HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-30-2019 HE Decision CUP19-0002 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN
10 Phil Olbrechts,Hearing Examiner
11 RE: Bridge Development
Warehouse FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
12 OF LAW,AND DECISION
13 Conditional Use Permit
14 CUP 19-0002
15 INTRODUCTION
16 The Applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to construct a 190,000 square
17 foot warehouse 701 15th St. SW. The project is approved subject to conditions.
18 ORAL TESTIMONY
19 Thaniel Gouk, City of Auburn Senior Planner, summarized the staff report.
20 Howard Jeng, Applicant, noted that the project site has one existing building and that it
21 will be torn down. The new building will beautify the area.
22 EXHIBITS
23 All eight exhibits identified at page 11 of the September 30, 2019 staff report were
24 admitted into the record during the October 9, 2019 hearing.
25 FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
Conditional Use P. 1 Findings,Conclusions and Decision
1 1. Applicant. Matt Gladney, VP of Development, Bridge Development
2 Partners, 10655 NE 4th St., Suite 210, Bellevue, WA 98004.
3 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the application at
5:30 p.m. at Auburn City Hall in the Council Chambers on October 9,2019.
4
Substantive:
5
6 3. Site/Proposal Description. The Applicant has applied for a conditional use
permit to construct a 190,000 square foot warehouse 701 15th St. SW. The site is flat,
7 approximately 11.45 acres in size, and roughly rectangular in shape. The site is
bordered to the south and accessed by 15th St. SW. There is one existing 59,461
8 square foot warehouse building on the site which would be demolished for the
proposal. According to King County Assessor's website records the existing building
9 was developed in the late 1960's along with other warehouse buildings.
10
4. Characteristics of the Area. The site is between the Union Pacific Railroad
ii on the west and the Auburn School District Transportation Center on the east. Vacant
property adjoins to the north and educational facilities to the south. Other uses in the
12 vicinity have include baseball fields and the Outlet Collection shopping center to
warehouses and wholesalers.
13
14 5• Adverse Impacts. There are no adverse impacts associated with the project.
A SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued on September 24, 2019.
15 Pertinent impacts are identified as follows:
16 A. Traffic. The proposal will not create any significant traffic impacts. 15th St.
17 SW, which is used to access the project site, is designated a principal arterial
and also a local truck route within the City's Comprehensive Transportation
18 Plan. Having the potential warehouse located on a Principal Arterial designated
road which is also part of the City's truck route assists in limiting impacts to
19 lesser classifications of public streets. 15th St. SW provides direct access to SR
167 and indirect access to SR 18 (via W. Valley Hwy. S) as well.
20
21 Two access points are necessary onto 15th St. SW, to meet International Fire
Code (IFC) requirements for access. Both driveways will be restricted to right-
22 in-right-out due to the relative location of the site to the traffic signal for the
railroad crossing and at Perimeter Rd SW (to the west). One of the accesses will
23 be for the general vehicle and truck traffic to and from the site,the other access
will be gated with a Knoxbox for fire access only. On-site traffic circulation
24 and parking has been reviewed by public works staff and found to be designed
25 adequately for the proposed use.
Conditional Use p. 2 Findings,Conclusions and Decision
Trip generation and Levels of Service (LOS) is included in the TIA (Exhibit 8).
1 The proposal will generate 52 PM peak hour trips. The TIA concludes that off-
2 site intersections included in the study (as coordinated with the City's Senior
Traffic Engineer) will continue to operate at an LOS C or better, which is in
3 conformance with adopted level of service standards as outlined in Table 2-5 of
the transportation element of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The
4 project will not lower level of service for any affected intersection.
Proportionate share system-wide impacts will be mitigated by the payment of
5 transportation impact fees assessed during building permit review. No
6 additional traffic mitigation measures are necessitated.
7 B. Aesthetics. The proposal is adequately screened to avoid aesthetic impacts.
Refuse and service areas will be located internal to the site and adequately
8 screened with fencing and vegetation, consistent with ACC 18.50.040(5)(a).
Utility facility locations (e.g. PSE) are not known at this time, however, will be
9 coordinated with the site landscaping to ensure they are adequately screened, as
10 conditioned. A minimum 10-ft. landscape strip will be required adjacent to 15th
St. SW and perimeter landscaping around the building will help ensure the
11 building maintains visual interest and helps to soften the facades. A minimum
of 10% of the site must be landscaped, consistent with Chapter 18.50 ACC.
12 Tall, columnar vegetation will also be provided against the building facades
that are viewable from the ROW to help soften the appearance of the expanses
13 of the exterior walls of the building. Per ACC 18.57.020(C)(1)(b) any dock
14 doors shall either not be visible from the street, or an additional 10 ft. of
landscaping abutting the street is required. A perspective view drawing will be
15 required along with future submittals to ensure this requirement is met, as
conditioned.
16
17 C. Noise, Odor, lighting. According to the staff report, the project isn't located
near any noise sensitive land uses, although the precise nature of what the staff
18 report identifies as "educational facilities" to the south is not identified. Since
the historic use of the property has been the same, i.e. warehouse use, impacts
19 to surrounding uses involving noise, odor and lighting are not anticipated to
significantly change. In addition, the City has performance standards, ACC
20 18.31.180, that regulate all of these impacts and set standards of legislative
21 acceptability.
22 D. Compatibility. According to the staff report, the project appears to not be
physically out of character with other uses and properties in the general
23 vicinity. The proposed warehouse would be replacing an older, smaller,
warehouse use and thereby would be incrementally increasing both vehicle and
24 truck traffic in the general vicinity. Given the modest impacts of the proposal
25 as identified in this finding and the similarity of surrounding uses as identified
in Finding of Fact No. 4, the proposal is found to be compatible with
surrounding uses.
Conditional Use P. 3 Findings,Conclusions and Decision
1 E. Public Facilities and Services. In uncontested findings, the staff report
2 concludes that the proposal will be served by adequate public services and
facilities. Given also that the site has been historically used for warehouse use
3 and that transportation facilities have been found to currently meet City level of
service standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5A, the project is found
4 to be served by adequate public services and facilities.
5
6 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
7
Procedural:
8
1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. Both ACC 14.03.030(G) and 18.64.020(B)
9 grant the Hearing Examiner with the authority to review and issue final decisions on
10 conditional use permits applications.
11 Substantive:
12 2. Zoning Designation. M-2, Heavy Industrial
13 3. Review Criteria and Application. ACC Table 18.32.030 requires a
14 conditional use permit for warehousing and distribution uses in the M-2 zoning district.
The criteria for a conditional use permit are governed by ACC 18.64.040, which are
15 quoted below and applied through corresponding conclusions of law.
16 ACC 18.64.040(A): The use will have no more adverse effect on the health, safety or
17 comfort of persons living or working in the area and will be no more injurious,
economically or otherwise, to property or improvements in the surrounding area than
18 would any use generally permitted in the district. Among matters to be considered are
traffic flow and control, access to and circulation within the property, off-street
19 parking and loading, refuse and service area, utilities, screening and buffering, signs,
yards and other open spaces, height, bulk, and location of structures, location of
20 proposed open space uses, hours and manner of operation, and noise, lights, dust,
21 odor,fumes and vibration;
22 4. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No.5, there are no
significant adverse impacts associated with the project and it is compatible with the
23 property and improvements in the surrounding area. Most of the factors identified in
the criterion above are addressed in FOF No. 5. City staff have found the proposal as
24 currently detailed to be in compliance with applicable bulk and dimensional
25 requirements and final compliance will be determined during building permit review.
Hours of operation are not a significant consideration given the absence of any
sensitive land uses in the area. The record does not contain any information on signs,
Conditional Use p. 4 Findings,Conclusions and Decision
but any placement of signs would require a sign permit under the ACC that assures
1 consistency with sign requirements and compatibility with adjoining uses. As
2 conditioned, proposed loading docks will be screened from view with added
landscaping to the extent required by ACC 18.57.020(C)(1)(b).
3
ACC 18.64.040(B): The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies and
4 objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
5 5. The criterion is met. The project is consistent with applicable
6 comprehensive plan policies as discussed at page 6-9 of the staff report, which is
incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full.
7
ACC 18.64.040(C): The proposal complies with all requirements of this title.
8
6. The criterion is met. The project is consistent with applicable zoning code
9 requirements as determined by City staff in the staff report.
10 ACC 18.64.040(D): The proposal can be constructed and maintained so as to be
11 harmonious and appropriate in design, character and appearance with the existing or
intended character of the general vicinity.
12
7. The criterion is met. As determined in FOF No. 5D, the project is
13 compatible with surrounding properties, which includes design, character and
14 appearance. The criterion is met.
15 ACC 18.64.040(E): The proposal will not adversely affect the public infrastructure.
16 8. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5E, the project
17 is served by adequate public infrastructure.
18 ACC 18.64.040(F): The proposal will not cause or create a public nuisance.
19 9. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, there are no
adverse impacts associated with the project.No nuisance is anticipated.
20
21 DECISION
22 Based upon the application and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the
conditional use permit is approved, subject to the following conditions:
23
1. All above ground utility facilities shall be visually screened with vegetation that
24 provides year-round screening from the public way, including the Interurban Trail.
25 The landscaping plans shall provide an approach that can be implemented where
above ground utility features cannot be predicted in advance.
Conditional Use P. 5 Findings,Conclusions and Decision
2. A perspective-view drawing shall be submitted showing the view from the right-of-
1 way to the location of the dock doors on the building. This drawing will be used to
2 ensure the project meets ACC 18.57.020(C)(1)(b).
3 Dated this 22nd day of October 2019.
5 fit-lir A.O1hrecht5
6 City of Auburn Hearing Examiner
7
8
9 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
10 This decision is final subject to appeal to superior court as governed by Chapter 36.70C
RCW. Appeals must be filed and served within 21 days of issuance of this decision as
11 required by RCW 36.70C.040.
12 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
13 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Conditional Use p. 6 Findings,Conclusions and Decision