Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPaccar Pre-Load Soil Retention, Site Plan and Special Grade and Fill Permits1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 1 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Paccar Pre-Load Soil Retention Site Plan and Special Grade and Fill Permits LUA16-00620, SA-H, SP FINAL DECISION Summary The applicant is requesting a Special Grade and Fill Permit and Site Plan approval to retain approximately 139,000 cubic yards of soil on the Paccar property located at 1400 N. 4th Street. The two permit applications are approved, subject to conditions. Testimony Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner, summarized the proposal. He noted that references in the staff report that the subject property is 25 acres in size is incorrect. The property is 66 acres. The portion of the property subject to the application is 12 acres. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Herrera responded that the soil at the site would not be used to replenish soil required by a consent decree for the project site and that the sole purpose of the soil pile is storage. The applicant isn’t ready at this point to move the soil off the property. Once modified as proposed and conditioned, the configuration of the soil will not be changed. Exhibits The February 21, 2017 Staff Report Exhibits 1-16 identified at page 2 of the Staff Report were 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 2 2 admitted into the record during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing. Exhibit 17 February 21, 2017 Staff Report Exhibit 18 Staff power point Exhibit 19 COR maps on City’s website FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. Paccar Inc. 2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the subject applications on February 21, 2017 at 11:00 am in the City of Renton Council Chambers. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The applicant is requesting a Special Grade and Fill Permit and Site Plan approval to retain approximately 139,000 cubic yards of soil on the 66-acre Paccar property located at 1400 N. 4th Street. The existing stockpile is currently located on the southwest portion of the subject property near the Garden Ave. N. and N. 4th St. frontages. The stockpile is the remnant of preload and surcharge material that was used for soil compaction related to the recently constructed Paccar Parts and Distribution Center (PDC) on the southwest portion of the site. The soil was moved to its current location in 2015 and stabilized. The PDC building permit approved locating the preload and surcharge materials in its current location for a period of 5-years and then the applicant would be required to take action. No building construction or access improvements are proposed with the applicant’s request. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services. Since the proposal is limited to a stabilized pile of soil with no occupancy, no infrastructure or public services is necessary. The drainage facilities for the site will not be changed as a result of the proposal and no changes are necessary as determined by City staff. 5. Adverse Impacts. As conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the project. Specific issues related to impacts are discussed below. A. Critical Areas. The proposal is consistent with the City’s Critical Areas Regulations and, therefore, all impacts are adequately addressed and there are no significant adverse impacts to critical areas. Critical areas at the site are limited to Wellhead Protection Zone 2 and High Seismic Area The applicant has provided fill source statements (Exhibit 6) certified by a professional engineer that the preload soil stockpile materials were obtained from sites that were not on the Hazardous Site 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 3 3 List for Model Toxic Control Act or National Priority List for Federal “Superfund” List and the soils are native to the fill source site. The applicant’s updated geotechnical memorandum (Exhibit 6) states the existing preload soil stockpile does not require compaction testing as it is non - structural. The report further states the track walking that occurred on the soil during its placement provided adequate compaction for its stockpile purpose. The report recommends the newly exposed slopes be revegetated as soon as possible to minimize the risk of erosion and sedimentation runoff and all potentially exposed soils be managed and capped with a minimum one-foot clean soil cap layer. The conditions of approval require compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. B. Aesthetics. As conditioned, the project site is adequately screened from view and will not create any significant adverse aesthetic impacts. There is a six-foot tall chain link fence with barb wire around the perimeter of the project site. City staff has visited the site and determined the fence is in good condition. The stockpile is setback from the Garden Ave. N. property line approximately 25-feet. Setbacks from N. 4th St. are approximately 40-feet. The City has not received any complaints on the existing stockpile during this application process. City staff has worked with the applicant to modify the existing slope along Garden Ave N and regrade the slope to between 4-5 foot horizontal run per 1-foot of vertical rise within 50-feet of the property line and to provide additional tree planting along the stockpile’s south and west perimeter. The area between the fence and the stockpile is vegetated with a mix of mature evergreen trees such as Douglas Fir and Western Red Cedar and recently planted evergreen trees and shrubs. There are gaps along the Garden Ave. N. frontage where vegetation is sparse or the newly planted vegetation appears to be unhealthy. The applicant has submitted a revised landscaping plan (Exhibit 5) that provides 103 new Western Red Cedar trees to be planted on the existing perimeter adjacent to N. 4th St. and the proposed modified slope along Garden Ave. N. A condition of approval requires the applicant to submit an irrigation plan for the newly planted trees. Another condition requires the applicant’s Landscape Architect to provide an assessment of the existing perimeter landscaping with regard to health and vigor and prepare and implement a plan to return any unhealthy plants to healthy status or replace those shrubs and/or trees that are dead, diseased, or near death. A surety device will be required for the newly planted and any replanted vegetation to guarantee plant survival for a period of 5-years. C. Noise and Dust. The proposal will not create any significant adverse noise or dust impacts. Staff determined that the amount of soil cuts and fills on the site are typical of a development project and therefore code based requirements for noise and dust control limitations should be appropriate. The applicant will be required to implement any additional dust and wheel wash procedures as identified in a hazardous waste consent decree applicable to the project site and/or company policy document for those areas containing contaminated soil that will be disturbed as part of the slope regrade. A condition of approval requires the applicant to submit a Construction Mitigation Plan that identifies the construction dates, hours of construction, vehicle routes, measures to minimize dust, erosion, mud, and noise. The mitigation plan will also identify all specific special procedures as required by the consent decree and company policy document to handle, store, and/or remove contaminated soils. The Construction Mitigation Plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to grading license approval. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 4 4 D. Drainage. Adequate provision is made for ensuring that the proposal doesn’t create any significant adverse drainage impacts. The preload soil stockpile was graded to drain to existing catch basins and conveyance pipes that were on the site prior to grading. The applicant’s landscape plan (Exhibit 5) identifies erosion control planting (hydroseed) for the regraded areas along the Garden Ave. N. frontage. The updated Geotechnical Memorandum recommends the exposed soil on the newly graded slopes be revegetated as soon as possible following regrading to minimize risk of erosion and sedimentation runoff. A condition of approval requires the applicant to comply with all recommendations of the Geotechnical Memorandum. E. Views. The existing preload soil stockpile does not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier. F. Compatibility/Size and location of the activity. As conditioned, the proposal is fully compatible with surrounding uses. Since the soil stockpile will be largely screened from view and has no other adverse impacts associated with it, it is difficult to conceive of any use to which the proposal would be incompatible. In any event, the surrounding uses are relatively intense and there are no apparent compatibility issues. The Renton School District Bus Barn and Boeing office with surface parking is located across Garden Ave. N. to the west. Zoning to the west is UC and IL. To the south of the project are multi-family duplexes and single-family residential is located across N. 4th St. to the south. Zoning to the south is R-10. The Paccar campus with Kenworth Truck Plant and the new PDC building is located to the north and east, respectively. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 4-9-080(F)(2) provides that the hearing examiner is responsible for granting special permits for fill and grade and the permit is classified is a Type III review by RMC 4-8-080(G). Site plan review is classified as a Type II permit by RMC 4-8-080(G). Both of the aforementioned permits have been consolidated. RMC 4-8-080(C)(2) requires consolidated permits to each be processed under “the highest-number procedure”. The special permit has the highest numbered review procedures, so both permits must be processed as Type III applications. 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 subject property is zoned Heavy Industrial (IH). The comprehensive plan land use designation is Employment Area (EA). 3. Review Criteria. Pursuant to RMC 4-9-200.B, Site Plan Review is required for development in the Employment Area land use designation when it is not exempt from Environmental (SEPA) review. Site plan review criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-200(E). The special grade and fill permit was required as a condition for approval for the original placement of the soil. The condition required a special grade and fill permit to retain the soil if it remained on the property for more than five years. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 5 5 The criteria for special grade and fill permits is governed by RMC 4-9-080(F)(4). All applicable 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 proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan as outlined in Finding No. 20 of the staff report. The proposal is consistent with the zoning code as outlined in Finding No. 22b of the staff report. No design standards apply as the proposal is not in a design district. No planned action ordinance or development agreement applies. 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; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 6 6 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. All off-site impacts have been addressed in Finding of Fact No. 5. As conditioned and as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant off-site impacts. The criterion is met. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On-Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including: i. Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation; ii. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs; iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces; and iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. 6. The criterion is met. Most requirements do not apply, as there are no buildings or other improvements at the stockpile site. All existing vegetation is proposed to be retained and a condition of approval requires the applicant to revitalize areas that may be in decline. No impervious areas are proposed with the application. Existing and new landscaping planted between the property fence and soil stockpile softens the effects of the grade change from the street. A majority of the landscaping are evergreen varieties that will provide screening year-round. New frontage improvements along Garden Ave N. also incorporated several of the site’s existing mature evergreen trees, which provide a tree lined sidewalk along the portions of the frontage. Planting areas are located behind a 6-foot tall chain link fence and therefore not be susceptible to damage. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users, including: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 7 7 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 and is mostly inapplicable. The proposal is not accessed by and does not interfere with any pedestrian or vehicular circulation and no connections to pedestrian or vehicular improvements are necessary. There are no loading areas. 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. No open space is required for this use 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. There are no view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier affected by the proposal. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. 10. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the natural systems at the site (i.e. critical areas) will not be adversely affected by the proposal. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 11. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 8 8 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. Fill and Grade Permit RMC 4-9-080(F)(4): …To grant a special permit, the Hearing Examiner shall make a determination that.. the proposed activity would not be unreasonably detrimental to the surrounding area. The Hearing Examiner shall consider, but is not limited to, the following: i. Size and location of the activity. ii. Traffic volume and patterns. iii. Screening, landscaping, fencing and setbacks. iv. Unsightliness, noise and dust. v. Surface drainage. vi. The length of time the application of an existing operation has to comply with nonsafety provisions of this Title. 13. The proposal will not be unreasonably detrimental to the surrounding area because it will not create any significant adverse impacts as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5. RMC 4-9-80(F)(4)(i)- (v) is directly addressed in Finding of Fact No. 5. As to RMC 4-9-80(F)(4)(v), a condition of approval limits permit approval to ten years. If the applicant intends to keep the preload materials longer than the 10-year time limitation, the applicant shall submit a new special fill and grade permit application no later than 9-years from the date of this decision. Removal and/or reuse of the soil stockpile will also require the applicant to obtain the applicable land use, building, and/or grading approvals no later than 9-years from the date of this decision. DECISION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 9 9 Based upon the conclusion that all applicable criteria are satisfied as noted in the Conclusions of Law above, the requested a Special Grade and Fill Permit and Site Plan applications 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 December 18, 2006. 2. The applicant shall submit an irrigation plan for the newly planted trees for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to Grading License approval. 3. The applicant shall provide an assessment of the existing perimeter landscaping by a Landscape Architect with regard to health and vigor and recommend a plan to return any unhealthy plants to healthy status or replace those shrubs and/or trees that are dead, diseased, or near death. A surety device shall be provided for the newly planted and any replanted vegetation to guarantee plant survival for a period of 5-years. 4. The applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Consent Decree and the company policy document (Exhibit 10) with regard to contaminated soil handling and relocation. 5. The applicant shall submit a Construction Mitigation Plan that identifies the construction dates, hours of construction, vehicle routes, and measures to minimize dust, erosion, mud, and noise. The mitigation plan shall also identify all specific special procedures as required by the Consent Decree and company policy document to handle, store, and/or remove contaminated soils. The Construction Mitigation Plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager for review and approval prior to Grading License approval. 6. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the Geotechnical Memorandum prepared by Hart Crowser, dated November 29, 2016. 7. The Special Fill and Grade Permit is valid for 10-years from the date of the final decision. If the applicant intends to keep the preload materials longer than the 10-year time limitation, the applicant shall submit a new special fill and grade permit application no later than 9- years from the date of this decision. Removal and/or reuse of the soil stockpile will also require the applicant to obtain the applicable land use, building, and/or grading approvals no later than 9-years from the date of this decision. Decision issued March 7, 2017. Hearing Examiner 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL CLEAR AND GRADE PERMIT CAO VARIANCE - 10 10 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080(G) classifies the application(s) subject to this decision as Type III applications subject to closed record appeal to the City of Renton City Council. Appeals of the hearing examiner’s decision must be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal period. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.