No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1PARTIES OF RECORD NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL BLDG LUAl0-003, Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 16261 36th Avenue NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 (applicant/ contact) Updated: 04/12/10 MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 7711 31st Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98115 (owner) Elizabeth P. Stewart 232 Pelly Avenue N Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 577-3383 (party of record) (Page 1 of 1) . I } \ \ \ \ I \ I I I 1 \ J I j I I \ City of Renton • P;anning Division AN 14 ZCl., ~ --- >-w ' _J _J <( I I I I r~ I I I I I I i ! I . ·o . i I !:)_ ' ->-! Ci;) ..., : ' ·-...- sJ . -------------., 1 ' .. I ' I .. L ' I , )----~ I --------I ' I I ' I I I ,_ =28 '-0 '' I r -----~ .. -r .. I I I , / ., I I I I I I ' I , I I , I I I I. I I , I I I I I I r.--=i , L ------11 : ' --r I ' I I I I ,1 I I I / }---------J---,- , I I I / I . I / I I / ~ - ADDRESS : 11 5 PELLY AVE . REN TON, WA_ 9B055 PARCE L UM BER: 722500-04 15 ZON ING : R-10 srTE FLAN SKETCH 11 = 2 0 '-0 " I I : ' ; i I I . l ·--. --- Z' w > <( >-_J _J W' Q__ I C t Y of Rentol nn1ng Divisio r p~ -·-· -·-·· j \l J A A,, ... l:.i;J lF ~LJ ! N ORT~ 115 Pe ll y Ave J\. Renton. WA 9 805 5 -Goog le Maps Go t>gle maps Address http://maps .google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl Page l of I To see all th e deta il s tha t are visible on the screen .use the "Print" lin k next to the map . City of Renton Planning Drvrsion JA NJti • .J 1/8/20 10 ,.... I ::,: "' A u CD RM-U .... "' "' E --ro (l.) '?""' ;.:::: -::,: ~ "' '° 0 -tj< I ~ CX) I Q:'. ~l~I ~ .. R-8R-B . "' "' «: ~ "' I I "' "' (l.) "' I "' 04 • 20 T23N RSE W 1/2 ZONING P/11/PW TBCRNICAL IJIIILVICIIS IWWOI --~ Renton City UlxLlt,I CDRCP) RC "' I "' ()R-8 "' CX) I "' a 20° er 1,..uioo CDR RCCP) t V I, R-8 F4 17 T23N R5E W 1/2 S317 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING Al<'FIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Ylills. being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a kgal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to. published in the English language continuously a.< a weekly newspaper in King Cc ;.;nt 1 . Washington. The Rento:1 Reporter has been approved as a I .cgal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice. a: Public Notice was published on September 3, 2010. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of S84.00. ,,,,.,,,, \' ·\'''I· ,,,, c.: ~·_:_ (.:. .... ,. \ --~-'-;:::-' -0'1\> · . .::· \ ' \:..-" •. _,,, ;: .J:: ' ;,J·"' ~f.-:--. 0 w ~ ~ :;~,.. z ~ -~-.c., '/ '\ (' ~ •I . 11 11 ~y i"A T != 0 ,· J Ii' ' -- ' \ I \ ~ ' NOTICE OF Pl:BLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXA\IINER RENTOI\, WASIIINGTON A public Heming \\ill be held by the Renton He.iring Ex:uniner in the Cottncil Chamber~ on the ~eventh floor of Renton City Hall, l05'.'i South Crndv Wav. Renton, Wa~hingtnn. on ·sl'pt;mher 28. ~O I U at 9:00 a.m. to rnn,idc1 the following petition,: l\orth Renton Profe,..,ionnl Hui!ding LUAIO~om Location. 115 Pi.:-11) i\\·C N A Rebuild ArprO\a\ P..-rmii for a ~.921 SF non-conformim.i: medical oflice use and buildini. located in the R-8 and R-10 zone<.,. The permit \vould allov. the orficc use & huilding to he remodeled, reestah[1<.,hed. 01 rebuilt. :-.hould damage occur. Legal dc,criptions of the files. noted ahovc are on file in the Citv Clerk":-Office, Se\enlh Floo~. City Hall, Renton. All imen:qed person,;; nrc invic..-d tn he prc<.cnt a1 the Puhlic Hearing to express !heir opinions. Quc .. 1ions -.hould be directed to the Hearing Examiner nc 425-430-6515. Published in the Renton Reporter on September 3. 2010. #400258 December 14, 2010 Clifford Moon MVH-Renton Properties, LLC 16261 -36th Ave. NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton MVH-Renton Properties, LLC c/o Aaron Vederoff 7711-31st Ave NE Seattle, WA 9811S Re: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated 10/21/2010, regarding the North Renton Professional Building Permit application, 115 Pelly Ave. N., (File No. LUA-10-003) Dear Appellant: At the regular Council meeting of December 13, 2010, the Renton City Council took action on the referenced appeal by adopting the recommendation of the Planning and Development Committee to affirm the Hearing Examiner's decision of 10/21/2010. Enclosed is copy of the Planning and Development Committee report as adopted. Unless an appeal of the decision of the City Council is filed with King County Superior Court as stated in Renton Municipal Code, the decision of the City Council is final. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enclosure cc: Mayor Denis Law Council President Don Persson Vanessa Dolbee Elizabeth P. Stewart 1055 South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov • APPROVED BY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL ,· COMMITTEE REPORT Date /;J.-/3-~0/0 O'ecember 13, 2010 ... North Renton Professiona,I Building Rebuild Permit Appeal LUA-10-003 Hearing ~xaminer's.Recommendatiori -0ctol5er 21, 2010 . The Planning & Development Committee recommends that the full Council find that the Hearing Examiner committed no errors of fact or law in this matter and that his decision be AFFIRMED. · .. I December 13, 2010 Monday, 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCILMEMBERS CITY STAFF IN ATIENDANCE APPEAL Appeal; North Renton Professional Building Rebuild, Moon, LUA-10-003 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting MINUTES Council Chambers Renton City Hall Mayor Law called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. DON PERSSON, Council President; MARCIE PALMER; GREG TAYLOR; RICH ZWICKER; TERRI BRIERE; KING PARKER. MOVED BY ZWICKER, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER RANDY CORMAN. CARRIED. DENIS LAW, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Public Works Administrator; ALEX PIETSCH, Community and Economic Development Administrator; COMMANDER KENT CURRY, Police Department. i Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report ; regarding the North Renton Professional Building Rebuild permit application I appeal. The Committee recommended that Council find that the Hearing I Examiner committed no errors of fact or law in this matter and that his decision " I be AFFIRMED. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR ! IN THE COMMITIEE REPORT. CARRIED. For the record, Councilmember Zwicker recused himself from the vote. Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2010 and beyond. One item noted was: * The significant rain storm event that occurred over the past weekend impacted many roads in the community. A few roads, including N. 31st St./ Jones Ave. NE (bridge), Monster Rd. SW, and a portion of SE May Valley Rd. remain closed. City crews continue to working hard to ensure that the roads are re-opened. Mayor Law remarked that this was a very significant rain event with the City Shops rain gauge showing four inches in 24 hours, which is equivalent to a 100- year storm. Mayor Law also remarked that City Public Works and Fire crews worked well together in response to reports of clogged drains and flooding issues. Responding to Council President Persson's inquiry, Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman stated that there had been problems of standing water on Rainier Avenue, but the road is now open. He added that the high level of the Green River increased the level of Springbrook Creek, which in turn caused a loss in capacity to the City's utility system. He explained that this was the cause of most of the flooding in the valley area, and that not much could be done except to wait for the waters to subside. ,, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Date 1~-13.;010 o·ecember 13, 2010 North Renton Professional Building Rebuild Permit Appeal LUA-10-003 Hearing Examiner's Recommendation -October 21, 2010 The Planning & Development Committee recommends that the full Council find that the Hearing Examiner committed no errors of fact or law in this matter and that his decision be AFFIRMED. / Don Persson, Substitute Member cc: Chif Vt·t1cenf . .Jenni te.r He.nm /'l J ·. November 22, 2010 AUDIENCE COMMENT Citizen Comment: Curry· Human Services Funding CONSENT AGENDA Council Meeting Minutes of 11/15/2010 Appeal: North Renton Professional Building Rebuild, Moon, LUA-10-003 CED: Tukwila Sounder Station, City of Tukwila Renton City Council Minutes Page 387 Continuing, Mr. Stenhouse reported that the Maintenance Services Division switches to 12-hour shifts when a snow event is imminent. He stated that a crew of seven, plus a mechanic, is on duty during each shift. He also reported that Global Positioning Systems (GPS) are being installed in City vehicles so the trucks can be tracked to determine when and where they have been operating within the City. He noted that future devices will also be able to determine whether or not a plow was in operation at any given time. Concluding, Mr. Sten house highlighted the following ways citizens can prepare for snow events: ensure tires are mud and snow rated with good tread; ensure vehicle cooling systems are rated to ten degrees below zero; replace torn or cut wiper blades; check vehicle heating and defrost systems; load-test or replace car batteries that are more than five years old; keep fuel levels above a half tank; and, carry a heavy coat and boots in case you have to walk. He emphasized that vehicles abandoned in travel lanes will be towed, and also cautioned motorists to stay at least 75 feet back from plow/sander trucks. In response to Councilman Taylor's inquiry, Mr. Stenhouse announced that this information will be available for viewing on the City's website. Council President Persson expressed appreciation for the city maintenance crews, noting that they normally provide various utility or street maintenance services in the city and are cross-trained in snow removal procedures. Kent Curry (King County), Renton Area Youth & Family Services (RAYS) Board member, stated that RAYS restores stability to children, youth, and families in crisis by providing counseling, drug and alcohol treatment, and life skills and parenting classes. He remarked that the Spark T.H.1.5. (Truth, Hope, Involvement, Success) program helps youth who are at-risk of being involved in the criminal justice system, at-risk for dropping out of school, and/or are in conflict with their peers. He reported that RAYS supports 90 students and has a 70 percent success rate. Mr. Curry also noted that the Healthy Start program teaches young, low-income families about important developmental stages and needs of their babies up to the age of two. He expressed appreciation for the 35 years of support the City has afforded the organization. Items listed on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 11/15/2010. Council concur. 1 City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the North Renton Professional Building Rebuild application (LUA-10-003); appeal filed by Clifford Moon, MVH · Renton Properties, LLC, accompanied by required fee. J Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Community and Economic Development Department recommended approval of an interlocal agreement with the City of Tukwila allowing Tukwila to serve as the lead agency for processing permits and land use applications for the Tukwila Sounder Station project. Council concur. (See page 390 for resolution.) CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL lo .::.i. Subject/Title: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated 10/21/2010 regarding the North Renton Professional Bldg Rebuild Permit application; 115 Pelly Av. N. (File No. LUA-10-003) Exhibits: • City Clerk's appeal notification letter (11/9/2010) • Appeal to Council from Clifford Moon, MVH - Renton Properties, LLC. (11/4/2010) • Hearing Examiners' Report & Decision (10/21/2010) Recommended Action: Refer to Planning and Development Committee Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required:$ Amount Budgeted: $ Total Project Budget:$ SUMMARY OF ACTION: n/a n/a n/a . Meeting: Regular Council -22 Nov 2010 Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Executive Staff Contact: Bonnie L Walton, City Clerk Transfer Amendment: $ Revenue Generated: $ City Share Total Project: $ Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision on the North Renton Professional Bldg Rebuild Permit application; 115 Pelly Av N., was filed on November 4, 2010, by Clifford Moon, MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, accompanied by the required $250.00 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council to take action on the appeal regarding the North Renton Professional Bldg Rebuild Permit application. n/a n/a n/a DeniS Law, Mayor November 9, 2010 APPEAL FILED BY; City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton Clifford E. Moon, represented by Aaron Vedernff RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the North Renton Professional Building Permit application, 115 Pelly Avenue N. (File No. LUA-10-003) To Parties of Record: Pursua~t to Title IV,.Chapter 8, R.eriton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing · examiner's decision on the North Renton .Professional Building has been filed with the City de~ · .In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-llOF, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding.the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p;m., Friday, November 19, 2010. NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Develor.ment Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Th.ursday, December 9, 2010, in the Council Chambers, 7 h Floor of Renton·City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not· reasonably have been available at the prior hearing· held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. · For additional information or assistance, please call. me at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk . Attachments 1 bss South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 O / Fa:x (425) 430-.6516 • rentonwa.gov APPEAL TO RENTON CITY Cvi.JNCIL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION FILE NO_ L .. \.rA -\D-003 The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of th, Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated 2---1 C,C~rnZ__ · , 20..JD. 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: W~) 8 j\,U)(ll,,__) Address: I 0 2h \ ~ ~ ~ A:vw fvV 14'@" fo12,tl'h------v'~ L.U4--°t. S.l'55 Phone Number: Ztf&, "°3'1(-9'5-f-3 Email: (/v\t.V0(1.eti.:i5~awo (2.Fl-OL Ct1v'I REPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY): Name: AAtWD \.-W~FF _____ _ Address: '1 '71 \ -"3\ 1--!"" Av\-? l../E?" ~T:71 uA 9S"" \ l 5 Phone Number: 2./Ju,, 15 2..'5 --0'\ l L Email: -A-V19tJGPJ)~'tl'\Voo, ~ 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based:CITY OF RENTON Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) NOV O 4 201G t~,• No. Error: _____________________ """"C"'l""'lY"tj4L'ilF[>lim!tl!,~iF'fl,i,F~F=1c<r-E-- Correction:--------------------------- Conclusions: No. 6-2 Error: ·:q-\'.)cl/;6 J.)O't" rvl~ ~ Lm"""" tt7l,!Vl.. 6, ~CtA-fTl<'<'1l4 Fe..:' l:nlT lV/),i. ~~~ ~ ~ ~'n?l1l-e; Correction: tr 0CllY5 IUIJl!?"r ~ Cl'F-~ ~ TL.Ae, ~-:t:=N.. vc,es: /lu',-v'J ~'& Ots:-~ (1,ie.Ln;1,UI'\---~-~~~~~------- Other: No. Error:----------------------------- Correction:--------------------------- 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) f lO '<~ X Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relie QE\a)I c() Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: _ _ /{l'lf,t,,"'1'11,,__{.llXl!I\.\ ,.,------- Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: ~~:.~~m Type/Printed Name 1\.&JUJID Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 4--8--llOF, for specific appeal procedures. City of Renton Municipal Code; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Ap~ 4-ll-11 OC4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schednle of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13°82) 4-8-1 lOF: Appeals to City Council -Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Collllcil, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. lf the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-l-050Fl, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-l -050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and sball specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) MVH-Renton Properties LLC 7711 -31st Ave NE Seattle, Washington 98115-4727 November 4, 2010 City Council City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057-3232 Ref: North Renton Professional Building LUA-10-003 115 Pelly Ave N Council Members, Clifford E. Moon Aaron Vederoff Stuart Hunting On April 17, 2007, we initiated an application to renew a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical/dental building rezoned to R-8 and R-10 zones in 1997. The building and its uses conformed to zoning from 1957 to 1997. On October 21, 2010, the Office of the Hearing Examiner, for the City of Renton, denied our request. There are two rebuild approval criteria: one for non-conforming use and the second for a non-conforming structure. We believe that we meet four of the six criteria for non-conforming use: Community Need, Location, Effect on Adjacent Property and Economic Significance. Further, we believe we meet three of the five criteria for non-conforming structure: Compatibility with Surrounding Structures, Condition of Building/Structure, and Development from Development Regulations. These are the minimum requirements for the Rebuild Approval Permit to which we have conformed for more than fifty years. We request that you grant a ten year continuation of a legal non-conforming use and structure on the subject property. A draft Restrictive Covenants is attached for your review and approval. DRAFT RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS GRANTOR: MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, a Washington Corporation, is owner of the subject property located in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. GRANTEE: City of Renton LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Renton Farm Plat #3 Situate in the NW Quarter of Section 17, Township 23, Range 5, in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, on its own behalf and on behalf of its successors and assigns, and in consideration for a conditional approval permit allowing the continuation of a legal non-conforming use and structure on the Subject Property, hereby establishes, grants and imposes the following RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS running with the land: 1. The conditional approval permits (Permits) for the existing structure (one- story clinic building) as well as use (a medical/dental clinic), shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ten (10) years from date of issuance. 2. If a catastrophic loss of the original structure occurs within the Permits' period with losses exceeding 50% of the assed value of the structure, and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such loss, both Permits will expire on the second anniversary of the date of the loss. The percentage of the non-conforming building that may be replaced with a legal non- conforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure accidently damaged. 3. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the non-conforming status of the existing use and structure. 4. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the remaining period of the Permits. 5. The Permits referenced herein are void and will not apply to any portion of the structure that is found to have intentionally damaged by the owner or its agents or assigns. Any redevelopment will be required to be in compliance with all then existing codes and regulations. 6. Any redevelopment pursuant to Paragraph 2 must comply with the requirements for a site plan review. The replacement structure shall be reviewed to ensure that it is architecturally in character in terms of its roof treatment, setbacks, etc., with the surrounding area at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building codes and the existing zoning codes then in place to the extent possible and as otherwise permitted by the Permits. 7. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successors or assigns, may request subsequent Permits. Such Permits may be issued if the conditions at the time still warrant such conditional approval of the use and structure. New restrictive covenants will be required to be recorded. Said covenants will require the approval of the City Attorney. 8. These Restrictive Covenants shall run with the land and expire at the termination of the Permits referenced herein. If either the use, the structure, or both, are made conforming during the Permits' period, the covenants pertaining to the previously nonconforming use, structure, or both, shall terminate without necessity of further documentation. 9. Any violation or breach of these Restrictive Covenants may be enforced in King County Superior Court by the City of Renton or any adjoining property owner who is adversely affected by said breach. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC By-----,---:,-,-,-----,---- Aaron Vederoff, Member Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF ______ _ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Aaron Vederoff signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute this instrument, and acknowledged him as the Member Manager of MVH -Properties, LLC to be the free and voluntary act of such party for uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. DATED this __ day of ______ , 2010 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at _____ _ My appointment expires. _____ _ October 21, 2010 OFFICE OF THE BEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Dc:i:.i'$.1'on REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OWNER: APPLICANT /CONT ACT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVJCES REPORT: PUBLIC HEARING: MVH-Renton Properties, LLC c/o Aaron Vederoff 7711-31~ Avenue NE Seattle, WA98115 Clifford E. Moon MVH-Renton Properties, LLC 16261 36"' Avenue NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 North Renton Professional Building LUA-10-003 115 Pelly Avenue N The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building located in the R-8 and R-10 zones. Development Services Reco=endation: Deny The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on September 21, 2010. 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: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the September 28, 2010 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, September 28, 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 tbe Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation nertinentto this reouest. Exhibit No. 3: Go.;;;ie M•n Ima"e Exhibit No. 4: Site Plan Sketch North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 2 -~------- Exhibit No. 5: Photograph of East Face of Building Exhibit No. 7: Photograph of North Face of Building Exhibit No. 9: Restrictive Covenant for the 1997 Conditional Annroval Exhibit No. 11: Photograph looking Northeast showing the Family Medical Clinic just south of the Renton Professional Building Exhibit No. 13: Photograph looking East on Pelly Avenue N showing the Reuton Vision Clinic also with a flat roof. Exhibit No. 15: Typed statement given by Mr. Vederoff. Exhibit No. 6: Photograph of West Face of Building ------- Exhibit No. 8: 1997 Certificate of Conditional An,;roval Exhibit No. 10: Zoning Map showing R-8 and R-10 zone desio-nations Exhibit No. 12: Photograph looking West on Pelly Avenue N, shows Clinic on the south with a flat roof. . . Exhibit No. 14: Photograph looking Northwest showing the alley side of the Renton Professional Building The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Co=unity and Economic Development, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The applicant is requesting a rebuild approval permit for a non-conforming medical office use. The building is located at 115 Pelly Ave N, the parcel is a split zone, the northern portion is R-8 and the southern is R-rn. This permit, if approved, would allow the non-conforming structure to be remodeled, re-established or rebuilt even though the costs of the re-establishment of the use would exceed 50% of the most recently appraised value. Without this permit the businesses within the structure would be permitted and allowed to remain. The applicant would be subject to the RMC in terms of what they can do with maintenance and rebmld. The Exarruner questioned if a tenant moved out and another one moved into that space, would the space not be considered vacated. Ms. Dolbee stated that that was correct. The site is located on the west side of Pelly Avenue N and is north ofN 1" Street, which is in the North Renton Neighborhood. This building was established in 1957 as a clinic and contains various medical offices. The building is approximately 3,921 square feet with 19 parking stalls in the northern parking lot and some diagonal stalls off the alley in the rear. Access to the site is via Pelly Ave Nor the alley which intersects with North 1" Avenue. There is mature landscaping along the front of the property and some landscaping on the north side of the building. No changes to the structure have been proposed by the applicant as part of this permit. North of the site is single-family residential homes zoned R-8, to the east is single-family residential homes with the exception of one piece of property which currently houses a vision clinic. To the south· is the R-10 zone with an existing Renton Family Practice Clinic. On the west is more single-family residential buildings zoned R-10. The subject site is exempt from SEP A review because the structure currently exists and no changes are proposed. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 3 There are two rebuild approval criteria; one for the non-<:onforrning use and the second forthe non-<:onforrning structure. In reviewing the non-conforming use issue there are six factors to be considered and four must be complied with for approval; Community Need, the continuation of this use at its current location would result in an overconcentration of a particular use within the area surrounding the site; Location, the subject location is suitable for the existing use; Effect on Adjacent Property, no comments from surrounding neighbors were received, there is a large arnonnt of mature landscaping along Pelly Ave N to screen the front of the building however, there is only a fence to the north and no screening is provided across the alley; Historical Significance, the building is not associated with a historical event or activity; Economic Significance, the subject building does not provide a substantial benefit to the community from employment or tax revenues; and timeliness with existing plans and programs. The approval of the Rebuild Approval Pennit would result in a delay of the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The criteria for a non-<:onforrning structure ioclude five criteria and three must have been satisfied in order to approve the pennit; Architectural and/or Historic Significance, the existing office buildiog does not represent a unique architectural style there are many office buildiogs with this style of architecture; Architectural Compatibility with Surroundiog Structures, this buildiog is not a part of a nnified streetscape of similar structures that are unlikely to be replicated; Potential of Site for Redevelopment, the redevelopment of the subject site would be economically feasible; Condition ofBuildiog/Structure, the building has been well maiotained and is not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare or safety; Departure from Development Regulations, the existing buildiog does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety. The North Renton Building complies with two of the six criteria for non-conforming use and two of the five criteria for non-<:onforming structure. The Examiner questioned the fact that they did receive a permit back io 1997 which expired and they are now looking to re-new this permit. Ms. Dolbee stated that was correct and that the criteria had not changed since that time. Under the existing code they can continue this use and they can continue to maiotain the structure. If approved the Conditional Approval Permit would allow the structure to he re-built should, for example, the structure burn to the gronnd and the cost to rebuild the structure was beyond the cost of the assessed value. Aaron Vederoff. 7711 31~ Avenne NE, Seattle 98115 stated that he is one of three owners of the building, He manages the building, collects the rents and pays the bills. His co=ents were written out and covered only the points that the owners take issue with, either disagree or actually say they are not correct. Item# 1: Project Description/Background; there are 23 non-residential uses and buildings within the area. This building is the most outstanding, attractive and well maintained sinall commercial building in the area. It is important to get this pennit approved; the nnderstanding is that the use may continue without any problem. The dentist currently occupying the building entered ioto a conditional· agreement to purchase the building but was advised by his attorney not to proceed because of the non-conforming status. The dentist is still interested in buying the building but not nnless the Rebuild Approval Permit is renewed. There appears to be a question as to whether financiog can be obtained without the ability to rebuild if more than 50% of the building is damaged. Item #4a: Community Need; the ability for relocation seems to ignore the fact that this dental practice has been established in this location for over 50 years and is extremely established. Moving would create challenge and hardship. Item #4e: Economic Significance; the current tenants do pay B&O tax and therefore provide economic benefit to the City. . North Renton Professional Buildmg File No.: LUA-10-003 Octobe_r 21, 2010 Page 4 Item #4f: Timelines with Existing Plans and Programs; it appears to be an extremely modest delay to the 100% implementation to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Further it appears that the City began the process oflooking at the zoning for the area and it has been put on hold. It is possible that the new zoning would allow the outright use for a small office building. Item #5a: Architectural and/or Historical Signillcance; the building is unique with the "U" configuration rather than the typical rectangle. Item #5b: Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures; the building does have a pitched roof, not a flat roof as stated in the report. The building is set back from the property lines on all four sides and is a valuable asset to the immediate neighborhood. Item #5c: Site Potential for Re-Development; the site could be redeveloped with three units; it seems to be extremely unlikely to be done. There are six houses in the block with an assessed value ranging from $119,000 to $243,000; it is difficult to believe that someone would build new houses that would cost $400,000 or more with the existing houses as neighbors. Clifford Moon, 16261 36th Avenue NE, Lake Forest Park 98155 stated that he is also one of the owners and proceeded to show additional photos of the area. The Conditional Use permit that was part of the building expired in June 2007. The City was contacted in April 2007 to begin this process, it has taken three years to get to the hearing today. They would like to continue the current status of the building. The Examiner stated that if the building was totally lost to fire or whatever, the expectation would be that the new construction would be upgraded to meet the existing codes. This issue is forced by the potential resale of the building where a purchaser would be subject to the same constraints as currently exist with redeveloping the property. · Mr. Vederoff stated if there was a complete burn down of the building, the concern as the City would be can somebody economically redevelop it with three housing units. The Examiner stated that at the same time someone at that point in redeveloping a dental office clinic as a modern structnre would-also be very expensive as well as a loss of income while it is being developed. Those are the trade-offs, the code is designed to help move out non-conforming uses ultimately. This building is well maintained and there is no problem with that. Mr. Vederoff continued stating that they were asking for the 10 year permit as previously. He has seen in other agreements such as this that _there is no time limit. This seems unusual where a time limit is given. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this pr.oject. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:41 a.m. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 5 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMME:NDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: l. The applicant, Clifford E. Moon, filed a request for a Rebuild Approval Permit to allow replacement of a legal non-conforming use .in the event of a substantial Joss. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertioent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit# I. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official determined that the proposal is exempt from environmental review. 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 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site is located on the west side of Pelly one parcel north of North 1st Street. An alley runs along the rear or west side of the parcel between Pe!ly and Wells Avenue North. 7. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the snbject site is located as suitable for the development of single family and medium density multifamily uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan .. 8. The subject site is currently zoned R-8 (Single Family -8 dwelling units/acre) for the north portion and R-10 (Residential; 10 units per acre) for the south portion. 9. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 156 enacted in May 1909. 10. There is R-10 zoning south and west of the subject site and R-8 zoning directly east across Pelly and north and northwest oftbe subject site. 11. Single family uses are located north, northeast and west of the subject site. Renton Vision Clinic is across the street in an R-8 parcel. Renton Family Practice Clinic is located directly south on another R- 10 parcel. 12. The subject site is approximately 15,000 square feet. The existing building is approximately 3,921 square feet. 13. The building is a one-story, U-shaped building. The building has a pitched roof The staff report noted it had a flat floor line. North Renton Professional Buildmg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 6 14. The building is served by I 9 on-site parking stalls and 5 parallel spaces on the street. There are 11 stalls located near the north property line. There is landscaping between the parking and the adjoining single family home. There are also stalls west of the building. These stalls directly back onto the alley. Single family uses are located on the west of the alley. Code does not permit direct maneuvering from an alley into parking for commercial uses. These alley.-accessed parking stalls are legally non- conforming like the building and uses. 15. . The site contains mature landscaping in front of the building both along the street and within theniche created by the U-shaped building. A fence and narrow landscape strip provides some separation along the north property line. There is no landscaping along the alley where the applicant has a series of parking stalls. 16. The purpose of a rebuild approval permit is to allow nonconfolilling uses and/or structures that became nonconforming as a consequence of Code amendments in June 1993 and thereafter, to be re-established and/or rebuilt in certain zoning districts where they would no!Illally be prohibited because the costs associated with re-establishing the use and/or structure exceed fifty percent (50%) of their most recently assessed or appraised value prior to the loss or damage. 17. The City issued a Rebuild Approval Permit for the subject site in 1997 (City file# LUA97-044). This permit expired 10 years after its issuance on June 26, 2007. 18. The applicant has indicated that the current zoning has restricted the building's sale as a commercial entity and may encumber its refinancing. The applicant noted the unkempt nature of the alley for the properties west of the alley. There have been no complaints about the current use. 19. A density calculation is not required for this analysis. Staff estimated that if the property were redeveloped with some conforming residential uses there might be a potential for three units. 20. The development of one single family home would generate approximately 10 trips. Three residential units, depending on the nature of the use or uses, could generate approximately 30 trips. Staff estimates that the clinic would generate more traffic than one single family use and probably more than a three unit development. CONCLUSIONS 1. Section 4-9-120 contains the crite_ria for approving a rebuild approval permit: E REVIEW CRJTERIA FOR NONCONFORMJNG USES: The Reviewing Official may issue a rebuild approval permit only when the continuance of the use is determined to be in the public interest and such uses are: (1) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Reviewing Official shall consider the following factors when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming use. In order to grant the permit, at least four ( 4) of these factors shall be complied with: 1. Community Need: There shall be a community need for the proposed use at its present location; and the continuance of the nonconforming use should not result in either the North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 7 detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the area surrounding the site. 2. Location: The existing location is or can be made suitable for tbe existing use. 3. Effect on Adjacent Property: The existing nonconforming use has not resulted in undue adverse effects on adjacent properties from noise, traffic, glare, vibration, etc., (i.e., does not exceed normal levels in these areas emanating from surrounding permitted uses). 4. Historical Significance: The existing use was associated with a historical event or activity in tbe community and as a result has historical significance. 5. Economic Significance: The existing use provides substantial benefit to the community because of either the employment of a large number of people in the community, the generation of considerable retail and/or business/occupation tax revenues to the City, or it provides needed affordable housing. 6. Timeliness with Existing Plans and Programs: Because of the anticipated market timing for permitted uses in the wne, retention of the existing nonconforming use would not impede or delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. F REVIEW CRITERIA FOR NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES: The Reviewing Official may issue a rebuild approval permit only when the continuance of the structure is determined to be in the public interest and such structures are: (1) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Community and Economic Development Administrator shall consider the following factors, when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming structure. In order to grant the permit, he/she shall find that at least three (3) of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. Architectural and/or Historic Significance: The structure represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture because of its style, use of materials,. or functional arrangement, and is one of the few remaining examples of this. 2. Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures: The nonconforming building or structure was part of a unified streetscape of similar structures that is unlikely to be replicated unless the subject structure is rebuilt per, or similar to, its original plan. 3. Potential of Site for Redevelopment: Redevelopment of the site with a conforming structure is unlikely either because tbe size of the existing lot may be too small to be economical, or becanse the characteristics of adjacent permitted uses (tbat might normally be expected to expand to such a site) currently might preclude their expansion. T)'pically, economic hardship would not be considered for a variance, but is a consideration here. 4. Condition of Building/Structure: If nonconforming as to the provisions of the City's Building Code, the building or structure and surrounding premises have generally been well maintained and are not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare, or safety, or they could be retrofitted so as not to pose such a .threat. 5. Departure from Development Regulations: If nonconforming with the provisions of the City's development regulations, the building or structure does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety, or could be modified so as not to pose such a threat. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) G DECISION OPTIONS: The approving body may grant, with or without conditions, or deny a requested rebuild approval permit. Such a permit, if granted, typically would carry conditions with it pertaining to how a damaged structure would be allowed to redevelop. The approving body may, for example, limit the term and duration of the rebuild approval permit as well as impose conditions. North Renton Professional Buildmg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 8 H CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Conditions imposed by tbe approving body shall reasonably assure tbat nuisance or hazard to life or property will not develop. A rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming use and/or structure may, for example, be conditioned upon the provision and/or guarantee by the applicant that necessary public improvements, facilities, utilities and/or services needed to support the use/structure will be provided, or tbe provision of otber features tbat would make . tbe use/structure more compatible witb its surroundings. I EXPIRATION: Conditions imposed relating to the duration of a permit for a use or structure should also reflect reasonable amortization periods for any substantial upgrades to tbe premises tbat are required by City Code. 2. This office has to reluctantly agree with staff's recommendation in tbis matter. There are two sets of criteria One set of criteria refers to non-conforming 11 uses 11 while the other refers to non-conforming "structures." Those criteria that so carefully outline what is permissible do not sanction tbe permit tbe applicant has requested. It does not meet at least four of the criteria found above for use nor tbree criteria for structure. At tbe same time, tbis office has to reconfirm what staff reported regarding this building and the uses it houses -the·building may be maintained in a normal fashion and the established uses and similar uses witbin it are all legally allowed to remain and may continue operation. Code and courts have generally encouraged tbe conversion of non-conforming ·structures and uses to conforming to current codes. Granting a permit to avoid conversion is not entertained lightly and Code provisions require that tbe criteria be appropriately satisfied. The use does not satisfy tbe criteria for approving the requested permit. Non-Conforming Uses Criteria 3. While the use obviously serves the needs of patrons · both immediate neighbors and other patrons of the buildings and its uses, those needs can be served by a building and uses in the commercial zones found nearby. The nearby vicinity provides the CN zone a block north and east of the site, the CA zone a block east oftbe site or downtown Renton a block or two south of the site. There is no community need for the uses at this specific location. In addition, there are two otber legal non-conforming uses in the immediate vicinity also serving medical patrons. One is immediately south of the-subject site and another directly across Pelly east of the subject site. These uses together create an over-concentration of non-conforming uses in an area of residential zoning. 4. The use has been established and, admittedly, well-maintained in the area for more than 50 years. The use has not generated any complaints. The building is designed for its current uses. Landscaping helps the use blend into tbe area although there is little to screen the building's alley parking from its residential neighbors west of the alley. There is also limited separation between tbe north parking area and the adjacent single family home. The applicant's comments on tbe state of those neighboring properties across the alley could reflect neglect or just a reaction to being subjected to the applicant's parking lot across the alley. 5. The use has been established in its location for a long time and neighbors are probably use to it. The use does generate more traffic than a standard single family home and staff estimated it probably generates more traffic than a limited number of residential uses. A conforming residential use or uses would probably have less effect on neighboring properties but it does not appear that tbe use had adverse impacts on those adjacent uses. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 9 6. While nicely maintained, neither the building nor contained uses have any historical or architectural significance. The uses are routine medical clinics. 7. Staff found that the building and its uses do not provide affordable housing. While it employs a complement of medical professionals and associates it does not provide retail uses and does not provide any substantial tax revenues either from occupation or sales taxes. 8. Finally, the timeliness of existing plans and code amendments suggests that the use should have been transitioned to a conforming use in 2007. Clearly, there has been no urgency in this area. The use is established and the applicant had a permit to allow restoration uutil June 26, 2007. Realistically, removing or renovating the existing building to provide residential uses will not occur if a permit were granted to allow reconstruction in the event of loss. Providing a nse consistent with both the comprehensive plan's goals and the current zoning will not occur if a permit is granted. Frankly, it -probably will not occur without a permit approval either as the use is still flourishing. Non-Conforming Structures Criteria 9. The other criteria for non-conforming structure rebuild approval mirror in some cases the criteria fouud above. The building is neither architecturally nor historically significant. 10. The one-story building is larger than nearby single family homes in area although it is not overly tall. Yard conformity was not analyzed for this review but the building could be converted to residential uses with potentially non-conforming yards. The building is not part of a unified streetscape and does differ significantly from neighbor residential uses. 11. The applicant pointed out in the current economy that redevelopment to conforming residential uses would be unlikely in the near term. Staff noted that redevelopment of conforming uses is possible even if not an immediate result. 12. Again, this office has to emphasize that the building and its landscaping area well-maintained and would not contribute to adverse impacts on health, safety or welfare. 13. Finally, this office cannot ignore the precedent of granting the permit. Two othernon-conforming uses are also located on this street. Approving this permit would create a precedent that would potentially lead to similar additional requests, thereby further delaying the transition of three uses to conforming land use patterns that area required by the comprehensive plan and the Zoning Code. The permit or permits do not satisfy the requisite criteria and therefore, the permit must be denied. If on appeal the City Council believes a permit is warranted, they might consider a reduced timeframe. DECISION The Rebuild Approval Permit is denied. North Renton Professional Builamg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 10 ORDERED THIS 21~ day of October 2010. ~~ FRED J. KAUF~rr--Q_.__ HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 21" day of October 2010 to the parties of record: Vanessa Dolbee 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 7711 31" Avenue NE MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 16261 36~ Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98115 Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 Elizabeth P. Stewart 232 Pelly Avenue N Renton, WA 98057 TRANSMITTED THIS 21" day of October 2010 to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Admmistrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Marty Wine, Assistant CAO Gregg Zimmerman, PW Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator J ermifer Henning, Current P Janning Manager Stacy Tucker, Planning Division Dave Pargas, Fire Marshal Larry Meckling, Buildiug Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Renton Reporter Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof1he City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., November 4, 2010 Any aggrieved person feeling 1hat 1he decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors oflaw or fact, error in judgment, or 1he discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Exaroiner within fourteen (14) days from 1he date of1he 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. 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., November 4, 2010. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 11 If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the reqnirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by Citv Conncil 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 tbem to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in tbe invalidation oftbe 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 tbe City Council. ~ 1al 1al .,, -· ~ z E ~ CD . ' I·, "' G4 • 20 T23N R5E W L'Z ZONING ----,,_,_""' ,.,_.,. p/B/'l!W TBCSNICil SEllV!l1'3 r,z.nJW1' CDRCP) ···--~/ CDR '',_ ,,·· ·,, ~:----r=~--1 -.. ~ . ..._...._-.._---"''''~= . '-.::-, <------~ ---- RC RCCP) i ·en· . :.-&-~ ' R'-B F4 17 T23N R5E W 1/2 5311 I I ' I I I • l I I I I >-' Ill . ....J I ....J I~ I I l I I I I 0· ' .Q . >-ctl ~ --------------., ' --' I ' ,_ 'r--- 1' -' -I_ I l;j '1,-...... ------"'4------l-l------J .1 z I Q I ....J I . ::::, . I fil I ,.,&. ___ .... , ___ ...... _, / l;j I Z I I to I I X L----- 11.l I_ I }-------'-__ J __ _ I / I / -------------~ I ADDRESS, 115 FELL Y AVE. N. RENTON, WA. 9B055 722500-0415 R-10 I PARCEL NUMBER: I ZONING, . I -- SITE PLAN SKETCl-t z' o:1- w I-> 1-1 <1: ~ . ).-:r ....J >< ....J w 11.l' lL I of Rentoh p nning Divisioi JAN 14 W1D I" = 20'-0" NORTf---1 I \ I I I ,- ~"? . Ji -, ~-_g; i~t .City of Renton Planning Division JAN 14 WW "'"°':" ,1{'.:~"''""~' rs:tt;fgflWigfQ) !~~::!:.: ·~ 1l'l I- I-I cc 1-1 :c X w ::_~ --~ %- ~ November 9, 2010 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) BONNIE I. WALTON, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 9th day of November, 2010, at the hour of 5:00 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record, notice of appeal filed by MVH -Renton Properties, LLC by Clifford Moon of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation regarding the North Renton Professional Bldg. (File No. LUA-10-003) Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 9th r)jj,'J. of November, 2010. ~---. ,,,,1 ,., ............. . . . , ti" ~ "i H IA 1y_ ----· l· r.\·\ ·. ~/'~:~Os::~;+,;~;\ ( ·. , ,·\ . ~ : c., ,.. '·vri, <i>\J'-::: ~ ::s=-·. ·.. , ''\~--. m: ;: -+ "'. ~ \;'~ • .... .,. s Cynthia R. oya c.s: · :_~ \ "'Usuc / ~ Notary Public in and for the State of \. ~··~~<7-'\A ... ~~/ ~ 0,:-,,, .... ,.~" ... ,, Washington, residing in Renton -----WAS\-11.,. 111' ..... .,..,//////J/JJ My commission expires: 8/27/2014 Denis Law, Mayor November 9, 2010 APPEAL FILED BY: City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton Clifford E. Moon, represented by Aaron Vederoff RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision regarding the North Renton Professional Building Permit application, 115 Pelly Avenue N. (File No. LUA-10-003) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the North Renton Professional Building has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-llOF, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m., Friday, November 19, 2010. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Develogment Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, December 9, 2010, in the Council Chambers, 7 h Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation ofthe Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information or assistance, please call me at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Attachments 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov APPEAL TO RENTON CITY UNCIL OF ,,=ARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/kECOMMENDATION FILE NO. WA -\Q·-003 The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of tht Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated Z--1 0 C:tt~.?lc:::'1?_ , 20~. 1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: Q,i,1~{;) 8 MtJOU Address: I 0U, \ -?>-&~ A;vrg-k-V ~ Rvlt4-r v'~, U-1+ °tS.l'55 Phone Number: "Zef&, °3~)1-9'5°'f3 Email: li\;J.W00t'P'.ii\-Wc-@D ~ Ml, ~ REPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY): Name: AA-12€/l) \,{;v,J~"FF Address: 171\ -31 "ll' Avt? VE? Sc1tt%?:, v\.1\1\ "\'3' \ \ 5 Phone Number: Ze'i(., , -S 2.. '5 -GA l 2.... Email: Avt,t)GlU!ffQ'-it\1-'CO '~ 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based:CITY OF RENTON Finding of Fact: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) NOV O 4 2010 ~~Oc" No. Error: -------------------~~Bl;\IF;i.,r....,FJ'LJu,F'B~~-CI I y cu,itk~ l'FICE Correction:--------------------------- Conclusions: No. 6-2 Error: ·:i:r Vc1:'5 IJ(K" M~ kl\~~-(Y'-:·~Ct.e4-U:"'1ll'\ Fe..e @(T NOil "Tl-t1U"r~ ·-v,w c.,2-l~ ~ ~'nJ~ Other: Correction: tr IJDl.?5 M~ "R.~ C>'F -nw-c..kl< ·rLA?, A-~ t.r,e:: kfv.J ~u'& otl'C-~ ew~i+ -~ ~ No. Error:----------------------------- Correction:--------------------------- 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) f \ 0 '{(,,~ X Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following reiie ~I LO Modify the decision or recommendation as follows: . JU1f~,vN_.i)t\'!AM ,.,- Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: ~~L~:.... Type/Printed Name NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 4-8-1 !0F, for specific appeal procedures. City of Renton Municipal l : Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Appe 4-8-l!OC4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-1 IOF: Appeals to City Council -Procedures I. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-l-050Fl, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-J -050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection 05 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) MVH-Renton Propertie .C 7711 -31st Ave NE Seattle, Washington 98115-4727 November 4, 2010 City Council City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057-3232 Ref: North Renton Professional Building LUA-10-003 115 Pelly Ave N Council Members, Clifford E. Moon Aaron Vederoff Stuart Hunting On April 17, 2007, we initiated an application to renew a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical/dental building rezoned to R-8 and R-10 zones in 1997. The building and its uses conformed to zoning from 1957 to 1997. On October 21, 2010, the Office of the Hearing Examiner, for the City of Renton, denied our request. There are two rebuild approval criteria: one for non-conforming use and the second for a non-conforming structure. We believe that we meet four of the six criteria for non-conforming use: Community Need, Location, Effect on Adjacent Property and Economic Significance. Further, we believe we meet three of the five criteria for non-conforming structure: Compatibility with Surrounding Structures, Condition of Building/Structure, and Development from Development Regulations. These are the minimum requirements for the Rebuild Approval Permit to which we have conformed for more than fifty years. We request that you grant a ten year continuation of a legal non-conforming use and structure on the subject property. A draft Restrictive Covenants is attached for your review and approval. DRAFT RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS GRANTOR: MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, a Washington Corporation, is owner of the subject property located in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. GRANTEE: City of Renton LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Renton Farm Plat #3 Situate in the NW Quarter of Section 17, Township 23, Range 5, in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, on its own behalf and on behalf of its successors and assigns, and in consideration for a conditional approval permit allowing the continuation of a legal non-conforming use and structure on the Subject Property, hereby establishes, grants and imposes the following RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS running with the land: 1. The conditional approval permits (Permits) for the existing structure (one- story clinic building) as well as use (a medical/dental clinic), shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ten (10) years from date of issuance. 2. If a catastrophic loss of the original structure occurs within the Permits' period with losses exceeding 50% of the assed value of the structure, and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such loss, both Permits will expire on the second anniversary of the date of the loss. The percentage of the non-conforming building that may be replaced with a legal non- conforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure accidently damaged. 3. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the non-conforming status of the existing use and structure. 4. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the remaining period of the Permits. 5. The Permits referenced herein are void and will not apply to any portion of the structure that is found to have intentionally damaged by the owner or its agents or assigns. Any redevelopment will be required to be in compliance with all then existing codes and regulations. 6. Any redevelopment pursuant to Paragraph 2 must comply with the requirements for a site plan review. The replacement structure shall be reviewed to ensure that it is architecturally in character in terms of its roof treatment, setbacks, etc., with the surrounding area at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building codes and the existing zoning codes then in place to the extent possible and as otherwise permitted by the Permits. 7. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successors or assigns, may request subsequent Permits. Such Permits may be issued if the conditions at the time still warrant such conditional approval of the use and structure. New restrictive covenants will be required to be recorded. Said covenants will require the approval of the City Attorney. 8. These Restrictive Covenants shall run with the land and expire at the termination of the Permits referenced herein. If either the use, the structure, or both, are made conforming during the Permits' period, the covenants pertaining to the previously nonconforming use, structure, or both, shall terminate without necessity of further documentation. 9. Any violation or breach of these Restrictive Covenants may be enforced in King County Superior Court by the City of Renton or any adjoining property owner who is adversely affected by said breach. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC By ________ _ Aaron Vederoff, Member Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF _______ _ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Aaron Vederoff signed this instrument, on oath staled that he was authorized to execute this instrument, and acknowledged him as the Member Manager of MVH -Properties, LLC to be the free and voluntary act of such party for uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. DATED this __ day of ______ , 2010 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at _____ _ My appointment expires _____ _ i:~ CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way · Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 Receipt t,U'\ 1681 Date Ii {4 { 10 1,2 .A:f(lt ,,J, D Copy Fee D Notary Service ·~Appeal Fee D ---------- +v L/h.,itcd LU fl -iU, ull.3 f!PA•ffuJ j;;, m(.)r;lvv Ir..?.,(, I -3"1 ~ A.I-( AJFJ 1-.a~ Frn,: + Pt'.iAit. /,tA1\ '):? I 55' Amount $ ;)_ t:.,1), 00 ..-·· '1 r:---µJ;., LV~ City Staff Signature ---------------------------......... .,. ............ --~~~~,. ... =..,,..,....-, .. --- ·~,: ',) .. ,,' I ' .; j .j I d I ·1 Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties LLC 1 ~ • MVH -Renton Properties LLC Elizabeth P. Stewart 232 Pelly Avenue N Renton, WA 98057 6251 36 Avenue NE lake Forest Park, WA 98155 Aaron Vederoff 771131 st Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98115 /, ,I I /1 1 /1 /.1 v' 1 . 7 L} ,/ 1 /7 ./ 1 /1 /1 77113151 Avenue NE ' Seattle, WA 98115 City Clerk's Office Distribution List Appeal, North Renton Professional Bldg Located at: 115 Pelly Av N File No. LUA-10-003 Renton Reporter City Attorney Larry Warren City Council • Julia Medzegian CED Alex Pietsch Assistant Fire Marshal David Pargas Planning Commission Judith Subia Parties of Record*• (see attached list) PW/ Administration Gregg Zimmerman PW/Development Services Neil Watts/ Jennifer Henning • Stacy Tucker/ Vanessa Dolbee . Kayren Kittrick ,. Janet Conklin "; / Larry Meckling PW/Transportation Services Connie Brundage PW/Utilities & Tech Services Lys Hornsby LUA-10-003 *City Clerk's Letter & POR List only AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING ST A TE OF WASHING TON ) ) ss. County of King ) Fred Kaufman being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 21st day of October 2010, affiant deposited via the United States Mail and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested a sealed envelope( s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me thisd l ::y of C "c ,. . t A-?-"'\, 201 o. ,11///. ,.1, .... ,. 111;;,._,,\f>,. , A:----. 11 ~, ','.,, ••• •,'.'."O;..'"-.:. \ ) i J;. .'~<;SION ,1-_;;,,, ~ ~ c:··.. ' ,\ c., ..... o·nn ', . ....... . ' ~ :~~ 11"\li .. ~ ·~ ~ :u N ' P r . -~~ ~ : -·-ota:)' 1c u~ and r the \ 111 \ Pu91..\KesiA~~t \ ( · -"--\ • -, \. " '•, .., 27 ...... ,~ 11 ' -, .... g... ...-, •• ~ \ ~ )'~ ............ ~<f-,ii ---OF W 1',S 11 1t -.,.,/_,/////JIii Application, Petition or Case No.: North Renton Professional Building LUA 10-003, Rebuild Approval Permit The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. HEARl~G EXAMll\'ER'S REPORT October 21, 2010 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OWNER: APPLICANT/CONTACT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: PUBLIC HEARING: MVH-Renton Properties, LLC c/ o Aaron V ederoff 7711 -31" Avenue NE Seattle, WA98115 Clifford E. Moon MVH-Renton Properties, LLC 16261 36'h Avenue NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 North Renton Professional Building LUA-10-003 115 Pelly Avenue N The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building located in the R-8 and R-10 zones. Development Services Recommendation: Deny The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on September 21, 2010. 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: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the September 28, 2010 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, September 28, 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: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 3: Google Map Image Exhibit No. 4: Site Plan Sketch North Renton Professional Buildmg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 2 Exhibit No. 5: PhotoQl'aph of East Face of Building Exhibit No. 7: Photograph ofNorth Face of Building Exhibit No. 9: Restrictive Covenant for the 1997 Conditional Annroval Exhibit No. 11: Photograph looking Northeast showing the Family Medical Clinic just south of the Renton Professional Building Exhibit No. 13: Photograph looking East on Pelly Avenue N showing the Renton Vision Clinic also with a flat roof. Exhibit No. 15: Typed statement given by Mr. Vederoff. Exhibit No. 6: Photograph of West Face of Building Exhibit No. 8: 1997 Certificate of Conditional Annroval Exhibit No. 10: Zoning Map showing R-8 and R-10 zone desionations Exhibit No. 12: Photograph looking West on Pelly Avenue N, shows Clinic on the south with a flat roof. Exhibit No. 14: Photograph looking Northwest showing the alley side of the Renton Professional Building The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Community and Economic Development, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The applicant is requesting a rebuild approval permit for a non-conforming medical office use. The building is located at 115 Pelly Ave N, the parcel is a split zone, the northern portion is R-8 and the southern is R-10. This permit, if approved, would allow the non-conforming structure to be remodeled, re-established or rebuilt even though the costs of the re-establishment of the use would exceed 50% of the most recently appraised value. Without this permit the businesses within the structure would be permitted and allowed to remain. The applicant would be subject to the RMC in terms of what they can do with maintenance and rebuild. The Examiner questioned if a tenant moved out and another one moved into that space, would the space not be considered vacated. Ms. Dolbee stated that that was correct. The site is located on the west side of Pelly Avenue N and is north ofN I~ Street, which is in the North Renton Neighborhood. This building was established in 1957 as a clinic and contains various medical offices. The building is approximately 3,921 square feet with 19 parking stalls in the northern parking Jot and some diagonal stalls off the alley in the rear. Access to the site is via Pelly Ave N or the alley which intersects with North I" A venue. There is mature landscaping along the front of the property and some landscaping on the north side of the building. No changes to the structure have been proposed by the applicant as part of this permit. North of the site is single-family residential homes zoned R-8, to the east is single-family residential homes with the exception of one piece of property which currently houses a vision clinic. To the south is the R-10 zone with an existing Renton Family Practice Clinic. On the west is more single-family residential buildings zoned R-10. The subject site is exempt from SEPA review because the structure currently exists and no changes are proposed. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 3 There are two rebuild approval criteria; one for the non-conforming use and the second for the non-conforming structure. In reviewing the non-conforming use issue there are six factors to be considered and four must be complied with for approval; Community Need, the continuation of this use at its current location would result in an overconcentration of a particular use within the area surrounding the site; Location, the subject location is suitable for the existing use; Effect on Adjacent Property, no comments from surrounding neighbors were received, there is a large amount of mature landscaping along Pelly Ave N to screen the front of the building however, there is only a fence to the north and no screening is provided across the alley; Historical Significance, the building is not associated with a historical event or activity; Economic Significance, the subject building does not provide a substantial benefit to the community from employment or tax revenues; and timeliness with existing plans and programs. The approval of the Rebuild Approval Permit would result in a delay of the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The criteria for a non-conforming structure include five criteria and three must have been satisfied in order to approve the permit; Architectural and/or Historic Significance, the existing office building does not represent a unique architectural style there are many office buildings with this style of architecture; Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures, this building is not a part of a unified streetscape of similar structures that are unlikely to be replicated; Potential of Site for Redevelopment, the redevelopment of the subject site would be economically feasible; Condition of Building/Structure, the building has been well maintained and is not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare or safety; Departure from Development Regulations, the existing building does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety. The North Renton Building complies with two of the six criteria for non-conforming use and two of the five criteria for non-conforming structure. The Examiner questioned the fact that they did receive a permit back in 1997 which expired and they are now looking to re-new this permit. Ms. Dolbee stated that was correct and that the criteria had not changed since that time. Under the existing code they can continue this use and they can continue to maintain the structure. If approved the Conditional Approval Permit would allow the structure to be re-built should, for example, the structure bum to the ground and the cost to rebuild the structure was beyond the cost of the assessed value. Aaron Vederoff, 7711 31" Avenue NE, Seattle 98115 stated that he is one of three owners of the building, He manages the building, collects the rents and pays the bills. His comments were written out and covered only the points that the owners take issue with, either disagree or actually say they are not correct. Item # 1: Project Description/Background; there are 23 non-residential uses and buildings within the area. This building is the most outstanding, attractive and well maintained small commercial building in the area. It is important to get this permit approved; the understanding is that the use may continue without any problem. The dentist currently occupying the building entered into a conditional agreement to purchase the building but was advised by his attorney not to proceed because of the non-conforming status. The dentist is still interested in buying the building but not unless the Rebuild Approval Permit is renewed. There appears to be a question as to whether financing can be obtained without the ability to rebuild if more than 50% of the building is damaged. Item #4a: Community Need; the ability for relocation seems to ignore the fact that this dental practice has been established in this location for over 50 years and is extremely established. Moving would create challenge and hardship. Item #4e: Economic Significance; the current tenants do pay B&O tax and therefore provide economic benefit to the City. North Renton Professional Builumg File No.: LUA-I 0-003 October 21, 2010 Page4 Item #4 f: Timelines with Existing Plans and Programs; it appears to be an extremely modest delay to the I 00% implementation to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Further it appears that the City began the process of looking at the zoning for the area and it has been put on hold. It is possible that the new zoning would allow the outright use for a small office building. Item #Sa: Architectural and/or Historical Significance; the building is unique with the "U" configuration rather than the typical rectangle. Item #Sb: Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures; the building does have a pitched roof, not a flat roof as stated in the report. The building is set back from the property lines on all four sides and is a valuable asset to the immediate neighborhood. Item #Sc: Site Potential for Re-Development; the site could be redeveloped with three units; it seems to be extremely unlikely to be done. There are six houses in the block with an assessed value ranging from $119,000 to $243,000; it is difficult to believe that someone would build new houses that would cost $400,000 or more with the existing houses as neighbors. Clifford Moon, 16261 36th Avenue NE, Lake Forest Park 98155 stated that he is also one of the owners and proceeded to show additional photos of the area. The Conditional Use permit that was part of the building expired in June 2007. The City was contacted in April 2007 to begin this process, it has taken three years to get to the hearing today. They would like to continue the current status of the building. The Examiner stated that if the building was totally lost to fire or whatever, the expectation would be that the new construction would be upgraded to meet the existing codes. This issue is forced by the potential resale of the building where a purchaser would be subject to the same constraints as currently exist with redeveloping the property. Mr. Vederoff stated if there was a complete burn down of the building, the concern as the City would be can somebody economically redevelop it with three housing units. The Examiner stated that at the same time someone at that point in redeveloping a dental office clinic as a modern structure would also be very expensive as well as a loss of income while it is being developed. Those are the trade-offs, the code is designed to help move out non-conforming uses ultimately. This building is well maintained and there is no problem with that. Mr. Vederoff continued stating that they were asking for the 10 year permit as previously. He has seen in other agreements such as this that there is no time limit. This seems unusual where a time limit is given. 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 9:41 a.m. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 5 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: I. The applicant, Clifford E. Moon, filed a request for a Rebuild Approval Permit to allow replacement of a legal non-conforming use in the event of a substantial loss. 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 #I. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official determined that the proposal is exempt from environmental review. 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 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site is located on the west side of Pelly one parcel north of North 1st Street. An alley runs along the rear or west side of the parcel between Pelly and Wells Avenue North. 7. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single family and medium density multifamily uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 8. The subject site is currently zoned R-8 (Single Family -8 dwelling units/acre) for the north portion and R-10 (Residential; 10 units per acre) for the south portion. 9. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 156 enacted in May 1909. 10. There is R-10 zoning south and west of the subject site and R-8 zoning directly east across Pelly and north and northwest of the subject site. 11. Single family uses are located north, northeast and west of the subject site. Renton Vision Clinic is across the street in an R-8 parcel. Renton Family Practice Clinic is located directly south on another R- IO parcel. 12. The subject site is approximately 15,000 square feet. The existing building is approximately 3,921 square feet. 13. The building is a one-story, U-shaped building. The building has a pitched roof. The staff report noted it had a flat floor line. North Renton Professional Builmng File No.: LUA-! 0-003 October 21, 2010 Page 6 14. The building is served by 19 on-site parking stalls and 5 parallel spaces on the street. There are 11 stalls located near the north property line. There is landscaping between the parking and the adjoining single family home. There are also stalls west of the building. These stalls directly back onto the alley. Single family uses are located on the west of the alley. Code does not permit direct maneuvering from an alley into parking for commercial uses. These alley-accessed parking stalls are legally non- conforming like the building and uses. 15. The site contains mature landscaping in front of the building both along the street and within the niche created by the U-shaped building. A fence and narrow landscape strip provides some separation along the north property line. There is no landscaping along the alley where the applicant has a series of parking stalls. 16. The purpose of a rebuild approval permit is to allow nonconforming uses and/or structures that became nonconforming as a consequence of Code amendments in June 1993 and thereafter, to be re-established and/or rebuilt in certain zoning districts where they would normally be prohibited because the costs associated with re-establishing the use and/or structure exceed fifty percent (50%) of their most recently assessed or appraised value prior to the loss or damage. 17. The City issued a Rebuild Approval Permit for the subject site in 1997 (City file# LUA97-044). This permit expired 10 years after its issuance on June 26, 2007. 18. The applicant has indicated that the current zoning has restricted the building's sale as a commercial entity and may encumber its refinancing. The applicant noted the unkempt nature of the alley for the properties west of the alley. There have been no complaints about the current use. 19. A density calculation is not required for this analysis. Staff estimated that if the property were redeveloped with some conforming residential uses there might be a potential for three units. 20. The development of one single family home would generate approximately 10 trips. Three residential units, depending on the nature of the use or uses, could generate approximately 30 trips. Staff estimates that the clinic would generate more traffic than one single family use and probably more than a three unit development. CONCLUSIONS I. Section 4-9-120 contains the criteria for approving a rebuild approval permit: E REVIEW CRJTERIA FOR NONCONFORMJNG USES: The Reviewing Official may issue a rebuild approval permit only when the continuance of the use is determined to be in the public interest and such uses are: (1) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Reviewing Official shall consider the following factors when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming use. In order to grant the permit, at least four (4) of these factors shall be complied with: 1. Community Need: There shall be a community need for the proposed use at its present location; and the continuance of the nonconforming use should not result in either the North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 7 detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the area surrounding the site. 2. Location: The existing location is or can be made suitable for the existing use. 3. Effect on Adjacent Property: The existing nonconforming use has not resulted in undue adverse effects on adjacent properties from noise, traffic, glare, vibration, etc., (i.e., does not exceed normal levels in these areas emanating from surrounding permitted uses). 4. Historical Significance: The existing use was associated with a historical event or activity in the community and as a result has historical significance. 5. Economic Significance: The existing use provides substantial benefit to the community because of either the employment of a large number of people in the community, the generation of considerable retail and/or business/occupation tax revenues to the City, or it provides needed affordable housing. 6. Timeliness with Existing Plans and Programs: Because of the anticipated market timing for permitted uses in the zone, retention of the existing nonconforming use would not impede or delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. F REVIEW CRITERIA FOR NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES: The Reviewing Official may issue a rebuild approval permit only when the continuance of the structure is determined to be in the public interest and such structures are: (I) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Community and Economic Development Administrator shall consider the following factors, when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming structure. In order to grant the permit, he/she shall find that at least three (3) of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. Architectural and/or Historic Significance: The structure represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture because of its style, use of materials, or functional arrangement, and is one of the few remaining examples of this. 2. Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures: The nonconforming building or structure was part of a unified streetscape of similar structures that is unlikely to be replicated unless the subject structure is rebuilt per, or similar to, its original plan. 3. Potential of Site for Redevelopment: Redevelopment of the site with a conforming structure is unlikely either because the size of the existing lot may be too small to be economical, or because the characteristics of adjacent permitted uses (that might normally be expected to expand to such a site) currently might preclude their expansion. Typically, economic hardship would not be considered for a variance, but is a consideration here. 4. Condition of Building/Structure: If nonconforming as to the provisions of the City's Building Code, the building or structure and surrounding premises have generally been well maintained and are not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare, or safety, or they could be retrofitted so as not to pose such a threat. 5. Departure from Development Regulations: If nonconforming with the provisions of the City's development regulations, the building or structure does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety, or could be modified so as not to pose such a threat. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) G DECISION OPTIONS: The approving body may grant, with or without conditions, or deny a requested rebuild approval permit. Such a permit, if granted, typically would carry conditions with it pertaining to how a damaged structure would be allowed to redevelop. The approving body may, for example, limit the term and duration of the rebuild approval permit as well as impose conditions. North Renton Professional Builumg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 8 H CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Conditions imposed by the approving body shall reasonably assure that nuisance or hazard to life or property will not develop. A rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming use and/or structure may, for example, be conditioned upon the provision and/or guarantee by the applicant that necessary public improvements, facilities, utilities and/or services needed to support the use/structure will be provided, or the provision of other features that would make the use/structure more compatible with its surroundings. I EXPIRATION: Conditions imposed relating to the duration of a permit for a use or structure should also reflect reasonable amortization periods for any substantial upgrades to the premises that are required by City Code. 2. This office has to reluctantly agree with staff's recommendation in this matter. There are two sets of criteria. One set of criteria refers to non-conforming "uses" while the other refers to non-conforming "structures." Those criteria that so carefully outline what is permissible do not sanction the permit the applicant has requested. It does not meet at least four of the criteria found above for use nor three criteria for structure. At the same time, this office has to reconfirm what staff reported regarding this building and the uses it houses -the building may be maintained in a normal fashion and the established uses and similar uses within it are all legally allowed to remain and may continue operation. Code and courts have generally encouraged the conversion of non-conforming structures and uses to conforming to current codes. Granting a permit to avoid conversion is not entertained lightly and Code provisions require that the criteria be appropriately satisfied. The use does not satisfy the criteria for approving the requested permit. Non-Conforming Uses Criteria 3. While the use obviously serves the needs of patrons -both immediate neighbors and other patrons of the buildings and its uses, those needs can be served by a building and uses in the commercial zones found nearby. The nearby vicinity provides the CN zone a block north and east of the site, the CA zone a block east of the site or downtown Renton a block or two south of the site. There is no community need for the uses at this specific location. In addition, there are two other legal non-conforming uses in the immediate vicinity also serving medical patrons. One is immediately south of the-subject site and another directly across Pelly east of the subject site. These uses together create an over-concentration of non-conforming uses in an area ofresidential zoning. 4. The use has been established and, admittedly, well-maintained in the area for more than 50 years. The use has not generated any complaints. The building is designed for its current uses. Landscaping helps the use blend into the area although there is little to screen the building's alley parking from its residential neighbors west of the alley. There is also limited separation between the north parking area and the adjacent single family home. The applicant's comments on the state of those neighboring properties across the alley could reflect neglect or just a reaction to being subjected to the applicant's parking lot across the alley. 5. The use has been established in its location for a long time and neighbors are probably use to it. The use does generate more traffic than a standard single family home and staff estimated it probably generates more traffic than a limited number of residential uses. A conforming residential use or uses would probably have less effect on neighboring properties but it does not appear that the use had adverse impacts on those adjacent uses. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 9 6. While nicely maintained, neither the building nor contained uses have any historical or architectural significance. The uses are routine medical clinics. 7. Staff found that the building and its uses do not provide affordable housing. While it employs a complement of medical professionals and associates it does not provide retail uses and does not provide any substantial tax revenues either from occupation or sales taxes. 8. Finally, the timeliness of existing plans and code amendments suggests that the use should have been transitioned to a conforming use in 2007. Clearly, there has been no urgency in this area. The use is established and the applicant had a permit to allow restoration until June 26, 2007. Realistically, removing or renovating the existing building to provide residential uses will not occur if a permit were granted to allow reconstruction in the event of loss. Providing a use consistent with both the comprehensive plan's goals and the current zoning will not occur if a permit is granted. Frankly, it probably will not occur without a permit approval either as the use is still flourishing. Non-Conforming Structures Criteria 9. The other criteria for non-conforming structure rebuild approval mirror in some cases the criteria found above. The building is neither architecturally nor historically significant. I 0. The one-story building is larger than nearby single family homes in area although it is not overly tall. Yard conformity was not analyzed for this review but the building could be converted to residential uses with potentially non-conforming yards. The building is not part of a unified streetscape and does differ significantly from neighbor residential uses. 11. The applicant pointed out in the current economy that redevelopment to conforming residential uses would be unlikely in the near term. Staff noted that redevelopment of conforming uses is possible even if not an immediate result. 12. Again, this office has to emphasize that the building and its landscaping area well-maintained and would not contribute to adverse impacts on health, safety or welfare. 13. Finally, this office cannot ignore the precedent of granting the permit. Two other non-conforming uses are also located on this street. Approving this permit would create a precedent that would potentially lead to similar additional requests, thereby further delaying the transition of three uses to conforming land use patterns that area required by the comprehensive plan and the Zoning Code. The permit or permits do not satisfy the requisite criteria and therefore, the permit must be denied. If on appeal the City Council believes a permit is warranted, they might consider a reduced timeframe. DECISION The Rebuild Approval Permit is denied. North Renton Professional Builumg File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page 10 ORDERED THIS 21'' day of October 2010. -~~ FREDI.KAUP~ ~ HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 21 '' day of October 2010 to the parties of record: Vanessa Dolbee 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 77113l"AvenueNE MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 16261 36th Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98115 Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 Elizabeth P. Stewart 232 Pelly Avenue N Renton, WA 98057 TRANSMITTED THIS 21" day of October 20 IO to the following: Mayor Denis Law Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Marty Wine, Assistant CA 0 Gregg Zimmerman, PW Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator Jennifer Henning, Current Plarming Manager Stacy Tucker, Plarming Division Dave Pargas, Fire Marshal Larry Meckling, Building Official Plarming Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services Renton Reporter Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section lOOGofthe City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., November 4, 2010 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. 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., November 4. 2010. North Renton Professional Building File No.: LUA-10-003 October 21, 2010 Page l l 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 pennits 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. -.i CD\ CA ·, , CA > S .CD_ I I. "' "' [/] Q) G4 · 20 T23N R5E W 1/2 ' CDRCP) ···----.,/ "c·· il / enton ivision Oii! COR S ~ -------,,..,....._, --.-~ CED ,, . RC 0 230 eyo ...... RCCP) F4 17. T23N R5E W 1/~7 · ' 11 .. lj ·1 . I I • 11 I I I I --------------;;, I', I ' I ):'--------- ! '' :!:28 1-0 11 I I:) ' b--,~~--~~~li------f+------j I Z I I I 0 _j ::) I !Il I I:) I Z I to fi;.;;;;;.--.il----lf----i I X L ____ _ I U1 I I }---------J--- / I / I / --------------~ I ADDRESS: I PARCEL NUMBER: I ZONING: 115 FELL Y A VE. N. RENTON, WA. 98055 722500-0415 R-10 SITE PLAN SKETCt-i z' o::t' w t:; > m <:( M ).-::r: _j >< _l w W' o_ I of Rentoh P nning Divisio1 JAN 14 Wl'J I" = 20'-0" NORTI-I I ,. /. ' -'-.. · .~ ... U') 1- 1-f CCI 1-f ::c >< w City of Renton Planning Division JAN 14 2010 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTV & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT· PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 21st day of September, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Clifford Moon Applicant/Contact MVH -Renton Properties, LLC Owner Elizabeth P. Stewart Party of Record ,,., ,.,, Eh; ~ _ ... . k/ ,/ /l'i<i.. -;;/,,ii,,~ I ..... ,,, (Signature of Sender): ~ ~· \. • < , ~ (. / {/ - ~J STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss rf-' COUNTY OF KING ) ~,.(11 .. ~$" ,.. ...... .... I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: ') u•h ,~L" ) / .;:,c, C r ' Notary Public i;;;r,;d for the State of Washington Notary (Print): .4. , r.:d , -----~~~-~-~~------------- My appointment expires: / \c:)')1 ."2 c1 .) oo -I North Renton Professional Bldg LUAl0-003 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING September 28, 2010 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: North Renton Professional Bldg PROJECT NUMBER: LUAl0-003 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tl,e applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Watercraft Lifts PROJECT NUMBER: LUAl0-050, ECF, SM, SMC PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit for the installation of two 10-foot by 14-foot freestanding boatlifts, one 10-foot by 20-foot freestanding boatlift with a fully grated platform, and one dock- mounted jet ski lift in association with an existing joint use dock which serves three single-family residential lots in the R-8 zone. HEX Agenda 9-28-10.doc DEPARTMENT OF COM~ ~ITV AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING DATE: September 28, 2010 Project Name: Owner: Applicant/Owner: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Site Area: North Renton Professional Building MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, c/o Aaron Vederoff, 7711 -31 51 Avenue NE; Seattle, WA 98115 Clifford E. Moon, MVH -Renton Properties, LLC; 16261 361 h Avenue NE; Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 LUAl0-003 Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% ofthe most recently assessed or appraised values. 115 Pelly Avenue N 3,921 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/ A 15,000 SF Total Building Area GSF: 3,921 SF £~ • ~ ; ·1 1 01 #1' Project Location Map North Renton Office Bldg HEX Report City of Renton Department of Com ity & Economic Development Pn · wry Report to the Hearing Examiner NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL B_~ _ LUAl0-003 Hearing Date September 28, 2010 Page 2 of 8 I A. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Neighborhood Detail Map Google Maps Image Site Plan Sketch Photograph of East Face of Building Photograph of West Face of Building Photograph of North Face of Building 1997 Certificate of Conditional Approval Restrictive Covenant for 1997 Conditional Approval I 8-GENERAL INFORMA T/ON: 1. Owner(s) of Record: MUH -Renton Properties, LLC, c/o Aaron Vederoff, 7711-31" Ave. NE, Seattle, WA 98115 2. Zoning Designation: 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) Single Family Residential (RSF) and Residential Medium Density (RMD) General Office & Medical Office North: Single Family Residential {R-8 zone) East: South: West: 6. Access: 7. Site Area: Renton Vision Clinic & Single Family {R-8 zone) Renton Family Practice Clinic {R-10 zone) Single Family Residential {R-10 zone) Via Pelly Avenue North or the alley located behind the building. 15,000 SF I C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Description Land Use File No. Ordinance Date No. Comprehensive Plan N/A N/A 5099 11/1/2004 Zoning N/A LUA94-031 4529 6/19/1995 Annexation N/A N/A 156 5/18/1909 Conditional Allow reconstruction in the LUA96-122 & N/A 8/5/1996 Approval Permit event of damage LUA97-044 HEX Report City of Renton Department of Cam ity & Economic Development NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL 8_ ., Pr, 1ary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUAl0-003 Hearing Date September 28, 2010 Page 3 of 8 [I,. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: The subject building currently is served by the City of Renton and all utilities are in place and existing. No changes to utilities are proposed. 2. Streets: Street improvements are not required at this time. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department. E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-060: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-110: Development Standards for Residential Zoning Designations 2. Chapter 8 Permits General and Appeals a. Section 4-8-080 Permit Classification 3. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria a. Section 4-9-120: Nonconforming Uses/Structures Rebuild Approval Permit 4. Chapter 10 Legal Nonconforming Structures, Uses and Lots a. Section 4-10-050 Nonconforming Structures Uses b. 4-10-060 Nonconforming Uses 5. Chapter 11 Definitions F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element: I G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. Project Description/Background Non-Conforming Use Residential Single Family Land Use Designation Residential Medium Density Land Use Designation The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North and is surrounded on the north, east, and west by single family residential homes. However, immediately south of the subject building is the Renton Family Practice Clinic and across the street between two single family homes is the Renton Vision Clinic. Under current conditions the Renton Professional Building has 19 on-site parking stalls and 5 parallel spaces on the street. The site is currently accessed off of Pelly Avenue North and from the alley in the rear. The existing site contains mature landscaping along the north property line and in front of the building along Pelly Avenue North. No changes are proposed to the existing parking or landscaping as a part of the subject application. HEX Report City of Renton Department of Com ity & Economic Development PrP · wry Report to the Hearing Examiner NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL 8_ ,, LUAllJ..003 -- Hearing Date September 28, 2010 Page 4 of 8 Pursuant to the applicant's project narrative the North Renton Professional Building was developed as a clinic in 1957 and is currently operating as medical/dental offices. Based on the City's permitting system the following business have applied for and have active business licenses at the subject location:, Daniel I Varadi, Ops, PIie Dental Practice, Vital Changes Inc, Medical Diagnostic Laboratory Inc., Susan Word-Moynihan LMHC, and OBA-Traditional Family Healthcare. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development (City file #LUA94-031). This particular rezone affected nine privately held properties, and the goal of this rezone was to change the then current P-1 zoning classification to zoning which is consistent with the zoning adjacent to each parcel. At the time of the Rezone the Land Use Designation was RO and the proposed rezone was R-10. The purpose of a rebuild approval permit is to allow nonconforming uses and/or structures that became nonconforming as a consequence of Code amendments in June 1993 and thereafter, to be re-established and/or rebuilt in certain zoning districts where they would normally be prohibited because the costs associated with re-establishing the use and/or structure exceed fifty percent (50%) of their most recently assessed or appraised value prior to the loss or damage. The City issued a Rebuild Approval Permit for the subject site in 1997 (City file# LUA97-044). This permit expired 10 years after its issuance on June 26, 2007. Without the issuance of the subject rebuild approval permit the Renton Professional Office Building and the business within the building would be permitted to remain, as the subject building and use has been determined to be an existing legal non-conforming use and structure. However, the applicant would be subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 Legal non-conforming structures, uses, and lots. The applicant has indicated that the current zoning has restricted the buildings sale as a commercial entity and may encumber its refinancing. 2. Environmental Review Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), the subject application is exempt from SEPA Environmental Review pursuant to WAC 197-11- 800(l)(b)(iii) The construction of an office building with 4,000 square feet of grass floor area, and with associated parking facilities designed for twenty automobiles. In addition, the subject development is already built and expansion is not a part of the subject permit. 3. Staff Review Comments Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end ofthis report. 4. Consistency with Review Criteria for Nonconforming Uses -Rebuild Approval Permit The Review Official may issue a rebuild approval permit only when the continuance of the use is determined to be in the public interest and such uses are: (1) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Reviewing Official shall consider the following factors HEX Report City of Renton Department of Com ty & Economic Development Pre ,ary Report to the Hearing Examiner NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL 8 __ ., WA10-003 Hearing Date September 28, 2010 Page S of 8 when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming use. In order to grant the permit, at least four (4) of these factors shall be complied with: a) Community Need: There shall be a community need for the proposed use at its present location; and the continuance of the nonconforming use should not result in either the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the area surrounding the site. The Renton Professional Building provides general office space and medical office space in the North Renton Neighborhood area. There are other medical office buildings within the vicinity of the subject site; however the demand for this particular office space and medical office space appears to be needed as the spaces are leased. However, there are many other small scale general and medical office spaces within the City currently and many are unoccupied, assumedly because of the current economic environment. Many of these vacant spaces are located within zoning districts where such uses are permitted out right and would not result in non-conformity. As such there is a community need for the proposed use however, this use can be provided to the North Renton Neighborhood in locations where the use is permitted in the zone. The continuation of this use at its current location would result in an overconcentration of a particular use within the area surrounding the site. b} Location: The existing location is or can be made suitable for the existing use. South of the subject site is the Renton Family Practice Clinic and across Pelly Avenue is the Renton Vision Clinic. In addition there are a small number of other commercial/office spaces within the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, the subject use has been operating at its current location since 1957 and has been a part of the neighborhood for more then SO-years. Based on the business longevity in the neighborhood and the existing legal non-conforming medical office uses within the sites' vicinity the subject location is suitable for the existing use. c) Effect on Adjacent Property: The existing nonconforming use has not resulted in undue adverse effects on adjacent properties from noise, traffic, glare, vibration, etc., (i.e., does not exceed normal levels in these areas emanating from surrounding permitted uses). No comments were received from neighboring property owners expressing concern about noise, traffic, glare, or vibration because of the continued operation of the subject office building. In addition, the site has a large amount of mature landscaping along Pelly Ave N. to screen the front of the building from the existing single family residences located across the street. However, the only screening provided to the existing residential properties to the north is a fence and small landscape strip and no screening is provided across the alley. Traffic generated by general office and medical office theoretically would exceed the number of trips as generated by a single family residence. However a portion of the site is zoned R-10 which permits multi-family residential. The submittal requirements for a Rebuild Approval Permit do not required the applicant to provide detailed density information. However, if one used the entire 15,000 square foot lot and evaluated the residential development potential it appears the maximum amount of units that could be provided would be three. Therefore staff anticipates, despite the ability to add multi- family housing on the subject site, that traffic generated by an office building would exceed that generated by a residential development. However, the existing structure does not appear to result in undue adverse effects on adjacent properties from noise, traffic glare or vibration. d) Historical Significance: The existing use was associated with a historical event or activity in the community and as a result has historical significance. HEX Report City of Renton Deportment of Com ity & Economic Development NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL 8 __ ,, Hearing Date September 28, 2010 Pr< 1ary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUAl0-003 Page 6 of 8 The subject building is not associated with a historical event or activity in the community and therefore would not have a historical significance. e) Economic Significance: The existing use provides substantial benefit ta the community because af either the employment of a large number of people in the community, the generation of considerable retail and/or business/occupation tax revenues to the City, or it provides needed affordable housing. The subject office building houses five small scale medical/dental offices that provide a variety of services to the surrounding community. However, the subject space does not contain retail business nor affordable housing. Currently there is no occupational tax collected by the City, however we do collect an "FTE" tax based on the number of employees at a particular business. The exact dollar about for the subject office building is unknown however based on the size of the building and its businesses staff has determined that the Renton Professional Building does not provide a substantial benefit to the community because of employment or tax revenues. f) Timeliness with Existing Plans and Programs: Because of the anticipated market timing for permitted uses in the zone, retention of the existing nonconforming use would not impede or delay the'implementatian of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Policy LU-70 states that the transition of uses and structures from non-conforming to those that conform to zoning and development standards should be implemented within three years of the adoption of the 2004 Update, (i.e. 2007). Policy LU-73 states that non-conforming uses should transition to conforming uses. The subject office building is a non-conforming use and permitting the use to be re-built or remodeled even if the cost exceeds 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised value would prolong the transition of the subject site to a residential use. Since the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update six years have passed, which exceeds Policy LU-70 transition of uses, by three additional years. Based on the above policies approving the Rebuild Approval Permit would result in a delay of the implementation oft he City's Comprehensive Plan. 5. Consistency with Review Criteria for Nonconforming Structures Rebuild Approval Permit The Reviewing Official may issue a Rebuild Approval Permit only when the continuance of the structure is determined to be in the public interest and such structures are: (1) found to be compatible with other existing and potential uses/structures in the general area; or (2) can be made to be compatible with the application of appropriate conditions. The Reviewing Official shall consider the following factors, when considering a request for a rebuild approval permit for a nonconforming structure. In order to grant the permit, he/she shall find that at least three (3) of the following criteria have been satisfied: a) Architectural and/or Historic Significance: The structure represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture because of its style, use of materials, or functional arrangement, and is one of the few remaining examples of this. The subject site contains a "U-shaped" single-story office building. The structure is wood-frame and brick veneer. The subject building does not represent a unique regional or national architectural style or an innovation in architecture because of its style, use of materials, or functional arrangement. There are many other small scale office buildings built and in the same architectural style that still exist today. HEX Report City of Renton Department of Com NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL I Hearing Date September 28, 2010 ity & Economic Development Pr. · iary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUAl0-003 Page 7 of8 b} Architectural Compatibility with Surrounding Structures: The nonconforming building or structure was part of a unified streetscope of similar structures that is unlikely to be replicated unless the subject structure is rebuilt per, or similar ta, its original plan. The single-story office structure is unlike other structures on the same street and in the same area. The majority of structures in the neighborhood are single-story and two-story single family residential homes. These homes typically exhibit pitched roofs and architectural details typical of a single family residence. The Renton Professional building has a flat roof and is set back from the street in the center and not at the ends, which represents a significantly different style then the surrounding homes. As such, the nonconforming building is not a part of a unified streetscape of similar structures that are unlikely to be replicated. c) Potential of Site for Redevelopment: Redevelopment of the site with a conforming structure is unlikely either because the size of the existing lot may be too small to be economical, or because the characteristics of adjacent permitted uses (that might normally be expected ta expand to such a site) currently might preclude their expansion. Typically, economic hardship would not be considered for a variance, but is a consideration here. The subject site is split zoned R-8 and R-10 and the applicant is not required to provide detailed information about density with the subject application. However, based on an estimate utilizing the measure tool on the City's Landlnfo Mapping System, the R-8 zone consumes approximately S,000 square feet of the subject site and the R-10 zone consumes approximately 10,000 square feet of the site. Theoretically (exclusive of a number of additional unknown factors) there is a potential for up to three units on the subject site. There appears to be sufficient room on the site to place three residential units that could be built architecturally compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, it appears the redevelopment of the subject site would be economically feasible. d) Condition of Building/Structure: If nonconforming as to the provisions of the City's Building Code, the building or structure and surrounding premises have generally been well maintained and are not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare, or safety, or they could be retrofitted so as not to pose such a threat. The existing building has generally been well maintained and is not considered to be a threat to the public health, welfare, or safety. e) Departure from Development Regulations: If nonconforming with the provisions of the City's development regulations, the building or structure does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety, or could be modified so as not to pose such a threat. The existing building does not pose a threat to the public health, welfare or safety. I H. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above review criteria the Renton Professional Building only complies with two of the six criteria for Non-Conforming Use and two of the five criteria for non-conforming structures, therefore staff recommends denial ofthe Renton Professional Building Conditional Approval Permit, Project File No. LUAl0-003. HEX Report City of Renton Department of Com 1ity & Economic Development NORTH RENTON PROFESSIONAL 1 Hearing Date September 28, 2010 EXPIRATION PERIOD: Pr · wry Report to the Hearing Examiner LUAl0-003 Page 8 of8 If the Hearing Examiner determines that the Rebuild Approval Permit is approved, staff recommends an approval period not to exceed 10 years. However, pursuant to RMC 4-9-1201 Expiration, Conditions imposed relating to the duration of o permit for a use or structure should also reflect reasonable amortization periods for any substantial upgrades ta the premises that are required by City Code. HEX Report @ ii~ ,~ ; F3 • 18 T23N RSE E 1/2 7 ~ itt ,. i ~ '"' u t, 'l:Jf I JI' n~ _ ~ [ RM-r,j:RM-f~, g I~ ,g ~c::.: n!B ]>_ RM~ t, ' l . n , t:l ' . I ~--· ··~···u Q' · ~,n ~ , c n1111t11u;::;1 · .',: ,g ~ ·t:I. .-g,,. t:::::1 ,q, I 6M u 1~M-U f j ln\\GJl I LI IN~ . '>J v -Wells A~. ±g ~~ .• g1~2-t. '% ~ / h I Q • 811 8,~,\m I CD I C1ll·il ~u . -- -0 'J ~ 2\ I t I-405 ~ f. R-lq ?J ·· .. ·. .~ R-8,,. ~"· '1'~ ~a, ~1:c! ~ nc_]t J I ~ Rjl LhlJ., 11,fuJe e~· ~-.L:cl N:.:..:: ....... l~§~j ~ tJ ·~ "-'o Pa~-n· '"" i:z .~ : '"'l ~- I tJ f I,> . z " -r Ave. S: ..... :.·' ; ~ S Renton 'Ave. S /\J · .,. ~ ' ' I L/;=::::::;=::::::;=::; ~ ~ nt :~~ y/,CP II '1 R-8 ] .... ....:a j i[ ~gt :;.:l D ~ ~ i-rj ~~ ~~ R-8 A] n " -0 'J A] n. .! In! ,tr/ ,t,, :~: n D A] " -0 n '-/ @ ~ /Zn·~ /~ 'Z/l 11. 3:Sll NE'Z.L Ll • t:l cc~ ,n ~ cc,. "' -- (D ffi c = :::, I..J s !!!. .::, '-<:di 0 z EXHIBIT 2 ;:, • ; I j :l;: ;5 115 Pelly Ave N, Renton, WA 98055 -Google Maps Go(_ 1gle maps Address hnp; maps.google.comimaps 0 hi=en&tab=wl Page 1 of 1 To see all the details that are visible on the screen,use the "Print" link next to the map. 8,2010 M I- I-I cc 1-1 J: X w I I I o· I \l_ ->--~~ tti I . I al ' I I ' / ' I "'-----------I '' I I <2B'-0" / I lj, _ I z II I Q I I _J I I :::) I I Ii} I ., ' I I I I I I / I \') I z I I t--I j (/) /1 I X L I I UJ I I I I I I /: )-________ J ___ -I / I / I / -~ I ADDRESS: 115 PELL Y AVE. N. RENTON, WA. 9B055 PARCEL NUMBER: 722500-0415 I ZONING= R-10 SITE PLAN SKETCl-t I" = 20'-0" IL I ,~ .. C----- '-----' ----- ' C-- C-- C-- C-- C-- C-- ~-- ,_ ' ~ • - ~ - - - h --I,, C--p~ C-- :i I '11:1' UJ I:; > al <t: 1-t >-::c _J >< _J w UJ' IL I Y of Rentoh nning D1visio1 llff ?J ~ I NORTI-I , i~-~F/~1~~{:_, · \ ,?r,,~: ' \ I City of Renton P:anning Division JAN 1 4 ZO'J .''-~ j ' r • f ID I- I-I cc 1-1 :::c >< w ;:_,,, >if~ "'-/t· !- ·' .t .. ··--.__ . ,. -~ ~r-w~··· r CERTIFICATE OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR A NONCONFORMING USE AND STRUCTURE City of Renton F'"ale Number: LUA-97-044, CAP Location: 119 and 121 Pelly Avenue North Business Name (If applicable): North Renton Professional Building Legal Description/King County Assessor's Property Identification Number: Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 24, Renton Farm Plat No. 3, according to Plat threreof recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, page 70, Records of King County, Washington. Background: The City in June 1993 zoned the subject site to the R-10 Residential Zone. Formerly, the site was zoned P-1, Public Use. The property owner requested a conditional approval permit in order to permit the existing dental office use and building to be re-established in the event of a catastrophic loss to the structure. Description of non-confonnlng use and structure granted Conditional Approval: The subject site contains a ·u-shaped" office building (adually two "L-shaped" structures with a common roof) on an approximately 10,000 square foot site. The structure is wood-frame and brick veneer does not appear to meet the required 25-foot rear setback. Date of Conditional =roval/Perfod of ValiditylDate of Expiration: City Council approved on April 1, 1 . This permit is valid from 14 days after the date of approval until April 1, 2006. During this period, the property owner must comply with all of the conditions listed on the attached "Declaration of Restrictive Covenants· recorded with King County under #9705280747 in order for this approval to remain valid. This pennit will expire on April 1, 2006 unless the original approval body grants an extension. Conditions of Approval: See attached "Declaration of Restrictive Covenants· dated May 2, 1997. Transferability: This permit is transferable to, and binding upon, future purchasers, heirs and assigns and runs with the land. Benefits of this Permit: This permit entitles the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even though the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised value. ,'1 I/ L ~ .. I C '4.-:I __ ? proved by tr.a City of Renton Development Services Division Director Date .. --.• ,., ·-;~;?: <:)~/"f ~:._::-.::~ co I:; cc 1-4 ::c >< w .· I ·· I ·~ l l ~ :3 = ~ .!. WHEN RECORDED RETI..:R."f TO: ~ Project File # _____ _c. Office of the Ci()' Clerk Renton Munidpal Building 200 Mi!! Avenue South Renton. \VA 9805S DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS = Parcel Ta'I: Account #s ___ -;;;1 Grantor{s) Namc _____ --.,J :: c RTSQ _______ ---i:I WHEREAS, Pro Team Marketing, Inc. (formerly knO\sn as Lyden, Ltd.), a Washington corporation, is owner of the following real property in the City of Renton, County of King, ~\ate of Washington, DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" A TT ACHED HERETO. WHEREAS, the owner of said described property desires to impose the following restrictive covenants running with the land as to use, present and future, of the attached described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, the aforesaid owner hereby establishes, grants and imposes restrictions and covenants running with the land hereto attached described with respect to the use i:,y the undersigned, their successors, heirs, and assigns as follows. In conjunction with the grant by the City of Renton to the owner of this property of a conditional use permit, the following restrictive covenants shall apply to this property: I. The conditional approval permit for the existing use, a medical/dental clinic, shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ten (10) years. !fa catastrophic loss of the original structure occurs within the conditional apprO\·aI permit period with losses exceeding 50% of the assessed value of the structure, and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such a loss, the conditional approval permit for the non-conforming use shall not be re-established. 2. New tenants shall be informed in writing abo,it the non-conforming status H~· -)J ~Nl)l S~f1W~,,~~f~d structure and the fact that this conditional approval permit for the AVO SIHl 03111303H ~ "" -:,; ! :2 -I 8 ... :!I "" -= 8 O'\ ... .... al .... ::c >< w i I I l ! ' I [ ' ! f· t r ,,. i ~-·. [· ; . f I . . . -·, . ~Ei~~~!ii1~~t~IB*~':1-i£,1t.~~~~- nor:-conforming use is initially granted for a period not exceeding ten (I 0) years, although subsequent permits might be issued if conditions at the time still warrant. 3. The conditional approval permit for the existing structure, a one-story clinic building, shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ten (10) years. If a catastrophic loss of the origi.nal structure occurs within the conditional approval permit period and the site is not red<!velop_cd within two-years of such a loss, the conditional approval permit for the non-conforming structure shall not be re-established. 4. The extent of the existing non-conforming building that may be replaced with additional non-conforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure accidentally damaged. In no case shall any portion of a structure that has been found to have been intentionally damaged by the O\\Tier be allowed to be reestablished unless done so consistent with all codes and regulations then in existence. 5. An application for site plan review shall be made if a catastrophic loss or an accumulative loss greater than fifty percent (50%,) of the assessed value of the structure occurs during the life of this permit. The replacement structure shall be reviewed to ensure that it is architecturally in character in terms of its roof treatment, setbacks, etc., with the surrounding area at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building codes and the existing zoning codes then in place to the extent possible. DURATION These covenants shall run with the land and expire at the termination of the Conditional Approval Permits referenced herein. If at any time said properties are made conforming as to use and/or structure during the stated life of these covenants, the portion of th~ covenants 2 ··-·- I I l I 1 i I l ' l ' ' i I pertaining to the nonconforming use, structure, or both, shall terminate without necessity of further documentation. Any violation or breach of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by proper lega: procedures in the Superior Court of King County by either the City of Renton or any property m,ners adjoining subject property who are adversely affected by ,~id breach. , INC. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that James J. Tomei ~1gned this instrument, on oath stated that they were authorized to execute this instrument, and acknowledged it as the President of Pro Team Marketing, Inc. to be the free and voluntar/ act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. w.ddJ5 18 DA TED this __£_ day of August, 1996. (Please print) NOTARY PUBLIC in a,w fpr the State of Washington, residing at /f?tke:,-/l.. My appointment expires '31>~ /(/() Sec1J' dd;;/ c;!--17,.:.._p C . ,,-,dzt,1.,-:J,-,7 _ 3 Date: Cf / q f 11': r 1 PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON /~·i\, \:~Ji A Public He.iring has been rescheduled and will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Ch.imbers on the 5eventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, W.ishington, on September 28 2010 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petition5: Nonh Renion Profe,.,on•I au,ldlng ftLC NO. LUAlO·OOl .,. j FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER'S OHICE AT 4ZS·430·6S1S 00 NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION I r I ,, Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file idet1tification. CERTIFICATION STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that \,')\· r\, ,-£ \\ f Dr\ 14c,dJ . signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: <'. ). I ·-VU> Notary Public in arid for the State of Washington µ ,A c, ,cr.1 ·, Notary (Print): My appointment expires: A , 4. "5 j .2 C/. ) o 1. J ---~= .... )~4----c,,p~~'-'-------- ' CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 9th day of September, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Revised Notice of Public Hearing documents. This information was sent to: Name 300' Surrounding Property Owners Elizabeth P. Stewart Clifford Moon MVH Properties (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING mentioned in the instrument. ) ) ss ) "! )Cir...· I Representing see attached Party of Record Applicant/Contact Owner ,..,. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington . . ., Notary (Print): !-t. A [, ,.h <', ----'-'-'-------'--'---=---------------My appointment expires: ,2 '! .) C, J I .,,~p~JJ;Zi];i'ri~'ii North Renton Professional Bldg '•',"!•'""'""-·'.~· .,._,_., . ., r{i i HI ~erel!!'tJl~L~~.r~. LUAl0-003 . ' 722400014006 BRUSH RYAN L 108 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500039507 CARR JACK V+NATALIE C 208 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98056 722600010507 CRABTREE JAMES W+KATHLEEN M 115 WELLS AVE NORTH RENTON WA 98055 172305911403 FERRIS KINNEY W+PEGGIMAE C 921 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600009509 HARGROVE JOHN P 105 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400011002 HESS CAROL M 968 ANACORTES CT RENTON WA 98056 722500043004 HYLER ROBERT S+GERALDINE R 127 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400028501 LANDEAU SETH 2715 70TH AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 172305911304 MCDONAGH KIMBERLY 909 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722500044002 MORRISON JACK 112 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305908607 BUCK DOUGLAS M+CLAUDIA J 904 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014501 CHENEY BEN L+ALICE M 104 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400012505 DELMUNDO DANILO S+GLORIA L 16121 SE 149TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722500040505 HAM FREDERICK H JR 200 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500028500 HARPER LUCAS 211 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722500043509 HINDMAN TODD GREGORY 913 N 2ND ST RENTON WA 98055 722400013008 JENSEN PAUL S+KATHLEEN 112 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500046007 LAUCK MARION L 904 NORTH 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600011000 MCMILLAN RENA 121 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500045504 MOYNIHAN DAVID L+SUSAN K 104 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722400042007 BURGESS TIMOTHY L 200 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305916303 CHRISTOPHERSON SARAH 822 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 172305903707 DOBSON WYMAN K+DOBSON VICKI L 821 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722400041504 HARDY THOMAS M+ELIAS VANESSA 204 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500040000 HARTMAN BRAD P+KRISTINA NOE 206 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500044507 HINTON ROLAND 108 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 172305904705 KNICKERBOCKER SANDRA PO BOX 571 PALMER AK 99645 722400007000 LE 8 ASSOCIATES PS C/0 VIENNA LE 135 PARK AVE N #101 RENTON WA 98055 722400012000 MEYER DANIEL J PO BOX 40030 BELLEVUE WA 98015 722400009501 MUNSON RONALD W+ELIZABETH A 623 CEDAR AVES RENTON WA 98055 ; 722500041503 MVHRENTON PROPERTIES LLC 7711 31ST AVE NE SEATILE WA 98115 722400013503 NGUYEN DUY 12345 SE 181ST ST RENTON WA 98058 722400007505 ONE PARK PLACE LLC 135 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400010004 PUGET SOUND RESIDENTIAL SER PO BOX 2577 RENTON WA 98056 722400003504 SANTOS RENATO L+PAZ C 1815 LAKE YOUNGS WAY SE RENTON WA 98058 722400006002 SYTH BONITA L 119 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98058 172305901008 WAH TAI LIMITED LIABILITY C PO BOX 3543 RENTON WA 98056 722500041008 YOUNG SIMON 181 LA MESA AVE ENCINITAS CA 92024 172305906700 NEAR CHARLES SAMPADIAN KIMBERLEY 903 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305904903 NGUYEN JOSEPH T 322 SENECA PL NW RENTON WA 98057 172305905801 ORGILL PETER D 915 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305905108 PULSIFER MICHELLE 835 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600010002 SIMPSON CRAIG L+MARGARET LY 111 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305913409 TIEU ANN N 830 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400041009 WIRICK LISA A 208 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500027502 NELSON ROSEMARY A 15419 SE 112TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722400004007 NIELSON CLAYTON W 2127 38TH AVE E SEATILE WA 98112 722400009006 POOL BROTHER CONSTRUCTION L PO BOX 2197 RENTON WA 98056 722400005509 RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY 235 MILL AVES RENTON WA 98055 172305904606 STARKOVICH BEVERLY J 810 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014709 TINKER WILLIAM E PO BOX 2106 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 722400011507 WOOD PATRICIA GRACE 126 PELLY AVE N #A RENTON WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing has been rescheduled and will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on September 28, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: North Renton Professional Building FILE NO. LUAl0-003 Location: 115 Pelly Avenue N Description: The applicant ls requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non- conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre {R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values . . '.,m,"'"''"1Wuk ,,,,?""""'"'.:'""· ···,ri,::s!::, .. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE AT 425-430-6515 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION ' ' i 1 J j Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON· A Publlc Hearing wUI be held bV the Renton Hearing Examiner In the Councll Chambers on the· seventh floor of Renton Cltv Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on September 21 2010 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the followlng petitions: N<1nh Renton Profeufanal Bulldln1 FllE NO. lUA10-003 Laall<>n: 115 Pelly Avenue N OincrtJrtlon: Tho applicant 15 reque511ng • Rebuild Apprcv•I Pormll for• non, ,onfcrmlng medical om,e uso a,,d offlc. butldln1, loca1«1 In tho Resldentlal 3 dwt!lllng unll:I par oae (R·8) and Re<ld•ntlal 10 dwelling u>llt< per acr<1 (R-lOl 1on,.., Too 3,921.s.quat• footofflco bulldmg ~ l~•d ot 115 Polly Avonu• North. The S<Jbject 11te was ..,.,a!llld In 1!>93 from Public Use lP·ll to R-8 ,nd R-10 l1111>oct1n11 the conf<llmlty of the offk:• dMopment-The robulld apprt>Yal P<1<mlt would illow the nonconfnrmlnR ,truciu<e and use to be r<!model•d, raestabllshed, or robullt eY<!n thought th• cos! ID remodel or ,e.,.tabli>h the.,.. orstru<lure would """"ed 5mi, oflhe mo!i! r«ently assessO<I or appralud values. ,~/. T·--~·, .. -~\~ , I DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AuntORIZATION Pl1u1se Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file ldentlflcatlon. CERTIFICATION I, '~.',\\ \ .. ;;,·\··,<\' \'~\'\\{ . hereby certify that :..~ copies of the above document were posted in~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on . . ·, \ ~. \. Signed:_'-..;_' ..c·'-'\~. ··..:.·.,, ...;· '.,-:.,~,..,,,\'),"",.""\ ~\,_,\.,,__~---- '---- Date: ri 2 L/ / I (''; I STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Q,, ,b,; \\ £ ::V .-frn" I/ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in a;; for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My a p poi ntme nt expires.· ___ ._A""c""J+'ls..·.i> "-±-.... ]"'--'q, 1 ...;~co· .._c'-', l:,,.1.1------ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 24th day of August, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Public Hearing documents. This information was sent to: Name 300' Surrounding Property Owners Elizabeth P. Stewart Clifford Moon MVH Properties (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING mentioned in the instrument. Dated: ) ) 55 ) see attached Party of Record Applicant/Contact Owner Representing Notary Publiinand for the State of Washington Notary (Print): /.-/. 4. (; {,-do a,' ----~-~-~~~-------------- My appointment expires: -North Renton Professional Bldg LUAl0-003 722400014006 BRUSH RYAN L 108 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500039507 CARR JACK V+NATALIE C 208 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98056 722600010507 CRABTREE JAMES W+KATHLEEN M 115 WELLS AVE NORTH RENTON WA 98055 172305911403 FERRIS KINNEY W+PEGGIMAE C 921 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600009509 HARGROVE JOHN P 105 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400011002 HESS CAROL M 968 ANACORTES CT RENTON WA 98056 722500043004 HYLER ROBERT S+GERALDINE R 127 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400028501 LANDEAU SETH 2715 70TH AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 172305911304 MCDONAGH KIMBERLY 909 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722500044002 MORRISON JACK 112 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305908607 BUCK DOUGLAS M+CLAUDIA J 904 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014501 CHENEY BEN L+ALICE M 104 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400012505 DELMUNDO DANILO S+GLORIA L 16121 SE 149TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722500040505 HAM FREDERICK H JR 200 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500028500 HARPER LUCAS 211 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722500043509 HINDMAN TODD GREGORY 913 N 2ND ST RENTON WA 98055 722400013008 JENSEN PAUL S+KATHLEEN 112 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500046007 LAUCK MARION L 904 NORTH 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600011000 MCMILLAN RENA 121 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500045504 MOYNIHAN DAVID L+SUSAN K 104 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722400042007 BURGESS TIMOTHY L 200 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305916303 CHRISTOPHERSON SARAH 822 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 172305903707 DOBSON WYMAN K+DOBSON VICKI L 821 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722400041504 HARDY THOMAS M+ELIAS VANESSA 204 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500040000 HARTMAN BRAD P+KRISTINA NOE 206 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500044507 HINTON ROLAND 108 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 172305904705 KNICKERBOCKER SANDRA PO BOX 571 PALMER AK 99645 722400007000 LE 8 ASSOCIATES PS C/0 VIENNA LE 135 PARK AVE N #101 RENTON WA 98055 722400012000 MEYER DANIEL J PO BOX 40030 BELLEVUE WA 98015 722400009501 MUNSON RONALD W+ELIZABETH A 623 CEDAR AVES RENTON WA 98055 722500041503 MVHRENTON PROPERTIES LLC 7711 31ST AVE NE SEATILE WA 98115 722400013503 NGUYEN DUY 12345 SE 181ST ST RENTON WA 98058 722400007505 ONE PARK PLACE LLC 135 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400010004 PUGET SOUND RESIDENTIAL SER PO BOX 2577 RENTON WA 98056 722400003504 SANTOS RENATO L+PAZ C 1815 LAKE YOUNGS WAY SE RENTON WA 98058 722400006002 SYTH BONITA L 119 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98058 172305901008 WAH TAI LIMITED LIABILITY C PO BOX 3543 RENTON WA 98056 722500041008 YOUNG SIMON 181 LA MESA AVE ENCINITAS CA 92024 172305906700 NEAR CHARLES SAMPADIAN KIMBERLEY 903 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305904903 NGUYEN JOSEPH T 322 SENECA PL NW RENTON WA 98057 172305905801 ORGILL PETER D 915 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305905108 PULSIFER MICHELLE 835 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600010002 SIMPSON CRAIG L+MARGARET LY 111 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305913409 TIEU ANN N 830 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400041009 WIRICK LISA A 208 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500027502 NELSON ROSEMARY A 15419 SE 112TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722400004007 NIELSON CLAYTON W 2127 38TH AVE E SEATILE WA 98112 722400009006 POOL BROTHER CONSTRUCTION L PO BOX 2197 RENTON WA 98056 722400005509 RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY 235 MILL AVES RENTON WA 98055 172305904606 STARKOVICH BEVERLY J 810 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014709 TINKER WILLIAM E PO BOX 2106 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 722400011507 WOOD PATRICIA GRACE 126 PELLY AVE N #A RENTON WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on September 21. 2010 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: North Renton Professional Building FILE NO. LUAl0-003 Location: 115 Pelly Avenue N Description: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non- conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use {P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. ' ~ ... J ~-· DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION E .r ' ' ~ · . .t , 11 I I l Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. -~De~::'.:~raw----~ .• ['J P"fi~u-.M· .! \ t \.. -i-_ . .. . . . .. I ------· --. August 23, 20lO Department of Community and Economic Development Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 1626136th Avenue NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Alex Pietsch, Administrator North Renton Professional Building / LUAl0-003 Dear Mr. Moon: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the April 1, 2010 letter from the City. Your project has been taken off hold and the City will continue review of the North Renton Professional Bldg. project. The Rebuild Approval Permit is tentatively scheduled to go before the Hearing Examiner on September 21, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. Please be aware that the applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing and a copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the hearing. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-7314. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner cc: Aaron Vederoff -MVH -Renton Properties, LLC / OWner(s} · Elizabeth Stewart, Party of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic D ••• lopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: I I _J,-/( II ~ ,., 1 -q/ {Jl 0 \f ,is_ IA I/_ COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1 7010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon P~R: Vanessa Dolbee/ 0 ) p.'-----• \J., PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building .. ·-·· : Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P·l) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water Uaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,DOOFeet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this applica · n with particular attention to those [!reas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional in o m tion is n ded to properly as is proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 7711 -31 51 Ave NE Seattle, WA 98115-4727 May 3, 2010 City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 Attn: Vanessa Dolbee Re: North Renton Professional Building, LUA10-33 Letter dated 4/1/2010 Ms Dolbee, 206.525-6912 Attached find the following submittals as requested in your letter dated 4/1/2010: • Three (3) copies of the existing recorded covenants on the subject property; • Five (5) copies of a draft of the "new" restrictive covenants.; • Three (3) copies of a nonconformity relationship and compatibility narrative. ~ Clifford E. Moon MVH -Properties, LLC 16261 -35th Ave NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 206.391-9543 NONCONFORMITY RELATIONSHIP AND COMPATIBILITY ,,i,!i NARRATIVE The name of the project is the North Renton Professional Building. It has an address of 115 Pelly Avenue North. Access to the North Renton Professional Building and its site is from Pelly Avenue North on the east or an alleyway on the west. Subject property has 19 on-site parking stalls and 5 street parking stalls. The property was developed as a "clinic" in 1957 and is currently medical/dental offices. Renton Family Practice Clinic is adjacent to subject property on its south. Renton Vision Clinic is east of subject property at 112 Pelly Avenue North. An onsite parking lot and landscaping protect the adjacent property on the north, and an alleyway separates properties on the west. The North Renton Professional Building with its medical/dental offices and the adjacent medical and vision clinics create a triad of neighborhood medical facilities. The site has mature landscaping along the west and north property lines, and adjacent to the building that exceeds or equals the surrounding area. The attached pictures illustrate the character and compatibility of the North Renton Professional Building to its neighboring structures and surrounding area. ! 2 City of Renton • Pianninn ,11vr···o,• . ::) ~ ~i,'.' • WHEN RECORDED REruRN 10: Pra;i4!ct file # Offic< oflhe Oty a.nc -Muai<ipli Bl>ilding 200 Mill Av...,. Soldh Rflnton, WA 9805S Parcel Tax Account #s ~,)Nam< RTSQ WHEREAS, Pro Team Marketing, Inc. {formerly known as Lyden, Ltd.), a Washington corporation, is owner of the following real property in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington, DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT "A" AITACHED HERETO. WHEREAS, the owner of said described property desires to impose the following restrictive covenants running with the land as to use, present and future, of the attached described real property. ~ NOW, THEREFORE, the aforesaid o~ hereby establishes, grants and imposes ~ 'restrictions and covenants running with the land Mreto attached described with respect to the use § by the undersigned, their successors, heirs, and assigns as follows. In cqnjunction with the grant CJ"' by the City of Renton to the owner of this property of a conditional use permit, the following restrictive covenants shall apply to this property: l. The conditional approval permit for the existing use, a medical/dental clinic, shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ren ( 10) years. If a catastrophic loss of the original structure occ\11'!i within the conditional approval permit period with losses· exceeding SO% of the assessed value of the structure, and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such a loss, the conditional approval permit for the non-conforming use shall not be re-eslablished. 2. New te!llll11S shall be informed in writing about the non-conforming status A!!'C)Q ~fill! S~M~~ structure and the fact that this conditional approval permit for the J.YO SIH.L 03Al30iH ·,· ''°: .. , .. ;,~ , - y :. • • i I I I $ .< ' • ' ,! ' l j non-confouning use is initially granted for a period not exceeding ten (10) years, although subsequent permits might be issued if conditions at the time still warrant. l. The conditional approval permit for the existing structure, a one-story clinic building, shall be in effect for a period not exceeding tea (I 0) years. If a catastrophic loss of the original mw:ture occurs within the conditional approval permit period and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such a loss, the conditional approval pennit for the non-confonning structun: shall not be re-established. 4. The extent of the existing non-conforming building that lI1llY be replaced with additional non-ccnforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure I accidentally damaged. In no case shall ~ portion of a structure that bas been found to have been intentionally damaged by the o'Ml.er be allowed to be reestablisbt.d unless done so consistent with all codes and regulations then in existence. 5. An application for site plan review shall be made if a catastrophic loss or an accumulative loss greater than fifty percent (50%) of the assessed value of the structure occurs during the life of this permit. The replacement structure shall be reviewed to ensure that it is architecturally in chl!Iacter in terms of its roof treaunent, setbacks, et.:., with the surrounding area at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building · codes and the existing zoning codes then in place to the extent possible. DURATION These covenants shall nm with the land and expire at the termination of the Conditional Approval Permits referenced herein. If at any time said properties are made conforming as to use and/or structure during the stated life of these covenants, the portion of the covenants 2 ' ':;' ! ' pertaining to the nonconforming use, structure, or both, shall terminate without necessity of further documentation. Any violation or breach of diesc restrictive covenants may be enforced by proper legal procedures in the Superior Court of King County by either the City of Renton or any property owners adjoining subject property who are adversely affected by said breach. STATE OF WASHINGTON . COUNTY OF KING ' I I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that James J. Tomer signed this instrument, on oath stated that they were authorized to execute this instrument, and acknowledged it as the President of Pro T earn Marketing, Inc. to be the free and vohmtary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, and that the seal affixed is the cOipOrate seal of said corporation. wdcl3S.11 DATED this____£_ day of August, 1996. "' "t"~y· "•· . l'it\ YI.., l\ii'J/ (PleiiSe print) NOTARY PUBLIC in Washington, residing at My appointment expires A/() ~ dd:t1/ 77,'{P 3 State of ,-... _____________ jfj ______ _ • I ! I .· •. ' ./ I I I \: l ·· . ..,.-. ...... , .... ~,-~~·---· __ ..;.. _____ :...,--···---'---..J.--, .. --·----~ .... -'-_. __ '' WHEN RECORDED RETIIRN TO: Office of Ibo City Clerk Renton Municipal Bulldina 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wasblngton 98055 Ded1n1don or Rnlrfctlvc Covenant. Reference numbers ofrolatcd documents: Nono Pro Team Marketing, Inc. Grantee: City of Renton Legal Description: Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 24, Renton Farm Plat No. 3, acconliog to Plat !hereof recorded in Volume II of Pla!S, pogo 70, Reconls of King County, Wasbington. Assessor's Property Tax Pam:I Account Numbers: 722500·04 l S-03 722500-0420.06 722500•0425-0I ,, •. - \ I ! ·•:, 1 I ., I >/. ;\_ Jli'JQ}n'~~~~=i11~~ti(W.~,\~-"'~~·~:111~.~~~~~~~ ... ~,,~~~~!,'·····~~-~-... :~·x~~titlJttOl._~~~.tfi.~{~:1t~ii-.~:\.:.:::::~ :, · -~::-: .... -' ' 1 ... ~. . ·• i" / WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Office of the Cil)' Clerk Renton Mwiioipal Building 200 Mill A,enuo Soll1h Renton, WA 9805S ·• • • \ i I ... 1 .... Beablcrthre Covenant• GRANTOR: Pro-Tellltl Markating, Inc. GRANTEE: Cily of Renton LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Lots 2,3, und 4, Block 24, Rmlon Farm Plat No. 3, according to PIAt thereof recorded in volume l 1 of Plats. page 70, Records of King County, Washington ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL ACCOUNT NUMBERS: 72ZS00-04 I S-03 722500-0420-06 72ZS00-0425·0 I NO RELATED DOCUMENTS Pro-Telllll Marketing, Jnc. (fka Lyden, Ltd.J, on its own behalf and on behaJf of its successors end 8S9igns and in consideralion for a condition&! approval permit allowing the continuation of a legal non-conforming LlSfl and structure on the Subject Property, herby establishes, grants and imposes the following RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS running with tho land: Restrictive CovenantH••page 1 of 3 \ 1, ,. r i I., •. ._ • ' .. ,.'': . • • • \ / I I r 1. Tho conditional approval permits (Permits) for the existing struc111re (one•story clinic build.it!g) as well as use (a medical/dental clinic), shall be in effect for a: period not nceeding ten (10) yi,ars from the date of their issuance. 2. If on accidental c;atastrophk: loss of the original structure occurs within lhe Permits' period. with losses exceeding SOO/o of the 855essed value of 1he strut:lure, and the site is not complelely redeveloped within two years of the date of loss, both Permits will expire on the second anniwrsmy of the date of the loss. The percentage of the nonaconforming building that may be roplo.ced with o. legal non""tOnforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure sccidentnl ly damaged. 3. Pro-Team Marketing, Inc., or its successor in inlerest, shall notify new tenants, in writing. of the non-conforming status of the oxisling use and structure. 4. Pro-Team Marketing, Inc., or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the remaining period of the conditional approval permits. 5. The Permits referenced herein llre void 11nd will not apply to any portion of the structure that is found to have been intentionaUy damaged by the owner or its asenls or assigns. Any redovelopmcnl will be required to be in compliance with BIi lhen existing codes 1111d regulations. 6. Any redev"lopmenl pursuant to Paragraph 2 must comply with the requirements for n. site plWl review. The replacement structure shall be reviewed ro ensure that it is archhectural ly in character in terms of its roof treatment, setbacks. etc., with the surrounding 111'ea at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building codes and the existing zoning codes then in place. to the extent possible end as otherwise pennittcd by the Permits. 7. Pro-Team Markenting, Inc., or Hs successozs or assisns. may request subsequeflt Permits. Such Permits may be issued if the conditions at the time still warrant such conditional approval of the use and structure. New restrictive covenants will be required to be recorded . Said covenants will require the approval of the City Attorney. a. These Restric:tivci Covenants shall run with the land and expire at the termina1ion of the Permits referenced herein. If either the u.~. the S1ructure, or both are made conforming during the Permita 1 period, the covenants pertaining to the previously non- conforming use, strucsure, or both, shall terminate without necm,ily of further documentation. 9. Any violation or breach of theso restrictive covenanlS may be enforced in King County Superior Court by the City of Renton or any adjoining property owner who is adversely affected by said breach. Restrictive Covenante-•page 2. of 3 \ I l f ,, ,_ _ _:_. • i .I .... :,• l l .. _,. ,. j' i -• ------_,---__ · .••. ' --.f . - --· __ .. -,.. '. /_-, .. _____ ·_. :.t .... _____ __j_, ____ -__ _:: __ , PllO TEAM MAllKl!TING, INC. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY Of KING _.... -·-· ·-· "'' _._. (Corporato Seal) I eerti.ly that I know or have satisfec:tory evidence that James J. Tomer siS'JOd this instrument. on oath stated lhat: ha was authorized to execut-ei 1his instrument, and acknowledged it as !he President of Pro Team Markonting, Inc. to the the free and volunta,y act of such party for Iha uses and purposes aetout thorain, and Illa !he scoll affixed is tho corporate seal of ,aid corporation. Restrictive Covet1U1t-·-pJ1&e 3 of 3 NOTAR.Y PUBLIC in and for the state of Washington, rcsidins al ~ My appointment expires: ~ 7 \ '·' : . l I I I DRAFT RESTRICTIVE CONENANTS ,'>11; ,!- l GRANTOR: MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, a Washington Corporation, is owner of the subject property located in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. GRANTEE: City of Renton LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Renton Farm Plat #3 Situate in the NW Quarter of Section 17, Township 23, Range 5, in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, on its own behalf and on behalf of its successors and assigns, and in consideration for a conditional approval permit allowing the continuation of a legal non-conforming use and structure on the Subject Property, hereby establishes, grants and imposes the following RESTRICTIONS and COVENANTS running with the land: 1. The conditional approval permits (Permits) for the existing structure (one- story clinic building) as well as use (a medical/dental clinic), shall be in effect for a period not exceeding ten (10) years from date of issuance. 2. If a catastrophic loss of the original structure occurs within the Permits' period with losses exceeding 50% of the assed value of the structure, and the site is not redeveloped within two years of such loss, both Permits will expire on the second anniversary of the date of the loss. The percentage of the non-conforming building that may be replaced with a legal non- conforming structure shall not exceed the amount of the structure accidently damaged. 3. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the non-conforming status of the existing use and structure. 4. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successor in interest, shall notify new tenants, in writing, of the remaining period of the Permits. 5. The Permits referenced herein are void and will not apply to any portion of the structure that is found to have intentionally damaged by the owner or its agents or assigns. Any redevelopment will be required to be in compliance with all then existing codes and regulations. 6. Any redevelopment pursuant to Paragraph 2 must comply with the requirements for a site plan review. The replacement structure shall be reviewed to ensure that it is architecturally in character in terms of its roof treatment, setbacks, etc., with the surrounding area at that time and, that it complies with all relevant building codes and the existing zoning codes then in place to the extent possible and as otherwise permitted by the Permits. 7. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC, or its successors or assigns, may request subsequent Permits. Such Permits may be issued if the conditions at the time still warrant such conditional approval of the use and structure. New restrictive covenants will be required to be recorded. Said covenants will require the approval of the City Attorney. 8. These Restrictive Covenants shall run with the land and expire at the termination of the Permits referenced herein. If either the use, the structure, or both, are made conforming during the Permits' period, the covenants pertaining to the previously nonconforming use, structure, or both, shall terminate without necessity of further documentation. 9. Any violation or breach of these Restrictive Covenants may be enforced in King County Superior Court by the City of Renton or any adjoining property owner who is adversely affected by said breach. MVH -Renton Properties, LLC By _________ _ Aaron Vederoff, Member Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF _______ _ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Aaron Vederoff signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute this instrument, and acknowledged him as the Member Manager of MVH -Properties, LLC to be the free and voluntary act of such party for uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. DATED this __ day of ______ , 2010 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at _____ _ My appointment expires. _____ _ City of Re ... on Department of Community & Economic Dev".Jpment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REv1Ew1NG DEPARTMENT: Pr7)'),,"hA 5VC-:;, COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 ' APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P·l) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT {e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Environment Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Trans rtation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,DOOFeet 14,DOOFeet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS 4/G/.coto -P 0'lopE'Aj'( SE..F;iYICE'i!:> H.6.,<c:., l..Jo c::01-1Hf::ll-f _ soyA t=EB2EA C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Probable Probable More Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Ren,on Department of Community & Economic Deve,opment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transponation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,00DFeet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Remon Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REv1Ew1NG DEPARTMENT: Rtvl<'..-"., APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical offic['!Jse and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones_ The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North_ The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development_ The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values_ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transnortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional infor ion is needed to properly assess this proposal. 4-5--!0 Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REv1Ew1NG DEPARTMENT: &'.tf'ii':IY\ 1c De.A/' COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable Mo,e Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Lic,ht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,00DFeet 14,00DFeet B. POL/CY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. I I Date City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Curtsh-1.,tcfian COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: lS,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed SO% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Hausina Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. COOE-RELATEO COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas wh additional informati n is nee d to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: I ran.,.,---r:::c> r+o +-1 \\(\ coMMENTs DUE, APRIL 1s, 2010 ' APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Linht/Glore Plants Recreation land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Tronsoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ;ti 6'+t_.(_ We have reviewed this application with panicular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where add;t;onal information is needed to properly assess this proposal. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: p JU)\ he/V\(,v) COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 15, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUAl0-003 DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 1, 2010 APPLICANT: Clifford Moon PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: North Renton Professional Building PLAN REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick SITE AREA: 15,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 3,921 square feet LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Uaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet B. POL/CY-RELATED COMMENTS tJo"'-L. C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. ~- of Director or Authorized Representative NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Appr~on has bttn flied and accepted with the Department of Community & Ei;onomlc O.,,,lopment (Cl:0)-Plannl"I Division of the City of Re<rton. The followln; briefly des<;rit,es the application and the necess.iry Pllbll~ Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPUCATION: April 1,2010 PIIOJECT NAME/NUMBEll:. North ~nlon Professional B,u;!dlng / LUA.10-003 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The apl)llcant ls requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non..:onforming medical office use and office bulidin&. looted in tt>e Resl.:lentlal 9 dwelling units per acre (R-BI and Residential 10 dwelling unit.'. per acre (R-10) zones.. 1he 3,921 square foot office building ls located at 115 Pel!y AW!nue North. The subject site was re-zoned ln 1993 from Public Use (P-1] to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of th<! office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remod.,led, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reertabllsh th!! use or structure would uceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. PROJECT LOCATION: 115 Pelty Avenue N PUBUCAPPROVALS: Rebuild Approval Permit for a Non-conforming Use and Bulld(ng APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Clifford Moon, MVH • Renton Properties, UC; 1626136" Avenue NE; lake Fore:st Pan(, WA 98155 PUBLIC HEARING: A publjc hMring will be scheduled bclmr the Renton Hearing Examiner ro Renton Council Cham\>rrs on a date tc, be detenninrd-Hearings begin at 9:00 a.m. on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall. All parties will be notified when the public hearing date has been set. Cl;Jmrn,,nts on the above ;oppricatlon must be submitted in writirc to v,messa Dolbee, Senior Plannl!I'", Dep;,rtment of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on April 15, 2010, This mamr wlU al5o t. schedu!N for a publi,; hearing on a date to be dirtennlned ~ a latertlm11. All parties wDI be notlflS when the publlc hearing cl.au, 1w been set. If you have questions about this proposal. or wish to be made a parry of recorn and receive addltlonal notifica!ion by mall, contact the Pn;,ject M;mager at (425) 430-7314. AAyone who If you would like to be made a partv of record to receive further informlltlon on this proposed project, complet11 this form and rerum to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No.: North Renton P~sslonal Building/ WAlC-003 NAME:-------------------------------- MA!UNG ADDRESS: ____________________________ _ TELEPHONE NO.:------------~ submit!' wr;m,n comments will automatically become a p.artv of retord aod will be notified of aoy deci~ion on this project. PL.EASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAWNG FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DAT£ OF APPLICATION: January 14, 2010 NOTICE OF COMPLITT APPLICATION: April 1, 2010 CERTIFICATION I I, lJMes :> "'-V6 \ bee...-hereby certify that 3 copies of the above were posted in __3__ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: '-{/z.,/z_OIO Signed~ OtJfJ_~ - STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING } } ss } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V ,·,ne , 5 "-l)e; IL ·q• signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: /\ fCl.\ .. J .) 1 '-'· 0 I 0 Notary Public in and for the State of Was ington Notary (Print}: ·I . .A ,r My appointment expires: ___ £...A'-"c'"'~+j .::·~"'s""~--';"-2_a:...,' 1,-.19."'-"'c--'1-''L----- , CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 1st day of April, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter & NOA documents. This information was sent to: Name Clifford Moon Applicant/Contact Aaron Vederoff -MVH -Renton Properties LLC Owner 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Representing , ..... > • .. "' "2.. • .. f C 11"" :: ,_ I \. "'v•" ,..,.t (· 'i, .... , 8-'29" f ,; ... -,., 'I\...... \. i+'1, 4f ''II\\\\\,,-. r· , I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker 111111 ~ OF \t,I I- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses 'and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: {/. fl" , J \ ;;i c; c \ J Notary (Print): _____ 1-\ __ ;\_.__,C:~-'-''-' ._'>:...:c.·<;....•·-------------- My appointment expires: North Renton Professional Building LUAl0-003 , 722400014006 BRUSH RYAN L 108 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500039507 CARR JACK V+NATALJE C 208 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98056 722600010507 CRABTREE JAMES W+KATHLEEN M 115 WELLS AVE NORTH RENTON WA 98055 172305911403 FERRIS KINNEY W+PEGGIMAE C 921 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600009509 HARGROVE JOHN P 105 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400011002 HESS CAROL M 968 ANACORTES CT RENTON WA 98056 722500043004 HYLER ROBERT S+GERALDINE R 127 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400028501 LANDEAU SETH 2715 70TH AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 172305911304 MCDONAGH KIMBERLY 909 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722500044002 MORRISON JACK 112 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305908607 BUCK DOUGLAS M+CLAUDIA J 904 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014501 CHENEY BEN L+ALICE M 104 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400012505 DELMUNDO DANILO S+GLORIA L 16121 SE 149TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722500040505 HAM FREDERICK H JR 200 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500028500 HARPER LUCAS 211 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722500043509 HINDMAN TODD GREGORY 913 N 2ND ST RENTON WA 98055 722400013008 JENSEN PAUL S+KATHLEEN 112 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500046007 LAUCK MARION L 904 NORTH 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600011000 MCMILLAN RENA 121 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500045504 MOYNIHAN DAVID L+SUSAN K 104 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 722400042007 BURGESS TIMOTHY L 200 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305916303 CHRISTOPHERSON SARAH 822 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 172305903707 DOBSON WYMAN K+DOBSON VICKI L 821 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722400041504 HARDY THOMAS M+ELIAS VANESSA 204 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500040000 HARTMAN BRAD P+KRISTINA NOE 206 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500044507 HINTON ROLAND 108 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98057 172305904705 KNICKERBOCKER SANDRA PO BOX 571 PALMER AK 99645 722400007000 LE 8 ASSOCIATES PS C/0 VIENNA LE 135 PARK AVE N #101 RENTON WA 98055 722400012000 MEYER DANIEL J PO BOX 40030 BELLEVUE WA 98015 722400009501 MUNSON RONALD W+ELIZABETH A 623 CEDAR AVE S RENTON WA 98055 ,, 722500041503 MVHRENTON PROPERTIES LLC 7711 31ST AVE NE SEATTLE WA 98115 722400013503 NGUYEN DUY 12345 SE 181ST ST RENTON WA 98058 722400007505 ONE PARK PLACE LLC 135 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722400010004 PUGET SOUND RESIDENTIAL SER PO BOX 2577 RENTON WA 98056 722400003504 SANTOS RENATO L+PAZ C 1815 LAKE YOUNGS WAY SE RENTON WA 98058 722400006002 SYTH BONITA L 119 PARK AVE N RENTON WA 98058 172305901008 WAH TAI LIMITED LIABILITY C PO BOX 3543 RENTON WA 98056 722500041008 YOUNG SIMON 181 LA MESA AVE ENCINITAS CA 92024 172305906700 NEAR CHARLES SAMPADIAN KIMBERLEY 903 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305904903 NGUYEN JOSEPH T 322 SENECA PL NW RENTON WA 98057 172305905801 ORGILL PETER D 915 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 172305905108 PULSIFER MICHELLE 835 N 1ST ST RENTON WA 98055 722600010002 SIMPSON CRAIG L+MARGARET LY 111 WELLS AVE N RENTON WA 98055 172305913409 TIEU ANN N 830 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400041009 WIRICK LISA A 208 PELLY AVE N RENTON WA 98055 722500027502 NELSON ROSEMARY A 15419 SE 112TH ST RENTON WA 98059 722400004007 NIELSON CLAYTON W 2127 38TH AVE E SEATTLE WA 98112 722400009006 POOL BROTHER CONSTRUCTION L PO BOX 2197 RENTON WA 98056 722400005509 RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY 235 MILL AVE S RENTON WA 98055 172305904606 STARKOVICH BEVERLY J 810 N RIVERSIDE DR RENTON WA 98055 722400014709 TINKER WILLIAM E PO BOX 2106 ISSAQUAH WA 98029 722400011507 WOOD PATRICIA GRACE 126 PELLY AVE N #A RENTON WA 98055 NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: April 1, 2010 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: North Renton Professional Building/ LUAl0-003 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Rebuild Approval Permit for a non-conforming medical office use and office building, located in the Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) zones. The 3,921 square foot office building is located at 115 Pelly Avenue North. The subject site was re-zoned in 1993 from Public Use (P-1) to R-8 and R-10 impacting the conformity of the office development. The rebuild approval permit would allow the nonconforming structure and use to be remodeled, reestablished, or rebuilt even thought the cost to remodel or reestablish the use or structure would exceed 50% of the most recently assessed or appraised values. PROJECT LOCATION: 115 Pelly Avenue N PUBLIC APPROVALS: Rebuild Approval Permit for a Non-conforming Use and Building APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Clifford Moon, MVH -Renton Properties, LLC; 16261 361 ' Avenue NE; Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be scheduled before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers on a date to be determined. Hearings begin at 9:00 a.m. on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall. All parties will be notified when the public hearing date has been set. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on April 15, 2010. This matter will also be scheduled for a public hearing on a date to be determined at a later time. All parties will be notified when the public hearing date has been set. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7314. Anyone who If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No.: North Renton Professional Building/ LUAl0-003 NAME: ------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________________________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: January 14, 2010 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: April 1, 2010 . il.-' 10..,. .. ~-,..J Denis Law c· f ---~M:,y:o, ________ • r Ity O l April 1, 2010 Clifford Moon MVH -Renton Properties, LLC 16261361h Avenue NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 .J._~JJ.Wl! Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application North Renton Professional Building, LUAl0-003 Dear Mr. Moon: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. Although, during our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Copies of the existing recorded covenants on the subject property that pertain to a Rebuild Permit (3 copies). City records indicate that the recording numbers for these documents may be the following: 9705280747 and 9609230084. • A drah of the "new" restrictive covenants that would be required to be recorded on the property if the Hearing Examiner approves your requests for a Rebuild Permit (5 copies). • A nonconformity relationship and compatibility narrative, which can include drawings, photographs, or other visual aids that show the relationship of the existing structure or building to its surroundings. Include studies or reports that support the applicant's contention that the existing nonconforming use or structure is compatible with the surrounding area and its uses (3 copies). Based our conversation on March, 31, 2010 you will be out of the Country until a latter date. Because of y0ur absence from this Country, the few additional items that are needed to complete review of the subject project cannot be completed and submitted to the City in a time frame that would permit the project to be scheduled for a Hearing Date. Therefore, staff has put the project on hold pending your return to the Country and submittal of the aforementioned items. Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. • rentonwa.gov Clifford Moon Page 2 of2 April 1, 2010 Please be aware that the applicant or representative(s} of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing and a copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the hearing. Please contact me at (425} 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting} Senior Planner cc: Aaron Vederoff -MVH -Renton Properties, LLC / Owner(s) PROJECT NARRATIVE The name of the project is the North Renton Professional Building. The building footprint is 3,921 square feet on a 15,000 square foot lot. It has an address of 115 Pelly Avenue North. There are no land use permits required for this project. The zoning designation for the site is R10. The adjacent property to the south is also designated R10 and the adjacent property to the north is designated RB. The property was developed as a "clinic" in 1957 and is currently medical/dental offices. Renton Family Practice Clinic is adjacent to subject property on its south. Renton Vision Clinic is east of subject property at 112 Pelly Avenue North. An onsite parking lot and landscaping protect the adjacent property on the north. An alleyway separates properties on the west. There are no special site features on the subject property. The proposed use of the property is medical/dental offices. Access to the North Renton Professional Building and its site is from Pelly Avenue North on the east or an alleyway on the west. Subject property has 19 on-site parking stalls and 5 street parking stalls. The site has mature landscaping along the west and north property lines, and adjacent to the building. The property type is commercial. Current zoning prohibits replacement of the North Renton Professional Building, has restricted its sale as a commercial entity, and may encumber its refinancing. Denis Law Mayor Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch,Administrator February 4, 2010 Clifford E. Moon MVH :-Renton Properties, LLC 16261-36th Ave, NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 Subject: North Renton Professional Bldg LUAl0-003 Dear Mr. Moon: After reviewing the materials submitted for the North Renton Professional Bldg, staff has determined that the application is incomplete according to the City's submittal requirements as outlined in RMC 4-8- 120C. The following information is required to accept the application as complete: • Please submit 5 copies of a Project Narrative, which includes detailed information about the · requested approval and the development site including but not limited to the following: o Project name, size and location of site · o Land use permits required for proposed project o Zoning designation of the site and a.djacent properties o Current use of the site (including types of businesses established at site) and any existing improvements o · Special site features (i.e. wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes) · o Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed development o Access o Parking lot analysis o Landscaping analysis Once the above requested information is received, review of your application will begin. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner cc: MUH -Renton Properties, LLC /Owner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. • rentonw_a.gov . " City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATIOrf1~,cc~·ol!f~© PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: (\l\'Jh: -\C,()(,tll\.) \\:t'\'€V-U.e5 ur_ ' ADDRESS: ('/6 ~i'F 1...:. \.1:-"I} (;''\:'e•ff= ,'1 I\ -31-if 4\it 1vr CITY: C:7 PnfL(:-v~'l-\ ZIP: Ci,'is I 15 ' l PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Norc-/1,i fentm, ~O"lil., Bli:M P-'-· {) ,I - r 0 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE:v { I ' \ \ S l''l:LL \ N,/C? t-) l2t1v~ i LA'\\ Gj'SC)'3S TELEPHONE NUMBER: 2,w. 5 2_'5-G')\2-KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): APPLICANT (if other than owner) t'J Z:2.. 5C:1' ·-CV\\ S NAME: CL,r~J t? . i '\,l,Cf \,._; EXISTING LAND USE}1' _ VvlW1cru. .. Cl."vSL O~{; COMPANY (if applic~ble): \\:.1\ V rt ~ \i-OL''tt l] v J{;\/tV-Tll'5 • ll C.... PROPOSED LAND USOS): \'"' I,);'.) 1 l: l\l-/ tc u'tt ornc.c- . ADDRESS: . . t:!l A-t, l\.,f \-l·LL.~\-2y ·I; EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: CITY: ~f .:\(WiTf {.;W~ ZIP: ?01':J s PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): TELEPHONE NUMBER 2cXc, ':f\ i-L\"J4-:J EXISTING ZONING: CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NAME: Cl,\ m,~.{) [:, \\At(µ SITE AREA (in square feet): I '5',0'C1/ COMPANY (if applicable): l"'tL \,t-Q. SQUARE FOOTAGE,OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: L;/µ. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DitSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): .I , j-'\, TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER o0 PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): L) f\ 2n . Zf'\ \~q54._0 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): ~, i'.\ Q:web/pw/devscrv/forms/planning/masterapp.doc 08/01/05 • • PRC CT INFORMATION (contim ) r--~~----~----------~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWElLING UNITS (if applicable): I,.) J\- PROJECT VALUE: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PR010SED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): f.-,' tt- IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): (: l 4- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSnD NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): L' A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 3/iL\ NET FLOOR AREA OF NON.-rESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): l, ~ NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): I,)/ A SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): l:l AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE l:l AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO l:J FLOOD HAZARD AREA l:l GEOLOGIC HAZARD l:l HABITAT CONSERVATION l:J SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES l:J WETLANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE N\J QUA~TER OF SECTION _CT_, TOWNSHIP z:?J, RANGE..5__, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. 3 . . 2. 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) t:' · ~ , declare that I am (please check one) ~e current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing swers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best,of my knowledge and belief. (Signature of Owner/Representative) Q:web/pw/dcvserv/forms/planning/masterapp.doc I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence thaCh£Fo,·c\ <Y)oc,n signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary (Print) t,J I (.0\ e cYci::,e,5S My appointment expires: I-S: -a 01 I 2 08/01/05 ..... LEGAL DESCRIPTION RENTON FARM PLAT #3 SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23, RANGE 5, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Master Application Form, M.llniltil~fi12.~~#~t1l! 1~•m11nYmliiil1i?•·•·•··· ·•···················· · · Neighborhood Detail Map , This requirement may be waived by: 1 . Property Services Section 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Planning Section PROJECT NAME ! IS PUlv1-N . u DATE 4/17 /Q{p I I Q:\WEB\PI.MDEVSERV\Forms\Planning\waiverofsubmittalreqs_9-06.xls 09/06 VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Planning Section PROJECT NAME: _rc.c...15"---'P~· ~u~r.,...~F-J.I--+B~~~· =~~- DATE: _k'-+(--'---1 7-'-+-/ O"'-?f=--+------ f.l),t'Cil:~ 1 z_z-5 6C04--\ S- Q:\WEB\P'N\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\waiverofsubmittalreqs_9-06.xls 09/06 JUSTIFICATION FOR NONCONFORMING USE Community Need: Subject property was developed as a "clinic" in 1957 with an address of 115 Pelly Avenue North. Present use remains medical/dental offices. Renton Family Practice Clinic is adjacent to subject property on its south. Renton Vision Clinic is east of subject property at 112 Pelly Avenue North. Effect on Adjacent Property: Parking lot, landscaping and walkways protect adjacent property on the north. An alleyway separates properties on the west. A medical clinic is adjacent to the subject property on the south. Subject property has 19 on-site parking stalls and 5 street parking stalls. Historical Significance: There is no historical significance to subject property. Economic Significance: The present use of the subject property provides business/occupation tax revenues to the City of Renton. More than 8,000 patients per year make use of services provided by the subject property. Timeliness with Existing Plans and Programs: Retention of the existing nonconforming use of the subject property would not impede nor delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan. ) ) . • ) . • ! ' STATE of 'lVASHING'ION SECRETARY of STATE I, SAM REED, Secretary of State of the State of Washington and custodian of its seal, hereby issue this CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION to MVH -RENTON PROPERTIES, LLC A Washington Limited Liability Company. An application was filed for record in this office on the date indicated below UBI Number: 602 244 313 Date: October 25, 2002 Given under my hand and the Seal of the State of Washington at Olympia, the State Capital ho .1 ;)lj L/ 30 CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION OF MVH -RENTON PROPERTIES, LLC Fll.EO A-c SECRET!\RY OF ST 1 ... OCT 2 5 2002 STATE OF WASHINGTON THE UNDERSIGNED hereby executes the following Certificate of Formation for the purpose of forming a limited liability company under the Washington Limited Liability Company Act (Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 25.15 et. seq., as amended). ARTICLE I Name The name of this limited liability company is MVH -RENTON PROPERTIES, LLC (the "LLC"). ARTICLE II Principal Place of Business The street address of this LLC's principal place of business is 19624 -76th Avenue West, Suite B, Lynnwood, WA 98036-5843. ARTICLE III Duration This LLC shall have a perpetual existence. ARTICLE IV Purposes and Limitations The purposes for which this LLC is organized are: A. To own and develop (purchase, sale, manage, lease) real property. B. To engage in any business, trade or activity which may lawfully be conducted by a LLC under the Washington Limited Liability Company Act, RCW 25.15 et. seq. as amended. C. To engage in all such activities as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the purposes of this LLC, or any of them, and to exercise any and all powers authorized or permitted to be done by a LLC under any laws that may be now or hereafter applicable or available to this LLC. Page l of 5 The foregoing clauses of this Article IV shall each be construed as purposes and powers, and matters expressed in each clause shall be in no way limited or restricted by reference to or inference from the terms of any other clauses; but shall be regarded as independent purposes and powers; and nothing contained in these clauses shall be deemed in any way to limit or exclude any power, right or privilege given to this LLC by law or otherwise. ARTICLE V Registered Office and Agent The first registered agent of this LLC in the State of Washington is The Coe Law Group, PLLC. The street address of the first Registered Agent and the first Registered Office of this LLC in the State of Washington is The Coe Law Group, PLLC, 720 Olive Way, Suite 1300, Seattle, Washington 98101-1855. ARTICLE VI Initial Members This LLC shall have at least one (I) Member, the actual number to be prescribed and fixed in the manner specified in the Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement ("Operating Agreement") of this LLC. The number of members may be increased or decreased from time to time but in no event shall be less than one (1) Member. The term of the initial Members shall be until the first annual meeting of the Members or until their successors are elected and qualified, unless removed in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement. The initial member(s) of this LLC is/are: Clifford E. Moon Aaron Vederoff Stuart G. Hunting ARTICLE VII Initial Managers This LLC shall have at least one (I) Manager, the actual number to be prescribed and fixed in the manner specified in the Operating Agreement of this LLC. The number of managers may be increased or decreased from time to time but in no event shall be less than one (I) Manager. The term of the initial Managers shall be until the first annual meeting of the Members or until their successors are elected and qualified, unless removed in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement. The names of the initial board of managers is/are as follows: Aaron Vederoff The initial manager(s) shall serve until the election and qualification of the successors in the manner Page 2 of S specified in the Operating Agreement. ARTICLE VIII Manager Liability A manager of the LLC shall not be personally liable to the LLC or its members for monetary damages for conduct as a manager, except for liability of the manager for: (i) acts or omissions that involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of the law by the manager, (ii) conduct which violates RCW 25.15.235, pertaining to unpermitted distributions to members or loans to managers, or (iii) any transaction from which the manager will personally receive a benefit in money, property or services to which the manager is not legally entitled. If the Washington Limited Liability Company Act is amended to authorize limited liability company action further eliminating or limiting the personal liability of managers, then the liability of a manager of the LLC shall be eliminated or limited to the fullest extent permitted by the Washington Limited Liability Company Act, as so amended. Any repeal or modification of the foregoing paragraph by the members of the LLC shall not adversely affect any right or protection of a manager of the LLC existing at the time of such repeal or modification. ARTICLE IX Indemnification Pursuant to RCW 25.15, and to the fullest extent permitted by its Operating Agreement, the Washington Limited Liability Company Act as amended, and Washington law, now or hereafter in force, this LLC is authorized to indemnify any of its Managers. The LLC shall indemnify each and every individual made a party to a proceeding because the individual is or was a Manager of the LLC ( or of another company or LLC on whose board he/she serves at the request of the company or corporation) against any and all liability incurred in connection with such proceeding, including without limitation any .proceeding arising out of the conduct of a Manager with respect to an employee benefit plan and further including without limitation any proceeding by or in the right of the LLC. However, such indemnity shall not apply on account of: (i) Acts or omissions of a Manager finally adjudged to be intentional misconduct, or a knowing violation of the law; or (ii) Conduct of a Manager finally adjudged to be in violation of RCW 25.15.235, pertaining to unpermitted distributions to members or loans to managers; or (iii) Any transaction with respect to which it was finally adjudged that such Manager will personally receive a benefit in money, property, or services to which the Manager was not legally entitled. Page 3 of 5 Any repeal or modification of the foregoing paragraph by the members of the LLC shall not adversely affect any right or protection of a manager of the LLC existing at the time of such repeal or modification. ARTICLEX Operating Agreement The Members shall have the power to adopt, amend, or repeal a Operating Agreement for this LLC, subject to the powers set forth in said Operating Agreement. ARTICLE XI Amendment The Members of this LLC reserves the right to alter, amend, or repeal any provisions contained in this Certificate of Formation in any manner now or hereafter permitted by statute. All rights of members of the LLC and all powers of managers of the LLC are granted subject to this reservation. ARTICLE XII Declaration I/We the undersigned, certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that the foregoing is true and correct. DA TED this ~day of October, 2002, at 5 ,., ±\do en est, Suite B Lynnwood, WA 98036-5843 Page 4 of 5 CONSENT TO APPOINTMENT AS REGISTERED AGENT John A. Coe, as Manager of The Coe Law Group, PLLC, a Washington professional limited liability company, hereby consents to serve as Registered Agent in the State of Washington for MVH - RENTON PROPERTIES, LLC. The Registered Agent understands that as agent for said LLC it will be responsible to receive service of process in the name of said LLC; to forward all mail to said LLC; and to immediately notify the office of the Secretary of State in the event of its resignation or of any changes in the registered office address of The Coe Law Group, PLLC. DA TED this ;;l.~ day of October, 2002. A. COE, Manager e Law Group, PLLC 720 Olive Way, Suite 1300 Seattle, WA 98101-1855 Page 5 of 5 Printed: 01-14-2010 Payment Made: CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA10-003 Receipt Number: Total Payment: 01/14/2010 02:58 PM 500.00 Payee: VISA Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 500.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Credit C VISA Visa Account Balances Trans Account Code Description 3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees 5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat 5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) 5954 650.237.00.00.0000 DO NOT USE -USE 3954 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 500.00 Balance Due .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 City Of o P1 . rienton anning o,·v .. · 1s1on JAN J -i IUiU R1000261