for shopping centers in the CA zone.
The project would result in a net decrease to impervious surfaces due to the conversion of a parking
lot area to grass.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project. Adequate
infrastructure serves the site as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. A State Environmental Policy Act
determination of non-significance was issued for the project on September 23, 2019 with several mitigation
measures designed to eliminate significant adverse impacts. See Ex. 11. Impacts are more specifically
addressed as follows:
A. Structure Placement and Scale. As conditioned, the structure placement and scale are not expected
to create undue adverse impact on the adjacent residences and is designed to protect privacy and
reduce noise for on-and off-site occupants and to maintain compatibility with existing development
an'd surrounding uses.
The existing one-story building is of similar size and scale as the other existing commercial
buildings within the Cascade Village Shopping Center site. In addition, the proposed building has
a lower height (28 feet) than adjacent multifamily residential structures to the south and east. The
proposed development has an existing partially obscuring landscape buffer along the north side of
the site between the adjacent single-family residential homes and the school. In addition, the
Applicant has proposed a substantial amount of perimeter and interior landscaping on the site that
would serve to break up the building façade when viewed from the ROW or from the neighboring
properties.
No significant changes to the existing building footprint is proposed. The effective "front" of the
building would continue to orient north towards the existing parking lot and would not negatively
impact the privacy of the adjacent properties.
The existing 38,575 sq.ft.building and various site improvements would not represent a significant
visual change to the overall scale of the building and would not negatively impact any natural
characteristics on the site. Architectural elevations submitted by the Applicant(Exhibit 9) indicate
plans for a significant façade update that would help decrease the perceived scale of the building
by breaking up the existing blank facades through the use of various colors and materials.
B. Views.No obstruction of existing views of natural features are anticipated, including view corridors
to shorelines or Mt. Rainier according to the staff report. Re-use of the existing building and the
minor site changes proposed would not significantly impact any of the already limited views in the
immediate area.
C. Noise, light and glare. Impacts from noise, light, and glare are not expected to be significantly
greater than the various other uses in the commercial development. Ambient noise from students
playing outside during recess and other noises typically associated with a school can be expected
but would not significantly impact residences due to the existing vegetative buffer on-site between
the proposed play area and the homes to the north. A condition of approval requires a lighting plan
that would evaluate potential light impacts on neighboring sites and would require changes to light
locations and types if significant impacts are expected.
D. Screening. Unattractive site features will be adequately screened from view. The Applicant has
proposed a trash and recycling enclosure near the existing paved loading area near the south side of
building. The enclosure and loading area not visible from the public ROW or adjacent residential
uses due to the presence of mature trees along the site perimeter and location of the area behind the
building. According to the Applicant, the new refuse and recycling enclosure would utilize a six-
foot tall chain-link fence with vinyl slats for screening. Per RMC 4-4-090, the architectural design
of any structure enclosing an outdoor refuse or recyclables deposit area shall be consistent with the
design of the primary structure on the site. In addition,the Design District D requirements state that
service enclosures (i.e. refuse and recycling) utilize high quality fencing materials for screening or
landscaping as approved by the Current Planning Project Manager. In order to meet these
requirements, a condition of approval requires that the Applicant utilize different materials for the
enclosure that better complements the existing building and thereby reduces the visual impact of the
enclosure when viewed from adjacent sites.
The existing rooftop utilities will be screened by the existing parapet and would not be visible from
adjacent properties or from the ROW according to the elevations submitted.
E. Fencing and Retaining Walls. An existing six (6') foot tall chain-link fence is located on the east
side of the project site between the shopping center site and the adjacent multifamily residential
uses. The site plan shows additional fencing proposed around the outdoor play area but does not
indicate the type or height of the fence. The Applicant will be made to demonstrate compliance
with fence requirements at the time of building permit submittal. No new retaining walls are
proposed.
F. Natural Features.The proposal will not adversely affect any natural features. No significant natural
features are present on the site due to its location on a heavily developed existing commercial use.
The Applicant has proposed the removal of existing vegetation and trees within the parking lot, bus
drop off area, and playground area in order to better serve the proposed school. While some
vegetation (primary parking islands) would be removed, the project would result in a net decrease
to impervious surfaces due to the conversion of a parking lot area to grass.
G. Landscaping. Aesthetic, noise, light and privacy impacts will be minimized by existing and
proposed landscaping. Staff have found the landscaping proposed across the project site is
generally acceptable and would help break up the expanse of asphalt created by the existing surface
parking lot, proposed bus drop off area, and proposed play area. The Applicant has proposed
approximately 42 new trees on the site(see Exhibit 5).The installation of new trees near the outdoor
play area and along the east side of the site will help decrease the impacts of noise on the
surrounding properties and will enhance the existing partially obscuring visual barrier between the
residential uses to the north and east and the project site. Existing mature landscaping along the
southeast property line already provides a significant vegetative buffer between the subject site and
the adjacent sites
H. Critical Areas.No impacts to critical areas are anticipated. No critical areas are mapped on the site.
I. Compatibility. The school is proposed to be placed within an existing building that has existed
within the neighborhood for many years. The proposed changes to the existing building are
expected to improve the aesthetics of the structure and the site improving the compatibility with the
neighborhood. The proposed school would be located within an existing commercial area adjacent
to both multi-family and single-family residential uses.Due to the typical hours a school is occupied
and the low number of new trips expected to be created by the school when compared to the other
retail uses on the site, the proposed use is not expected to negatively impact the neighborhood or
create any substantial or adverse effects on adjacent properties. Schools are generally very
compatible with residential uses due to who they serve(children)and the primarily indoor nature of
the use.
As to overconcentration of use,the project site is within an existing auto-oriented retail development
(Cascade Village Shopping Center).The proposed school is located over a half-mile from the nearest
existing school and therefore the new school would not create an overconcentration of educational
uses in the immediate area. The location of the school within the existing commercial development
and adjacent to single and multi-family residential units with children who may attend the school is
appropriate and would bring additionally activity to the partially vacant site.
Conclusions of Law
1. Authority. RMC 4-9-200(B)(2)(a) requires site plan review for all development in the CA zone and
Condition 9 of RMC 4-2-080 requires site plan review for K-12 facilities in the CA zone. RMC 4-9-
200(D)(2)(b)(iv) defines this project as a Large Project Scale subject to review and approval by the hearing
examiner because it is over 25,000 square feet in area in the CA zone. RMC 4-2-060E requires a hearing
examiner conditional use permit in the CA zone for K-12 educational facilities. The site plan and conditional
use permits are classified as a Type III permits by RMC 4-8-080(G). As Type III applications, RMC 4-8-
080(G) grants the Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a final decision on them, subject to
closed record appeal to the City Council.
2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The site is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) with Urban
Design District D Overlay.The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation is Commercial Mixed Use(CMU).
3. Review Criteria/Approval of Modifications. Site plan review standards are governed by RMC 4-9-
200(E)(3). Conditional use permit standards are governed by RMC 4-9-030C. All applicable site plan and
conditional use criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
Site Plan
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to be in
compliance with the following:
a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans,policies, regulations and approvals, including:
i. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and policies,
especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design Element; and any
applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan;
ii. Applicable land use regulations;
iii. Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and
iv. Design Regulations:Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC 4-3-100.
4. The criterion is met. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the reasons stated in
Finding 15 of the staff report. The proposal does not qualify as a Planned Action Ordinance. The proposal is
consistent with applicable land use regulations for the reasons identified in Finding 16 of the staff report and
to Design District"D" regulations for the reasons identified in Finding 17 of the staff report.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off-Site Impacts:Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses,
including:
i. Structures:Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular
portion of the site;
ii. Circulation:Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and
adjacent properties;
iii. Loading and Storage Areas:Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop
equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding
properties;
iv. Views:Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to
attractive natural features;
v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding
properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the
project; and
vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive
brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets.
5. The criterion is met. As described in FOF No. 5A and 5I, the existing building is of appropriate scale
and its proposed use will not create an overconcentration of use. Desirable transitions and linkages for
vehicular and pedestrian circulation are provided as determined in FOF No. 4E. Loading areas and equipment
and refuse/recycling areas will be screened from view as determined in FOF No. 5D. No views will be
obstructed by the development as determined in FOF No. 5B. The proposed landscaping will reduce noise and
glare, maintain privacy and enhance the appearance of the project as determined in FOF 5G. No lighting plan
was provided.As noted in FOF No. 5C, a condition of approval will require the Applicant to submit a lighting
plan,which will staff will ensure complies with the criterion quoted above.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts:Mitigation of impacts to the site, including:
i. Structure Placement:Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing
and orientation;
ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural
characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight,prevailing winds, and pedestrian and
vehicle needs;
iii. Natural Features:Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils,
using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces;
iv. Reducing Parking Impervious Areas:Design parking areas to minimize impervious surfaces,
including but not limited to: (1) breaking up parking areas and directing stormwater flows to multiple
low impact development features such as bioretention areas; (2) locating parking near trees to provide
storm water uptake; (3) retaining or adding vegetation to parking areas; (4)placing existing parking
that exceeds maximum parking ratios in permeable pavement designed consistent with the Surface
Water Design Manual in RMC 4-6-030, and (5) using other low impact development techniques
consistent with RMC 4-6-030; and
v. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and
privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance
of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are
less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements.
6. The criterion is met. Structure placement appropriately protects for privacy and noise reduction as
determined in FOF 5A. Structural scale is appropriate as determined in FOF 5A. Natural landscape will be
adequately protected as determined in FOF 5F. Parking impervious surface is adequately minimized and
mitigated due to the reduction in parking area and replacement with grass as identified in FOF 4G. The
proposed landscaping will maintain privacy and enhance the appearance of the project as determined in FOF
5G.
•
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d):Access and Circulation:Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users,
including:
i. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather
than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and,
when feasible, with adjacent properties;
ii. Internal Circulation:Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including
the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives,parking,
turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways;
iii. Loading and Delivery:Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas;
iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and
v.Pedestrians:Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings,
public sidewalks and adjacent properties.
7. The criterion is met. The proposal provides for adequate access and circulation as required by the
criterion above for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 4E.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space:Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points
and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site.
8. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF 4D.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines
and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines.
9. The criterion is met. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal.
As noted in FOF No. 5B, no views are affected. There are no shorelines in proximity to the project for which
access could be required.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems
where applicable.
10. The criterion is met. No natural systems or critical areas would be adversely affected for the reasons
identified in FOF No. 5F and H.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to
accommodate the proposed use.
11. The criterion is met. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in
Finding of Fact No. 4.
RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and
estimated time frames,for phased projects.
12. No phasing is proposed.
CONDITIONAL USE
The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following
factors for all applications:
RMC 4-9-030(C)(1): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be 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.
13. The criterion is met. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive
plan policies, development standards and the design district requirements as determined in COL No. 4.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the 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.
14. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in FOF 5I.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not
result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property.
15. 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 adjacent
property.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character
of the neighborhood.
16. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5A and I, the proposed use is compatible with the scale and
character of the neighborhood.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking:Adequate parking is, or will be made, available.
17. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4G, the site is served by adequate parking.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall
mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area.
18. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4E, the proposal provides for safe circulation and adequate traffic
mitigation and facilities.
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.
19. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5C, the proposal will not result in any adverse light, noise or
glare impacts.
RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping:Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by buildings,
paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent properties from
potentially adverse effects of the proposed use.
20. As shown in the site plans for the proposal, all undeveloped portions of the site are landscaped.
Decision
As conditioned below, the site plan and conditional use permit as described in FOF 3 are approved, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The Applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of
Non-Significance Mitigated, dated (September 23, 2019).
2. The Applicant shall submit an updated landscape plan that demonstrates compliance with the tree
retention requirements for the CA zone.The updated plan shall be submitted with the Construction
Permit and shall be subject to review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior
to permit issuance.
3. The Applicant shall submit detailed specifications for the proposed enclosure that utilizes materials
that better complement the existing building and reduces the visual impact of the enclosure. The
alternative enclosure shall be submitted with the Building Permit application for review and
approval by the Current Planning Project Manager.
4. The Applicant shall submit a lighting plan with the building permit application that adequately
provides for public safety and avoids excessive brightness and glare to adjacent properties and
streets.The lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to permit issuance.
5. The Applicant shall submit a pedestrian access plan that identifies a safe walking route across the
site for pedestrians from the public sidewalk to the school entrance. This plan shall address how
the school would implement the route. The plan shall be submitted with the Construction Permit
application and reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
construction permit issuance.
6. The Applicant shall submit updated elevations that add three-dimensional architectural design
elements (i.e. modulation, sunscreens, trellis, etc) on the top half of the building along the north
elevation in order to break up the blank wall along the top half of the building. The updated
elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager at the time of
building permit review.
1
2
DATED this 5th day of November 2019.
3
4
6
Kristen Olbrechts
7 City of Renton Hearing Examiner Pro Tern
8 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
9 RMC 4-8-080(G)classifies the application(s)subject to this decision as Type III application(s)subject
10 to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the hearing examiner's decision
must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision. A request for
11 reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal period.
12 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding
13 any program of revaluation.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
SITE PLAN& CONDITIONAL USE
1