Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA86-067 !r • CITY Of RENTONr2 Warren F. Viupel 15 6 1°' Vereie Valve].P.O. Box 756 Pt�t, 1G�6 JUL 2 2 1986 'Renton, WA 98057 �i�� ... _ _ `(206) 285-3684 . L EM NO. X. de To: i--lding and oning Department o -�� Re: Ann Lotto site plan and rezoning request; North 2nd and Meadow Avenue North There are some statements we'd like to relate, as well as some specific questions we would like to ask. 1 . The entrance .to and address of the building should be oriented toward Meadow, toward the present. business developments. Putting the entrance and address on the north side of the property could and no doubt would cause •undue infringement on the residential side of the project. In this case, the company's address and main bus- iness entry would be directly opposite designated residential use; .this would be half a city 6 o'( k (from Meadow to the alley on the east) facing residential uses, our own front door and view from our living room, and our only recreation and loung- ing area outside in our back (side) yard toward our own alley. There would be,_n traffic put into the residential area in spite of the parking lot to the south. The residential area is already struggling with business and industrial traffic plus parking on the street caused by other than residential uses; more traffic and more parking problems are not welcome. We are aware that deliveries automatically come to the entry/address side of a building where autos/vans/trucks are often left running while elivering or finding out where to deliver, �noften double-parked. � �a.� .Z. '`''..rz''c.�'es'' ��r�r� .` e 2. As:the Richter letter pointed out, tere should be a bgtm, shrubbery or some kind of definitive barrier on the north side of the property delineating businessrom^res- idential . This area is trying to survive, with a newish duplex nearby and with young coupTes with children coming to the central areas. Within half a block from the north boundary line, there are a minimum of 13 children presently living here. Granted, some are not permanent residents but are tenants, but this gives you an idea of the num- ber of children now in the neighborhood. This point also supports item 1 above-- the relocation of the entry toward the business area and lessening traffic on North Second. The plan we have seen shows only an expanse of sod in a goodly portion of the northern border of the site. • 3. The outdoor business sign should not be at the northern edge of the property at North Second and Meadow. This also would be more appropriate near an entry on-Meadow and south of the indicated placement. Any other outside signs of any sort? 4. The service entrance is shown at the alley. the service entry should be from thg parking area to the south. The alley will not accommodate large trucks to go all the way through, and we would end up with more maneuvering of large and small vehicles on the street, i .e. , North Second, next to property zoned R-2 with multiple family residency and opposite home-owned, single-family residence. You will recall that the alley from North Second does not go straight through when traveling south but has a sharp dog-leg turn to the left out onto Factory, a change in configuration the city unfortunately allowed some years past. In addition to the alley problem, there would be noise and fumes and vibration associated with such service entrance--again which should be oriented south and west from the location shown. 5. What about arbage collection? I see no mention made of this problem. Again, this should note located at tF alley's service entrance (where presently shown). Page 2 That would be too close to the residential area. No doubt a dumpster would be used , and presently picking up of the dumpster at the Texaco station on the south is on Friday mornings at 4:00 a.m. , and can be heard in our house and beyond to the north. There should not be an additional noisy nuisance so close by. As you probably know , downtown business pickups are made in these very early morning hours , not at the same time residential pickup is made--and in fact, on an entirely different day, which means we who live in the area here have two garbage truck noises each week, with backup beepers , engine noises and air-brake releasing, jarring sounds. We should not be subjected to additional noises even to accommodate an apparently good- looking business development. We have to remember that the residences were here first though. 6. What happened to the roofline, by the way? It seems that the company, in its good effort to be compatible with residential looks, had originally planned to have a composition or similar roof, instead of the flat roof we see on the drawing. Has that been abondoned, or did I hear it wrong on the grapevine? 7. The community, I am sure, would hope to see some limitation on night and Sunday activity such as working hours weekdays from 8 to 8 and little or no activity on weekends. We as homeowners directly across the narrow street from the project hope to spend our retirement years here with some degree of quietude. 8. Outside safety lighting at night would bewelcome to us neighbors on the north side of the site, but would be reasonably sure the company owners and the city would not permit unreasonable glare. 9. Under answers to 6a of the environmental checklist and 7b(1 ) , there is an indi- cation that energy equipment and other noise-producing equipment will be located indoors. We would trust this includes all types of equipment. We trust, too, that. no outside air-conditioning condenser and fan will be directed toward the residential area but instead toward the commercial and noisier business to the south. 10. Will the business owners have their own trucks and company cars? If trucks , we would hope these would be shielded or parked where they would not infringe on either residential use or businesses. We have that problem in the community already, but there should not be added nuisances. 11 . We are also concerned with construction time. How long will the construction take from ground-breaking time to comp etion? What about "staging areas" during con- struction? This part of town has had too many problems with construction equipment on empty lots that the thought of yet another appals us . The last time we had con- struction equipment in the area, the contractors abided by the actual beginning time EXCEPT that they sent a man down very early in the mornings to "warm up" old equip- ment, and sometimes we had noisy equipment running at 6:00 a.m. or so. And what about night parking of equipment if a staging area is not used? And for how long a period will the neighborhood be subjected to construction noise, parking, dust and fumes? Will dusty areas be kept down with watering or other means? 12. What about ri ting-chemical odors? ` ii� 13. One very important point: Would the owner/developer be willing -Co retain the present "No commercial parking 9 pm to 6 am"? The residents fought hard to get these erected in the first place so as to discourage overnight parking by out- of-town truck drivers and others who came down here off the freeway to stay.all or part of the night, often with refrigerated units running, and sometimes their diesel engines, for long periods. Surely a decent business would not want to return to that. Lastly, is the rezone void if this site plan is abandoned at any point? Warren F. Vaupel Versie Vaupel Dennis Ngifert - & Associates (:) A' }. ARCHITECTS/PLANNERSI I v & C0.,1 , , ) 519 SO.WASHINGTON AVENUE KENT,WASHINGTON 98092 PHONE(206)854-5010 r .z,?. Q S'0 ECv _M,s•..JJ t3fn,., + ._ = � -�, F,x. : :o.. z. .ie 71. .o.Z. r t .�.s—i w - — I _ I , _._ CI.NO.i1l_nd STPEEt PRINT CRAFT , __----_—_ _—_--_— II ra^Fi�`/PT'•C No2:.�N tL_./,aTior -} — — OFFICE BUILDING• VsL!bl _ -ea ,.____--- -----'—_--Bet —1 ,Ca:S11NC CYWtl ONE R I S�g g 62 ST i O N s A s r� . , E I,c a. (p ) Rom_ �oJ E Si.5/w { Cl1ofCE o F & .✓TRY ....„ •yy�lJJ105 i J I-• /Irk 74 y , k'''''' - -eltli ,* (Ii;1° —1 ; co../ .e....94c2NS.. .......1 I Cli 1 .e.-P, ' I ,i.E.M,-...,CA n. ill 4111111.410116. A.,', J :J= S D.aosco riwT s+oaz lls!SC FT. iJY-�nG W CC CAS', 5^L 31o'cc i ; . . ( I 0 tir�r 15.. , [ N t.-' a.- of,5,. �xa..ec .r..E*.•�. 8 l I ts rt I S V r k: r� Dt..I.D.aTn I I ? Ida I I; • 1. awn. n.l nano c/o runt[sots .�' I 34 I I I L s�4 F, 1. t.C.1TKTe ,wtb::1:1:. °Cl t:.ei eUt".". -. V J _ 9 .n.n.. 13.1 Yis.-snela •ene, I ; I . II ' $ 4140,114111011f � 11f 1.5.ceE el / I. CD.TeCT Dennis entf.rt.ter«let..let conoctxen.. I I rs-...L: yotwa I 4 8' ,rt,.I•su.l..n I 7-- �w v.•a.la i C[.uel tM.1RT D[aC.lntD.: l ' (1'.^u'NP) -' Ir 4. fb tnlM cod` lf[S sort r(a uf.'l,. I z CI S. w e 1[I ,sod.11I tdeltlentI tlt.tatl..lI on neii I ..M� 51J 1 Zp � i•• tied. /Lennonrent nep lSeen fOnt4 iv.so ass t0 • iill 1 I( S IV ..1. TypoOccno of «!ten,!. .1 on. / _ ti \�j ,. .el..le:non:`l 1.-I senr Y> I Y. gaol non TO UV.OW II. Yln Ion,Ill 'feel soil rn i �• .4 -� — �4 4 l s 10. en11elM eens,et edlonet Lon( N. el •-1 ; sot wiaet w ..nnn , VIGh1TY_MA? el Inn [-1 el [teexs.-]1.-1 wet laYt u • 2vXo G:�'e+-I 6�fora al -1 It-1 a.slay! lateµ I�.wl I••l�.l I, Ills.t..tx 14,00 Ia. ]..M CPePe. 14. .lte 2 ene: l M LWW,11LLY N I nnal Allowable Content 5S\l..11i,.I. not n .t�M el nest cetera.:u,n sls[, n w r s r GI T �.f[.'V U. lld[ee Hte.at .ft.l(orl -'' ltn,....d,lt SITE PLAN _ a ..al i.ter (or laDea.ele, tr�r.„ _�NATioN ED ' 10 :ld.linn 1,re.for coM.c.Dle.one sore It. SCA...E t/le.f-0' .1 .lords• .1..n1rMu All ion. l+l IV"l II dleg n I �:✓[.....nt.x.ten la. ., tttt Iaa«�crte.IdMs al rwnt tttt it ft. �t [ -*C:A Q \ Ill rode H.1 1,tt.,,n. `�'I CZ. 6",: !$!•ld1 Ill el ,en1.00»re. .enl Sp.c1.l intOnns.en. ti 1. ~�� Lt. 11.1M Ml,ttt l+� e • ..y rl �� tiii Ma - al 1 0..00,es l!rt. ,v+ ICI ' £££ I1w`• 1\I glt.IN..l,.ts 1S l!. Itstl..t 1 1 :18[itGt!£/'f'traLir. 01 tenoned(I5 lens 1,. alM.c.ply,16 J U L 2 } 1986 1 [.ael al 10 r a1Mr ., !tali 1.re. t.!rent alMe Ui_ al 041.len..et nenl 539 5.1. I,\r 6..7 M~'4 q Congo.In.lnoln.drlonno,on.) 11111 1.0. Otw.&o 1.0 CI Hens 11.414 I.r. Lend u. alen.tt.w/In..tents a:H ate.r32 _ cowe.a CN i 401 t isi • ow 9•tNG+ DennisNV ifer#—— & Associates ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS 5t9 SO.WASHINGTON AVENUE KENT.WASHINGTON 98032 TN01D1MM21uM€s=e.+r1 s�riNl PH0NE:(206)854-5010 cl -t--- S� j ��n vJT T� '�aM—G k�A. '. F=.0ENCS. (e-2 ZONE [451RFO CL NORTH 2nd STREET PRINT CRAFT HML+TIG__NoF,TH E:LE\J^TIONI I — - - - - - - - - - - - vs1,n1!oB 1 ig,.i. 81ET bum BUILDING rE%ISTNG CURB USE n IXISTING PLANTING S-RIP(SoP) o G PT.LHd&u LIm 4PT 1416N I /— . D5.•.cED .91BN �a, r y/v jyi. "-. - "- u,,-IWp LIT. `.I 0.:'C O.LANDSCAPING SETBACK ' 4/'''H I ,��Iv/�, 4 . JLet I e./rE LANDSCAPING }7/ i.� ,y �lY/"" / .I� Sl1VIGE VACANT'.o =HDE 'C ..LI. 1,�`'P) PLAN NC BERET_ IL,z c p)J lE;J-I DC . ''IID 4 -•!__� .•—� -I ` i 4ICE+ICE 1 8' ,,ar'�I 1 f R- LANI�DCAF E. �...GHEDULE o I .o 11041. 34"rii BpD z I ,,_"c�d'P 1:{I• PROPOSED PRINT SHOP } 3 V v. - 5353 SO.FT. I 1P �-�,T- PWLTIG ivy L°Pt}M I6AL 31-0II O.c, Q I S R • !,i,^ 1 eY.LTIc Iv(6RCLIN0.vJEIG I&.L.v-,14G. l n m.'•AI I � • 4125 A-1Ne. MAPLE IIn1-21GW{.. I r-- T- - ; 1 DRAWING Sores I-oN-4J PLANE 21hI CAL, I _�9"'� I �I Id 1. ONNER: Mel Maine c/o Print Craft ' �' 1 �4 4,16 titr4.16 1 2. ARCHITECT( Dennis Seifert R Associates.Architects ` - u' % pill ' 1092 west James Set.Suite 103 I '111 ` & I I 98032 Phone: MI6)e54-5010 3. CONTACT Dennis Seifert.Associates far corrections. .Ilit 91v49f. id • .GENERAL'PROJECT DESCRIPTION- I h6PIlALT 9^`/IN0 .. - g BC • A I I , (OXIN9 to rdfALlS -� I! 1. Gnvexnfn Codes:19El5 U RUNE BACK wIM L'SCAPE ARCS (� 2eINP) 5. Sew Construction(%) Remodel() Addition() Alteration() APPROVAL 6. Use of Lot: LEAN vlkrt ISOM .,�^"v. M t ExiProMOATYIry Pof C mic STREATEWOERding (B-1 oSTOM S.Er thTO IE1N 30Ngd f M `'EasSout: e-1 a SET SH GR AT WRI[Rr XFILNL I I ..pt.. VICINITY tv1AP AC Wasa:P-1(e 1 svetlayj FINISH E - 13. Site Area:16,400 S.P. TOPSOIL:IMPORT MISSIVE TEXT(. 6TA(bN 31 HOME 14. Elite Coverage: a) Allowable Covexages 651 10,712 aP /ROLL 70P 3/3 OF BURL b) Actual Coverage:32.54 5350 I.P. Mar AM BALL 15. Building Setbacks Required: S BOTTOM x SIDES OF ROLE s.el Coolants al Front Yards 10 Pt.for Landscaping ROLE SITE PLAN CID b) Bide Yards l0 Pt.fox Landscaping and zero rt. COAPACT LATER 0AC/ILL SITE FLAN c) Rear Yards None SCALE. :1/16,V-0. C ` k1l d) Special Seebeck•/easeents:Sono • MIN.CLEARANCE ALL NUM GLEVAM 16. Building setback1 Provided( �^IccT L'S el Pion!Yards 10 rt 1 I`x+JFM1iI IV b) side Yards lG rt.,5 Ft. • Rear Yards 55 Ft. d) Special Setbacks:None 17. Building Heights ▪ Allowable llowable((eights 35 Ft. h) Building"eight)15 rt. atorle•3 1 Revisions le. Paakinll 1 Provide.sited(is No. Odle D.acrpibn b) 16I /o1246 SITS I'LAs•1pRq'{+0/eL_= 19. LandRceping: a) Requited.10 Pt.at street sides b) Provided)10 et.at Street side, SS. Iuo eu.i Building Area:5359 B b) Concrete 1•Idevlla.driveway,etc.):6121 S.P. • e) 5t.1s 11.67E S.F. oLLS110Cay 553.1MD. 21. Mee par Plsor: Occup.2cy Lead a) Cresnd/let.Floor: Area J2 Hrdah9Y.TR ClieT:YRIIITY ati I arl Dennis Neifert & Associates ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS ` 519 SO.WASHINGTON AVENUE KENT,pRIc �=NWIOIi S PHONE:(206)WASHINGTON 98032 54 50 0 \w M. t SY-a'sN 'vl@J ,,TA-4 F�UlCM 't N. �, tYc9lfJEi f1 2 1GNE ,A\ fPFe HE 1p' cNo-TH L6VATIcN CL NORTH OAR STREET PRINT CRAFT e E - - - - - - - - - c'elba 6* elm 6.',.-7 OFFICE BUILDING rE%ISING CURB UNE COSTING FLAMING STRIP COST.SN•' ni OQ tf 0.LANDSCAPING SETBACK lyn W ,, dO --A 3 = at • ear•Cif f LANDSCAPING VhCAu7'o7.PE'FJO6h'GE I ..E J JPNG BERM ,, p2:ONE 0-I:.aJE F�'R I, C1 aTAr 4e.41NE FLAN I W; N/I' -9dfu3' i (u-311.'ENCE • I S/ �i R•d r4NE rc I /o EH:5,NE F=R CZI2PIAEVeRe RAM T 9 E„ FRRPP++(( I 3u PROPOSED PRINT SHOP . Lr^ 5353 S0.Ff. oI � GZ D um. — '°F 10 DRAWING NOTEE `� 1: 1. ODDER: Mel Maine c/o Print Craft t`',A•iJ PPE,I4 5 �d 2. ARCHITECT. Dennis Neifert• ociates.Architects /(�� � ,) 1042 `James 980325t set,so I din\ l� 5 n . _ .,/V Phone. (206Rent)854-501e r I I_ _i V ✓r,✓4'-- nn 3. CONTACT Dennis Keifer!A Associates for corrections. I DPR�=T. } fff _A6.91ALT ywINO t0 1 9S KIN9 le aF/Ll o I ® �CENTRALwPructienI BSNeDAmCodel() Addition( Alteration(I Governing c I u of st: `'`\laN�'4.. I IstING I pp ei Elating:vacant/Residence �re I � l Occupancy Proposed:Printhop J8.. ypepofcGroup: Construction:5“ I ` I I 11. rice lot Seismic Zone: ec&�z(B-1 eve lay) " 11. sore e: x I 30' 't. J^t/V +✓b'4/ ti,{ 12. zoning lone: Ad]acent fiefs. , ��%ram6t."�'�+ ^"'L`•`1s1 fpfilC a) North:R-2 I 1 tt b) ouch:B-1 d) East: a t::R-z IN-1 overlay) VIaINITY fr1Af 13. Site Area:16,480 S.P. 7mu•",ETATbS B•I LONE 14. Site coverage: e) Allowable coverage(651 10,212 8.11. 9) Actual Coveragee.32.51 5350 S.P. 15. Building Setbacks Required( N Sheet Contents b) Sid• Front Yard:10 .for Landscaping SITE PLAN SITE FLAN h) sloe Yam:le Ft.for Eaneecaping one,.w rt. CIDj Special Rear rd:None Setbeeke/Easements:tl ECAIE:,/,5•_r_D• ELEVATION 16. Building Setbacks Provided: ono G a) P Yard(10t. rl‘oJ._cr NHS b) Sid`Yard(19 Pt.,5 Pc. c) :55 P a) Rear None 17. Building!might, a) Allowable Height:35 Ft. S Revlekm0 1B. [king: g Neigh[(15 Pt tones(1 Ne. Dote Desublbn e) Required(15 b) Provided:16 19. Landscaping: a) Required:10 Pt.at street sides b) Provided:10 Ft.at sheet aide. 20. 170:tooa 8 a) Concrete(sideA s 5dri 8 e)• Concrete,474 S.F.. driveways.etc.):6124 S.F. e) Tocal:l11.1]4 S.P. .6,> Sheet No. 21. )e e pet Area NOpeecy Lead Mean By TR e) D nG/GNNd/1st.Pleor( 5350 32 Checked BY 7N I'r'9 NOTICE OF ENVIRONME,TAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COM- AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION MITTEE RENTON,WASHINGTON The e P u u,'Py ^Fa,T; e _, being first duly sworn on oath states that (ERC) has'ron issued to declarationCn of Review mmon- he/she is the Chief Clerk of the significance for the following projects: JOHN S. SIMPSON (ECF-037-86) Application to rezone approximately 0.59 acre from G-1 to R-1 (file R-037-86); VALLEY NEWSPAPERS application for short plat approval to subdivide said property into three(3)single Daily News Journal, Daily Record Chronicle, Daily Globe News family lots(file SHPL-038-86);application (or waiver of required off-site street im- provements (file W-039-86); anc applica- Daily newspapers published six (6) times a week.That said newspapers lion for variance to maintain the current 30' are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six wide roadway along Morris Avenue South 6- months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published instead pf requiredtyoce6d' width (fil3 V-15th 86). Property located 513 South 15th in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King Street. County, Washington. Valley Newspapers have been approved as legal MELVIN MAIN C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. (ECF-060-86) newspapers by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 King County. (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shoo of one story approximately 5,350 squire foot The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Daily News building on a site having 16,48t7 square feet (file SA-068-86). Located at the Journal , Daily Record Chronicle_, Daily Globe News , (and southeast corner of North Second Street orth. not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its and thedow rmAva ionue egard Further information regarding this action subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice a is available in the Building and Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, No t i ca of 1'nv i rnnrr.Fn t.n 1 DP fie rm i rAa t i on was published Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Renton on July 28, 19 6 i 743 Hearing Examiner by August 11, 1986. Published in the Daily Record Chronicle July 28, 1986. R1743. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $ Subscribed and sworn to before me this ?Oth day of Juts 19 `v5 . Notary ublic for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, . King County, Washington. CI' 6r Y "''' ' VN#87 Revised 10/84 �- �'��.! I i., fin- S E P 1 1 1986 • November 24, 1986 Renton City Council Minutes Page 138 CAG: 060-86, NE 10th Public Works/Engineering Department submitted CAG-060-86, NE 10th Street Improvements, Street Improvements, Kirkland Avenue NE to Monroe Avenue NE; and Kirkland Avenue NE to requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the Monroe Avenue NE, amount of $19,753.54, commencement of 30-day lien period, and release of Final Approval retained amount of $1,039.66 to contractor, Gary Merlino Construction Company, if all required releases are received. Council concur. Lease: Control Tower Public Works Department requested renegotiation of Federal Aviation Building, Federal Administration lease rate for Control Tower Building at Renton Municipal Aviation Administration Airport. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Parks/Housing & Community Development Department requested approval of Parks: Trails Master EDAW, Inc. as the primary consultant for the City-Wide Master Trails Plan. Plan, Consultant Parks: Cedar River Parks/Housing & Community Development Department requested approval of Natural Zone Master Jongejan Gerrard McNeal as primary consultants for the Cedar River Natural Plan, Consultant Zone Master Plan. Parks: Heather Downs Parks Department requested approval of MacLeod Record as consultant for Park Master Plan, the Heather Downs Park Master Plan. Consultant Parks: Housing & Added: Parks /Housing & Community Development Department requested Community Development appropriation of unallocated 1986 Community Development Block Grant Block Grant Funds, 1986 Funds in the amount of $19,863 into Housing Repair Program, Cedar River Trail Design, and Highlands Neighborhood Center, Phase III. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL REFER THE FOUR ITEMS LISTED ABOVE TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. Streets: Handicapped MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY REED, CORRESPONDENCE Parking FROM CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING HANDICAPPED PARKING BE REFERRED TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Tax Levy Ordinance, MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY TRIMM, 1987 TAX LEVY 1987 ORDINANCE BE REFERRED TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. (See Ordinances and Resolutions.) Fire Department: EMT- Added letter was read from Richard O. Cummins, Medical Director of King Defibrillation Program County EMT-Defibrillation Program, praising recent outstanding performance of Renton Fire Department personnel in responding to two separate cardiac arrest calls. Individuals involved were EMTs Monoghan, Schulten, Hunt, Dykes, and Rude, and paramedics Dougherty and Keller. OLD BUSINESS .Planning and Development Committee Chairman Keolker announced that the Appeal: Maine, Print Maine/Print Craft Sales Corporation appeal, remanded to the Hearing Craft Sales Corporation, Examiner by Council on 11/3/86, has been dismissed by the Examiner since R-067-86, SA-068-86 the applicant has withdrawn from the original proposal. WSDOT: I-405 S Curve Upon Council inquiry, Administrative Assistant Parness reported that the last Project date for submission of comments for the final Environmental Impact Statement for the WSDOT I-405 S Curve Project is 11/24/86. Completion of the final EIS document is estimated to take one year. Court Case: Playtime Upon Council inquiry, Mayor Shinpoch indicated that the Forbes Playtime case against the City has ended with Mr. Forbes disincorporating in the State of Washington. Since the amount of admissions tax owed the City for the theater operation does not offset the cost of attorney's fees to collect them, the City has decided not to pursue the matter. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS • Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee member Trimm presented a report Committee recommending the following ordinance for second and final reading: J� , b'' of R4,� L) a� x THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR 0 LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER co- FRED J. KAUFMAN. .235-2593 0,9A1 SEPSE°�P November 24, 1986 Jon Potter R.W. Thorpe and Associates, Inc. 1300 Alaska Bldg. 2nd and Cherry Seattle, Wa. 98104 RE: Melvin Maine/Print Craft Sales Corporation - Rezone and Site Plan approval. File Nos. R-067-86 & SA-068-86 Dear Mr. Potter: I have reviewed your request in conjunction with the Council's action and find that no alternative exists but to dismiss the application. While the City Council remanded the matter back to this office, it was to consider, with some slight modifications, a site plan staff had already spent time reviewing and analyzing - a site plan for the Print Craft operation. That is no longer the case. The conditions proposed were proposed by Mr. Maine, the potential buyer, and were specific to his endeavor. Mr. Maine, the original applicant, is no longer a party. Therefore, we not only have different parties but a strong possibility for a different application. The permit fee does not entitle one to an analysis of a different proposal. Under the circumstances, therefore, for the sake of clarity and to provide staff with not only the opportunity for a fresh review but also to allow the permit process to be appropriately renewed, this office will dismiss the application. Please feel free to contact this office if further assistance or information is required. Sincerely, 16-4191j—H-- FRED J. KA FMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK:dk cc: ,Mayor Shinpoch V City Clerk Building & Zoning Department City Attorney Members of City Council ruik R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Planning • Landscape • Environmental • Economics Principals: Jon Potter November 19, 1986 Robert W. Thorpe, AICP Associates: Joanne Polayes-Wien Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue S. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Melvin Maine/Print Craft Sales Corporation - Rezone and Site Plan Approval. File #R-067-86 Dear Mr. Examiner: We have just been informed that Melvin Maine will be unable to follow through with the purchase of the site proposed to be rezoned. We anticipate another buyer may be interested in proceeding with this rezone and site plan approval request. Since the Planning and Development Committee and Council indicated that the rezone request should be con- sidered concurrently with site plan approval, we request a continuance of the rezone and site plan approval hearing. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, 4.-:(:Z, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. NOV 0) • C4/7.}, 2; 1986 NFgRi®F��fid. Jon Potter, Principal 44 RO/� cc: Ann Lotto Joan Bakko Dean Parkinson & Associates Seattle: 1 300 Alaska Bldg. • 2nd & Cherry • Seattle, WA 98104 • [206] 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503 • 1110 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, AK 99503 • [907] 276-6846 OF I . 0 THE CITY OF RENTON t$ '�*"� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 ' BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • MAXINE E.MOTOR, OVA `o' CITY CLERK • (206).235-2501 0 1 T ,0 SEP.104w November 4,;1986 Mr. Jon Potter R. W. Thorpe;& Associates, Inc. 1300 Alaska Building • Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Melvin Maine/Print Craft Sales Corporation Appeal, File No. R-067-86 Dear Mr. Potter: At its regular.meeting of November 3, 1986, the Renton City Council adopted the Planning and Development Committee report on this matter which recommended that the referenced application be remanded to the Hearing Examiner with the following indications: 1) the site plan be considered with the rezone; 2) further testimony be allowed on either the site plan or rezone; and 3) necessary conditions or covenants to run with the land be recommended to be imposed on the site plan to achieve compatibility between the existing residences on the north side of N. 2nd Street and the proposed site. The Committee concluded that the Council might look favorably on a B-1 rezone, with conditions on the site plan approval, if the site was compatible with the,residential use across the street. Please feel free to contact either this office or the Building and Zoning Department for further information regarding this matter. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON •(,i 6 A,&12441 . Marilyn J. a sen Deputy City Clerk • cc: Mayor Council President Building & Zoning Department Hearing Examiner • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTTE REPORT TO: Renton City Council November 3, 1986 FROM: Planning and Development Committee RE: Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation R-067-86 The Planning and Development Committee met on October 29 , 1986 to consider the appeal of Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation from the recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated September 30, 1986 . Maine seeks a rezone from R-2 to. B-1 for the property located at the southeast corner of Meadow Avenue North and North Second. Maine seeks to conduct a printing-broker business at that location. The Committee ' s review of the record revealed that the. Hearing Examiner bifurcated the hearing of the Site Plan approval and the rezone. Believing that that action may have affected the Hearing Examiner' s decision on the rezone, and believing that the proposed construction by Maine, with proper covenants, might be to the public' s benefit . The Committee is Remanding this matter back to the Hearing Examiner with the following indications: 1. Consider the Site Plan with the rezone; 2 . Allow further testimony to be given on either the Site Plan or rezone; 3. Recommend necessary conditions or covenants to run with the land to be imposed on the Site Plan to achieve compatibility between the existing residences on the north side of North Second and the proposed site. The Committee concluded that the Council might look favorably on a B-1 rezone, with conditions on the Site Plan approval, if the site was compatible with the residential use across the street. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council remand this matter back to the Land Use Hearing Examiner for further hearing and with the indications outlined above. J n Ct . / -�_ November 3. 1986 Renton City Council Minutes Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published H&CD Block Grant in accordance with State and local laws, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public Program, 1987 hearing to consider the 1987 Housing and Community Development Block Grant Program. Dixon Long, Block Grant Citizens' Advisory Committee, presented.the Committee's 1987 Block Grant recommendations: Proiect Total Funds Housing Assistance Program $ 84,649 North Highlands Neighborhood Center Phase II, Interior 97,400 North Highlands Walkways - Phase 1B 26,000 Senior Services Program - Health Care ($13,796) Transportation ($5,000) 18,796 RAMSC Support Programs - Clothing Bank ($3,120) Valley Clinic ($3,000) 6,120 Planning and Administration 31,959 Renton/Kent Rental Rehabilitation 136,333 RAMSC - Property Acquisition (Triangle Building) 57.303 Total Block Grant/Population Funds Requested $458,560.* *Includes $37,800 City General Fund; $82,630 private monies/match funds Mr. Dixon reviewed the individual program goals for 1987 which will effectively address the needs of the citizens of Renton and remain consistent with the City's 1987 program policies adopted by Council in July. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY TRIMM, THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report Committee recommending Council concur with the Citizens' Advisory Committee's 1987 Housing and recommendations and support adoption of the 1987 program proposal. Community Development MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR Block Grant Program IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilman Stredicke commended efforts of the Citizens Advisory Committee. John Morris, City Block Grant Coordinator, introduced Advisory Committee members Vesta Bolstad, Katie Gilligan, Mary Jo Rouse, Tony Ladner, Rolf Dragseth, Gary Popovich, and Dixon Long. RECESS MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Time: 9:15 p.m. Council reconvened at 9:28 p.m.; roll was called; all members were present. AUDIENCE COMMENT Judith Ivanovich, 4839 South 170th, Seattle, owner of an apartment building Renton Loop at Hardie and Victoria Streets, questioned possible use of alternative methods such as State Police cooperation to control cruisers on the "Loop". Ms. Ivanovich noted traffic congestion and noise level causes major problems for the apartment tenants, as well as for the entire city. Mayor Shinpoch agreed to relay complaints to Police Chief Alan Wallis. Renton Loop Anita Lazor, 32 SW Victoria Street, Renton, stated her complaint regarding traffic congestion and noise levels at very late hours, exhaust fumes, • restriction of movement from her home, and safety hazards of reckless driving - all caused by loop cruisers. Mayor Shinpoch responded that a solution to this problem would be gladly received; methods tried have not ; been successful. The cruising situation appears to travel from city to city ,' and, due to use of barricades, from neighborhood to neighborhood within Renton. Mayor Shinpoch indicated studies show the average age of loop cruisers is 19 and only one-third reside within the Renton area. Appeal: Melvin Jon Potter, 1300 Alaska Building, Seattle, requested the Planning and Maine/Print Sales Development Committee report be brought before Council. MOVED BY Corporation KEOLKER, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE REGULAR # ORDER OF BUSINESS AND ADVANCE TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT UNDER OLD BUSINESS. CARRIED. November 3. 1986 Renton City Council Minutes Page 3 Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Keolker presented a report Development Committee regarding appeal of Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation from the Appeal: Melvin recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated September 30, Maine/Print Sales 1986, for rezone of property located at the southeast corner of Meadow Corporation Avenue North and North Second Street from R-2 to B-1. Committee review #R-067-86 of the record indicated the Hearing Examiner bifurcated the hearing of the Site Plan approval and the rezone, which may have affected the decision on the rezone. Believing that the proposed construction, with proper covenants, might be to the public's benefit and that Council might look favorably on the B-1 rezone, with conditions on the Site Plan approval, if the site was compatible with the residential use across the street, the Committee recommended this matter be referred back to the Land Use Hearing Examiner for further hearing with the following indications: 1. Consider the Site Plan with the rezone; 2. Allow further testimony to be given on either the Site Plan or rezone; 3. Recommend necessary conditions or covenants to run with the land to be imposed on the Site Plan to achieve compatibility between existing residences on the north side of North Second and the proposed site. MOVED BY KEOLKER, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Norman Peterson, 3402 Park Avenue North, recommended Council restrict continued granting of rezones which encourage multi-family development, noting Multifamily Rezones possibility of increased crime rate. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Mobile Home Permits Executive Department requested review of standards and policies under which a temporary permit for mobile home use in R-1 zones could be granted under special occasions (Renton Municipal Code Section 4-707B.4.a. specifically prohibits mobile homes in an R-1 zone). Refer to Community ,Services Committee. • MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY TRIMM, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Michael M. Hanis, attorney for Victoria Hills Homeowners' Victoria Hills Association, requested that the Bennett Group, developer of Victoria Hills FPUD 042-85 Phase II Final Planned Unit Development, be required to complete the building permit process before the seasonal stop work order becomes effective instead of issuance of automatic stop order by the City on November 4, 1986. The developer would then be left with the same portion of its original six months to begin construction as it would have if weather had not been a consideration. Mayor Shinpoch confirmed that the date of November 4th has been set for the Building Department to not issue the developer of Victoria Hills Phase II FPUD 042-85 a building permit. She reported that the developer has been notified in writing that the six-month clock stops on that date with 113 days expended. When the Building Director determines that site conditions and rainy weather no longer pose a hazard he will so advise the developer who will then have approximately 67 days to comply with the Council's stipulation that substantial construction must occur. She noted that the total elapsed time will not exceed the six months designated by the City Council, and all parties of record have been provided with a transcript of the Council minutes of July 14, 1986, and October 20, 1986, wherein the City Attorney offered the definition of "substantial construction." Mr. Bennett has paid required fees for site plan approval, but the matter of fees is not pertinent because permits will not be issued She concluded her report by stating that the onus is on the developer to secure permits and show substantial construction once the clock resumes, no staff time will be devoted to this matter until the Building Department decides it is appropriate to resume. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTTE REPORT • TO: Renton City Council November 3, 1986 FROM: Planning and Development Committee • RE: Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation R-067-86 The Planning and Development Committee met on October 29 , 1986 to consider the appeal of Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation . from the recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated September 30 , 1986 . Maine seeks a rezone from R-2 to. B-1 for the property located at the southeast corner of Meadow Avenue North and North Second. Maine seeks to conduct a printing-broker business at that location. The Committee ' s review of the record revealed that the. Hearing Examiner bifurcated the hearing of the Site Plan approval and the rezone. Believing that that action may have affected the Hearing Examiner' s decision on the rezone, and believing that the proposed construction by Maine, with proper covenants, might be to the public' s benefit . The Committee is Remanding this matter back to the Hearing Examiner with the following indications: 1. Consider the Site Plan with the rezone; 2 . Allow further testimony to be given on either • the Site Plan or rezone; 3 . Recommend necessary conditions or covenants to run with the land to be imposed on the Site Plan to achieve compatibility between the existing residences on the north side of North Second and the proposed site. The Committee concluded that the Council might look favorably on •a B-1 rezone, with conditions on the Site Plan approval, if the site was. compatible with the residential use across the street. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council remand this matter back to the Land Use Hearing Examiner for further hearing and with the indications outlined above. ZA, W;t4er,440r-- - NI ;E OF PENDING SITE PLAN APPROV, RENTON, WASHINGTON A SITE PLAN APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED AND ACCEPTED WITH THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. THE FOLLOWING BRIEFLY DESCRIBES THE APPLICATION AND THE NECESSARY PUBLIC APPROVALS: DESCRIPTION: R-067-86, SA-068-86 Application for rezone from R-2 to B-2 and application for site plan approval to construct a pring shop of 1-story, approximately 5,350 sq. ft. building on a site approximately 16,480 sq. ft. GENERAL LOCATION: Located at: S.E. corner of North 2nd Street and Meadow Ave. North PUBLIC APPROVALS: Rezone Site Plan Approval Building Permit The application can be reviewed at the Building and Zoning Department located on the third floor of City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to public hearings and during public hearings. For further information on the application or dates of final action by the City, please contact the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. CERTIFICATION I, JERRY F. LIND, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF 1HE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in E q , on they TH day o f!!_,1`.r'";-',1986. GQ �op�nn • ' • Nssio <•�yc •a _ ► Qcz. SIGNED: * : NOTg4)• • m��� 4 elicVP coo ,tag` =.WASHING;/#1 October 6. 1986 Renton City Council Minutes Page 2 permit application by developer on 8/22/86; cited City Code sections regarding seasonal constraints on development; noted designation on City maps of the subject site as potentially hazardous during development; and indicated that hydroseeding is not effective during rainy months, and removal of vegetation could cause the detention pond to overflow. Mr. Blaylock concluded that the applicant is diligently pursuing the necessary permits; City Code provisions and the official record support the request; and grading could be completed by 8/30/87 with work beginning no later than 5/15/87. Mr. Simone felt that the request for extension should be denied since the developer was well aware of development constraints of the subject site and need for complex geotechnical studies. Both Mr. Simone and Mr. Post expressed disagreement with Mr. Blaylock's recommendation and felt another extension was unrealistic. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Appeal: Maine/Print Appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on Melvin Maine/Print Craft Craft Sales Corp. Sales Corporation Rezone, R-067-86, filed by R. W. Thorpe & Associates, Rezone, R-067-86 Inc., representing A. L. Lotto, for denial of rezone of property located on the southwest corner of N. 2nd Street and Meadow Avenue N. from R-2, multifamily residential zone, to B-1, business zone. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Appeal: Austin Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision on Austin Company Special Permit, Company Special SP-078-86, filed by the City of Renton and the Austin Company for denial Permit, SP-078-86 of permit to place fill material on a 14.63 acre parcel of property located between Lind Avenue SW and East Valley Road north of SW 19th. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. (See 9/22/86 Council Minutes.) Bid Opening - Water City Clerk reported bid opening 9/26/86 for Water Production Wells; two Production Wells bids received; Engineer's estimate: $142,000. Refer to Utilities Committee. Bid Opening - NE City Clerk reported bid opening 9/24/86 for Street Improvements to NE 10th 10th Street Street between Kirkland Avenue NE and Monroe Avenue NE; five bids Improvements received; Engineer's estimate: $21,865. Refer to Transportation Committee. Swanson Court Case Court case filed in an undetermined amount by Dann Sheffield for Kimberly Swanson for damages sustained in automobile accident at 7904 110th Place SE alleging icy/defective road conditions (1/26/86) (CL-43-86) Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Peters Claim for Claim for damages in the amount of $50 filed by Irene L. Peters, 23246 - Damages, CL-54-86 164th SE, Kent, for windshield shattered by golf ball hit from Maplewood Golf Course, alleging inadequate fencing/protection by the City (7/31/86). Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Yantzer Claim for Claim for damages in the amount of $317.09 filed by State Farm Insurance Damages, CL-55-86 Company for D. J. Yantzer, for vehicle damage allegedly caused by golf ball at Maplewood Golf Course (8/19/86). Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Harrison Claim for Claim for damages in the amount of $5,582.10 filed by F. Joan Harrison, Damages, CL-56-86 16611-127th Avenue SE, Renton, for damage to apartment building and loss of rent caused by plugged sewer line, alleging City failure to inspect the sewer line at Harrington Avenue NE and NE 9th Street (8/29/86). Refer to, City Attorney and insurance service. Graves Claim for Claim for damages in the amount of $27.01 filed by Sharon G. Graves, 659 Damages, CL-57-86 Union Avenue NE, Renton, for loss of sleeping bag allegedly not returned by Police Department following son's arrest and release. Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Trihub Claim for Claim for damages in the amount of $185.00 filed by Vera Trihub, 838 Damages, CL-58-86 Harrington Avenue NE, Renton, for damage to apartment allegedly caused by a plugged street sewer (8/29-9/1/86). Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Tri-Delt Policy Development Department requested public hearing be set for 10/27/86 Annexation/Rezone as second hearing for Tri-Delt Annexation/Rezone approved by King County Boundary Review Board; and recommended G-1 zoning for the 13.89 acre site located on the south side of SE Renton-Issaquah Road, east of Sunset NE/Duvall intersection. Council set hearing. For.Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING _ ==== _ SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. City Clerk For Agenda Of 10/06/86 (Meeting Date) Staff Contact Maxine E. Motor (Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Consent X Recommendation; Melvin Main/Print Craft Public Hearing Correspondence Sales Corp.; R-067-86. Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach• New Business A. City Clerk's Letter Study Session Other • B. Letter of Appeal C. Hearing Examiner's Report, dated 9/16/86 Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Refer to Finance Dept. Yes_ No. N/A_ Planning and Development Committee Other Clearance FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required $ , Amount $ Appropriation- $ Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary.) Appeal filed by Jon Potter, R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. , representing A. L. Lotto accompanied by required fee received on September 30, 1986. • PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. OF R4,, 4. THE CITY OF RENTON CJ `• Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • MAXINE E.MOTOR, ,9,0 �' CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2501 0 94TE0 SEPTE4'�P October 1, 1986 APPEAL FILED BY JON POTTER, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. REPRESENTING A. L. L I'I1O RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, dated September 16, 1986, Melvin Main/Print Craft Sales Corp. , R-067-86. To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision has been filed with the City Clerk, along with the proper fee of $75.00 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. The Council Secretary will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Comnittcc meeting. If you are not listed in local telephone directories and wish to attend the meeting, please call the Council Secretary at 235-2586 any weekday after 1:00 p.m. for information. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor, C22C City Clerk WRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICATION NAME: FILE NO. -R - 0 6 7-` . Mi0I,,,e7 1V1Ct«-72. ,.1+s°II47'S Calt„r - The undersigned interested r yip,- gj .; Mice of Appeal from the Decision or Recommendation of the La d Usc a4 n `. ''� `ar, dated gyp -- :7 19 1 . IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY ® . CRY Ci.ERK'S OMCE , 1 . APPELLANT: mgcgo EPRESENTATIVE (IF ANY) : Name: M-Q.IVx.v, Il lair — . - Name: iZV"/.."-Ttio re s /`k-4ccx .s__ . fI I Address: 1D 7 `LUttfjG , ,;.. ,r -9, e_ Address: I x l/4LQ.c, zL.)!) i---,I ,L(JA �a1Tle/ LJ,A �/� Y- Telephone No. Telephone No. 6,Zcf- -6'Z "i 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: C '..-._52.p -L k_rl 4 - r f(I e?_.) FINDINGS OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. Error: ,( �a , �d Jgce..�'q�s S;gl�oer cti �-a Tti Ctkc,.,.43 Correction: CONCLUSIONS: ( I � `� ' I No. Error: C'-oar�'�a` 1 '-Q,,Ls -p�i�,.I idt�h T >,c ---nQ 0 C-4 ()Af- - r---- NiPj-- Correction: ar-e .5v14„4 c)i -.�,-#— i.a i`t-4 G)l A- �,, / r OTHER:No. ' Error: `. ,l e.J c J 1�-4,e ivt9eoQ s4,1 k .L t�( • ' .,Q• `Una`-at ,n de � .-7, .. y R:-.)�d'e-g Correction: `1 sq1 lS emsis-k� ii( e�.Ns,r..,.Laj,svve.'ill10,, op R>ei‘livt.,5"-Zes-n'sn 'IS (tr/Ojr-ccntdt-s GLL c•-)lit%Celly-6A., t`-levp, 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) Reverse the Decision or Recommendation and grant the following relief: Modify the Decision or Recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: ii -- \ I' 6n e,,i ,(-.'+) �-F �D, 1✓ce Appell nt/Representative Signature Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 30 of the Renton Municipal Code, and Sections 4-3016 and 4-3017, specifically (see reverse side of page) for specific appeal procedures. re/ , rul ,tiD, R.W. 1',_rjlorpe & Inc. Planning • Landscape • Environmental • Economics September 30, 1986 Principals: Jon Potter Robert W. Thorpe, AICP City of Renton Associates: Renton City Hall Joanne Polayes-Wien Renton, WA 98055 ATTN: City Clerk RE: 'Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation CITY OF RENTON File No. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 r 198111 Request for appeal of Hearing Examiner's � � 0. recommendation for denial. D CITY CLERK'SOMCE I Dear Mr. Examiner: We have been retained to represent the proponent to appeal the Examiner's September 16, 19.86 recommendation of denial. Attached lb the $75.00 riling - � _----•' fee for appeal to the City Council. General Arguments for Appeal are as follows: 1. The proposal is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The issue of whether the land use is appropriate for the site location has already been addressed during the Comprehensive Planning process. The proposal would only make the zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation. Further, the issue of incompatibility is not supported by the Declaration of Non-Significance made by City staff. 2. The Hearing Examiner's recommendation for denial is not supported by City staff as provided in the preliminary report to the, Hearing Eza,. iner dated September 2, 1986. 3. The Hearing Examiner cited the Bryant Rezone request, which was denied by City Coun^_il as having similar issues to this proposal. The Bryant ,,. rezone also included a conditional use permit request to authorize parking of buses. A conditional use permit was necessary since bus parking is an industrial use. The proposed service use iv- not an industrial uze and impacts are significantly less. The issues are not similar. However, the Hearing Examiner did note that the present request is inmeasurably superior to the Bryant Rezone " equest in sensitivity to homes across the street. 4. The Examiner noted that the area does not represent t.ie greatest example of good land use practice; however, he then defends the land use pattern of the area by stating that it is reasonable to place a boundary between the commercial zone and residential zone at a mid- block point. 'That division properly creates an interface at the rear of the properties". However, it should be noted that the rear of that commercial property is generally less compatible with the residential use than the front of .the commercial property. The rear of the commercial property generally contains dumpsters, storage areas and other' functions which may be unsightly. Seattle: 1300 Alaska Bldg. • 2nd & Cherry • Seattle, WA 98104 • [206) 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503 • 1110 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, AK 99503 • [907) 276-6846 1 Page 2 - City of Renton 5. The Hearing Examiner noted that streets are substandard despite the traffic engineer recommendation for approval with conditions. 6. If the proposal site was developed with residential uses as provided under the current R-2 designation there would still be a demarcation between the new residential use, and adjacent commercial zone designation (i.e, gas station). The issue of incompatiblity would still exist. However, if a site is rezoned to be commercial, appropriate mitigations can be imposed to lessen the potential impacts. • Under the existing zoning (R-2) it would be less likely that such mitigations such as landscape buffers and building orientation would be required of the residential development (i.e., single family or duplex) to Litigate impacts of adjacent commercial uses. 0 • 7. One can assume that under the existing R-2 designation a duplex could ---------- be constructed. Based on the proposal it would provide a transitional service oriented use between the residences north of the site and gas station south of the site. If the site is developed with single family or duplex no transitional use would be provided between the gas station and new residential use. In summary, the Hearing Examiner has ignored the staff's recommendations for approval with conditions. ignored the adjacent commercial land use's impact on development opportunities of the subject site and the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site, and ignored the Determination of Non-Significance of the Rezone request made by the Building and Zoning Director. Policy Development Director and Public Works Director. It is on the points made above and others which will be made at the Hearing that we respectfully request City Council's approval of the proposed rezone. Respectfully submitted, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 0 Jon Potter, Principal Attachment cc: Hearing Examiner Roger Blaylock Seattle: 615 Seattle Tower•3rd& University• Seattle.WA 98101 •(206)624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503•.1110 West Sixth Avenue•Anchorage.AK 99503•(907)276-6646 A W,� CITY OF RENTON N? 18145 FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON7�98055 RECEIVED OF a -a666, Received by L(fl TOTAL ed September 16, 1986 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPLICANT: . MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. File No.: R-067-86 and SA-068-86 LOCATION: Southwest corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval to rezone from R-2 to B-1, and approval of a site plan to construct a one-story building for a print shop consisting of approximately 5,350 square feet. • SUMMARY OF ACTION: Building and Zoning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions Hearing Examiner Decision: Recommend City Council deny rezone request. BUILDING & ZONING The Building & Zoning Department Report was received DEPARTMENT REPORT: by the Examiner on August 27, 1986 PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Building and Zoning Department Report, examining available information on file with they application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on September 2, 1986 at 10:35 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit #1 - Yellow File containing application, proof of posting and publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit #2 - Assessors Map. Exhibit #3 - Site Plan. Exhibit #4 - Written testimony of Versie Vaupel. The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jeanette Samek-McKague, Zoning Research Technician. Mrs McKague announced that the applicant had suggested a possible continuation but it was felt by staff that the review should be presented as there were surrounding property owners in the audience wishing to testify regarding this proposal. She proceeded stating the proposal is to rezone property and place a print shop thereon, with the building to be approximately 5300 sq. ft. The rezone and site plan requests do meet the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code; a review of departmental comments was given which suggested reorienting the pedestrian walkway to North Meadow; landscaping; the sign in the northwest corner needs to be set back 10 ft.; 3 fire hydrants will have to be placed in and around the site; the driveway in the S.W. corner of the site needs to be 30 ft. wide with underground powered lighting placed around the site; with the Design Engineering Department not commenting on this proposal as they felt they needed more information regarding the grading and utility plans as well as the storm water retention/detention plans. Looking at the rezone request, the three criteria to be considered were discussed noting the property has not been considered for a rezone since the land use analysis was completed for the revision to the Central Area Plan in 1983, but due to opposition from the neighborhood the City did not follow through with the rezoning; the property is classified for the proposed zone pursuant to policies in the Comprehensive Plan; and she reviewed the surrounding zoning and other uses in the area as proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. McKague stated the site will be a buffer between heavier commercial and industrial uses and the residential uses; staff feels the B-1 zoning, with some limitations, is appropriate. She advised the print shop is a service use; the use is being considered in a delicate transitional area between two zones; improvements have not been provided on Meadow and surrounding streets, and when considering possible traffic patterns it was noted the streets are considered to be MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 2 substandard. Meadow has a 60 ft. right-of-way but is not presently built out to width. Staff is working with the applicant to upgrade the road system in the area and until the time the system is improved it is probable there will be no further commercial uses permitted in the subject area. Reviewing the site plan, Mrs. McKague stated due to the sensitivity of seeking a rezone in such a sensitive area, the Site Plan Review Committee felt this matter should be presented with the rezone for a public hearing. Conservation of area-wide property values was discussed and it was felt this proposal would not affect those values; the city will be watching development in the area between Bronson Way and 2nd Street which is to be limited to offices and similar uses. She stated there is a height limit of 35 ft.; it is felt this is a more compatible rezone for the area than a previous application for a different applicant (said rezone was denied by the City Council); there should be no problem with noise or odor from the print shop; it is recommended, that due to the sensitivity of the area the conditions for this site should be placed in the form of restrictive covenants. With this information, it was suggested that the rezone be recommended for approval to the City Council and the Site Plan be continued to provide time for staff to review with the applicant such matters as the relocation of the main entrance, landscaping, buffering to the north of the site and relocating the service entrance to the south portion of the building with the placement of all loading areas on-site. It was also suggested there be a limit placed on construction time in order to ensure expedient completion and return of the neighborhood to a normal pattern. • The Examiner called for testimony in support of this proposal from the applicant or their representative. Responding was Dennis Neifert. 1042 West James Street. Kent. Wa. 98032. Mr. Neifert stated they received the staff report on Friday afternoon of Labor Day Weekend for this hearing and felt they did not have sufficient time to review staff requirements, which the applicant feels are substantial, nor did they have time to analyze how they will affect their project. He requested they be given time to work with staff to determine how they can comply with some of the requirements or possibly come up with a revised Site Plan. Mr. Neifert feels the applicant has been very sensitive to the fact they will be adjoining a residential area and has tried to provide safeguards to ensure there are no impacts to the neighborhood. They feel the criteria in the staff report is possibly criteria they could live with, but need more time to review. He requested a continuance to September 23, 1986. He then introduced the owner of the business. Testifying was Melvin Maine. 107 Williams Ave. So.. Renton. Wa. 98055. Mr. Maine explained his operation is limited almost exclusively to acting as a broker in the printing business, with very little printing on-site; they discourage walk-in business; if they do receive walk-in print business they direct them elsewhere; they deliver their own product in their own vehicles; they receive deliveries from UPS. As far as noise on-site, Mr. Maine stated at the present time they have duplicators and presses which are very quiet; no old equipment will be used; odors from inks and/or dyes are not detectable except inside the building, and only then if you are standing close to the machines. Due to the fact they received the report late, Mr. Maine requested a continuance to review staffs suggested conditions to their request. . He had no further comments at this time. There was no one else wishing to speak in support of this proposal and no one wishing to speak in opposition. Wishing to comment on the proposal was: Marjorie Richter. 300 Meadow North. Renton Wa. 98055. Ms. Richter referred to the sign at the northern end of the property and felt it should be moved further to the south toward the business parking lot. She stated it was also felt the entrance for the business should not be located across the street from the residential property due to the street noise from trucks as deliveries are made to the business. She stated the service entrance should be located in the alley or located in the parking lot area. Mrs. Richter felt there should be screening and/or landscaping to try to continue the continuity of a residential atmosphere. Commenting further was Versie Vaupel. 1402 North 2nd Street. Renton. Wa. 98055. Mrs. Vaupel lives directly across the street from the proposed business. She submitted her letter of testimony to the, Hearing Examiner setting out her concerns such as retaining a residential atmosphere for the area; possible noise and odors; moving the sign further south near the delivery entrance; placement of the delivery entrance to be considered carefully as the alley and street in the area are both very narrow; asked for a limit to night and Sunday activities on the site as the property adjoins residences; and suggested outside safety lighting for surrounding residents. Mrs. Vaupel questioned the length of time for construction and it was stated by the owner they anticipated a 5 month building program. In closing, Mrs. Vaupel stated the proposal does seem to be more compatible than other proposals previously submitted for this area. There was a question as to whether the use proposed would be permitted in the B-1 zone, and with that in mind the Hearing Examiner asked the applicant if they would want to have him consider the Rezone portion of the application today and hear the Site Plan portion at a later date after this determination has been worked out. The applicant felt it should be determined first if the use was permitted because if it was not the applicant would have no need for the rezone. It was noted that the determination of use would be the responsibility of the Building and Zoning Department at the time someone seeks a building permit. Mrs. McKague stated staff has determined this use would be permitted, and to date that determination has not been appealed. It was determined the Examiner would consider the Rezone portion this date and will review the Site Plan at the continued hearing. The applicant agreed, and wishing to testify was the owner of the property, Ann Lotto. 280 Morris Avenue So.. Renton. Wa. 98055. She stated she wished to have the property rezoned, feels the rezone would benefit the community as the property is currently in a run down condition. At this time the Examiner • MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 3 confirmed the continuance of the Site Plan portion of this application to September 23, 1986. 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 11:10 A.M. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Melvin Maine, for Print Craft Sales Corporation, filed a request for approval of the rezone of approximately 16,480 square feet of property from R-2 (Duplex Residential) to B-1 (Business/Commercial) together with a request for approval of a site plan for a one-story building containing a print shop. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) • documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a declaration of non-significance (DNS) for the subject proposal. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located immediately southeast of the intersection of North 2nd Street and Meadow Avenue North. The site comprises the northwest quadrant of the block bounded by N. 2nd on the north, Meadow on the west, Factory Avenue N on the east and Bronson Way N on the south. The southern end of the block fronts along the Sunset/Bronson corridor. 6. Meadow Avenue is a residential grade street. It is only 35 feet wide. When parking occurs on both sides, which is permitted, only 20 feet of driving surface is available. No. 2nd, the other street the site fronts upon, is a street with only 30 feet of width, and again, with parking on both sides there is only about 15 feet of driving surface. 7. The subject site consists of two (2) single family homes and a vacant parcel. From the west and moving clockwise, is a vacant R-2 zoned lot, which is the site of a rejected Bryant Motors rezone attempt, similar to the current application. West of the vacant lot is Bryant Motors, a truck, bus and tractor/mower sales and service operation. Across to the northwest are single family homes located along N. 2nd and Garden Avenue North, the next street west of the site. A small apartment building is northwest of the site. Single family homes are north of the apartment. Directly north of the subject site are additional single family homes. Southwest of the site is a motel. Bronson Way North, a major arterial, is located to the south. 8. While the applicant applied for a particular site plan, the late delivery of the staff report recommendations did not give the applicant time to respond. The applicant requested that the site plan be considered at a continued hearing. The parties agreed to allow the rezone hearing to be conducted separately, although the applicant indicated that his purchase of the property is contingent upon approval of his site plan and the rezone. Staff agreed to separate the items since staff believes that the rezone stands alone, and can be approved subject to certain conditions without a site plan. The proposed plan for a print shop was predicated upon an approval of the current B-1 rezone request. 9. Staff recommended approval of the rezone subject to: 1) a maximum building height of 35 feet; 2) use of the property be restricted to office and similar service and professional uses (subject to the discretion of the Building and Zoning Department regarding similar services); and 3) further limitations regarding entrances, parking, circulation, and location of mechanical equipment, all of which would be prohibited along N. 2nd Street. 10. The subject site is currently part of a multi-block R-2 zone. The R-2 zone extends north and west of the subject site, wrapping around the Bryant Motors building, just west of the site. It also extends east of the site to Houser Way. The B-1 zone immediately south of the site extends east and west generally along the north edge of Bronson Way. It then extends up Park Avenue, a major arterial. The R-2 zone, divided by this commercial thoroughfare, continues to the west and to the south to the Cedar River. 11. The R-2 zone is developed primarily with single family homes. The B-1 zone generally consists of a strip of small scale retail and commercial operations following the Bronson/Sunset corridor. The subject site like most of this R-2 zone contains single family homes, as indicated above. 12. The site is approximately 103 feet wide measured from Meadow, and approximately 160 feet deep measured from N. 2nd. An alley forming the east property line parallels Meadow Avenue east of the site. • MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 4 13. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial or low density multiple family uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the plan. The site appears at the periphery of an area shown as commercial, but abutting an area which is shown as low density multi-family. 14. The Comprehensive Plan Compendium contains a number of policies, some quite general, referring to respect for neighborhood values and calling for the elimination of incompatible uses. In its more specific statements it describes residential neighborhoods as areas where traffic which is not local in character should be discouraged. It calls for single family dwellings to be buffered from more intensive uses by low density multiple family uses, and in turn indicates that low density multi-family uses should be buffered from more intensive uses by medium or high density uses. Incompatible uses should not be allowed, but where they exist, screening is recommended. 15. The Comprehensive Plan continues: Commercial areas should be located and designed to minimize travel and congestion and to promote safety; commercial areas should be compatible with adjacent land uses. Buffers should be placed between commercial and single family areas. Development should be designed to avoid adverse impacts on adjacent property. 16. The Comprehensive Plan also states that a variety of commercial, industrial and retail uses must be encouraged. It also indicates that provisions should be made for diversification and wide- ranging employment opportunities. 17. The plan also specifically identifies North Renton as a quality residential neighborhood whose viability and stability should be preserved. It is an area in which land use decisions should limit conflicts between residential and non-residential land uses. New development should be designed to reduce the hazards and nuisances of arterial traffic volumes in North Renton. 18. This Office takes notice of the fact that the City recently completed a study of the Cedar River Corridor. The study was accepted by the City Council and they have funded action to begin the recommended strategies contained within the study. Extracted below are comments from the study regarding the North Renton neighborhood in which the subject site is located: Most buildings, particularly single family structures, are in good condition and generally maintained by neighborhood residents. Residential neighborhood boundaries are not well defined [and] future plans should define the edges of the neighborhood and prevent non-residential encroachments. The neighborhood has walking access to the Cedar River, downtown, the library, City Hall, and a number of major entertainment uses. Housing structures have character, are affordable and easily rehabilitated or rebuilt. If the neighborhood were suitably planned and improved, the area could sustain present residents and possibly attract new resident investment from households interested in living in a convenient, comfortable urban residential setting. (Pages 14 and 16, Cedar River Corridor Strategy, January 1986). CONCLUSIONS 1. The proponent of a rezone must demonstrate that the request is in the public interest, that it will not impair the public health, safety and welfare and in addition, complies with at least one of the criteria found in Section 4-3010, which provides in part that: a. The subject site has not been considered in a previous area-wide rezone or land use analysis; or b. The subject site is potentially designated for the new classification per the Comprehensive Plan; or c. There has been a material and substantial change in the area in which the subject site is located since the last rezoning of the property or area. The requested classification is not justified and should be denied. 2. Staff has not succeeded in distinguishing the current request from the Bryant rezone request already denied by the City Council. While it cannot be denied that the current request is immeasurably superior to that request in sensitivity to the homes across the street, it still is inappropriate and generally for the same reasons the Bryant request was inappropriate. Commercial zoning, even if oriented away from the residential homes is generally an inappropriate neighbor to residential development. MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 5 3. There is no compelling reason to shift the zoning boundary in this area. While the area does not represent the greatest example of good land use practice, the earlier decisions to place the boundary between the commercial B-1 zone and the residential R-2 zone at the mid-block does represent reasonable land use practice. That division properly creates an interface at the rear of properties. It avoids incompatible uses and incompatible zones facing one another across a street. While a street may serve as a good demarcation line for changing zones, for instance when stepping down or up between similar classes of use, it is not necessarily the case when switching between commercial and residential zones. 4. While the Building and Zoning Department recommended approval subject to strong buffering standards, it is not simply a matter of erecting a screening fence or planting tall leafy trees. Zoning and land use cannot always be a simple matter of buffering incompatible uses. Zoning does not just separate the incompatible on-site unsightly uses or noisy uses or noxious uses of a particular plot of land from adjacent or less intensive uses. Zoning is also intended to alleviate the off-site secondary impacts such as delivery traffic, noise, customers, etc from circulating in an area preserved for less intensive uses. These are the secondary but no less consequential aspects which are meant to be segregated. Good land use practice seeks to preserve residential amenities by reserving land which can be held in quiet comfort, while also reserving other property for more intense, less restrictive activities. The rezone would permit a wide range of uses and even,if limited to professional offices, it would still introduce commercial traffic, both vehicular and foot traffic into the area. 5. Zoning requires the establishment of a line between different districts. On one side of the line uses are permitted, on the other side of the line they are prohibited. The courts have recognized that the establishment of the line creates or denies rights unequally, but that the line must be drawn somewhere in order to give effect to zoning. When zoning and uses are already in place, modifying the line requires a review of what impacts will result. Will the applicant be denied reasonable use of the site, if the zoning is not approved? Will neighboring property be adversely affected by the request if it is approved? In the current.case the facts demonstrate that the request to modify the zoning is inappropriate. Single family homes already occupy the site and remain a reasonable use of the subject site. They certainly remain a more reasonable neighbor to the single family homes across the street. 6. In addition, the fact remains that the,streets serving the subject site are substandard. They are even substandard under today's standard in terms of serving residential development, and are truly substandard as commercial access streets serving commercial development. The same question asked in Bryant Motors is still relevant in this case: "Is this a corner (N. 2nd and Meadow Avenue N.) on which one would establish commercial uses?" Asking the question from a slightly different perspective: "Is the street frontage along Meadow, a street on which to establish a commercial use?" The answer in both cases is: "No." The commercial corridor of Sunset/Bronson is generally only one lot deep. The narrow streets do not invite commercial traffic or exploration. They were not meant to. The commercial focus should be maintained along the corridor. If it were to shift as requested, more travelers would begin to enter the residential area, uninvited and for the wrong purposes. 7. The recommendation adopted by the City Council in the Bryant Motors proposal stated: "While a major commercial thoroughfare is only a half block away, the land use and street characteristics are dramatically different surrounding the subject site. The site is located at the intersection of Meadow and N. 2nd. Meadow Avenue is a residential level street. It is only 3'5 feet wide, and with parking on both sides approximately 20 feet of driving surface is available. The other street the site fronts upon is No. 2nd, a street with only 30 feet of width, and again, with parking on both sides only about 15 feet of driving surface. The question again: Would it be reasonable to have a commercial use at the location of the subject site with a front door on either No. 2nd or Meadow Avenue North? The answer: Unlikely." The same result, of necessity, follows in the current case. 8. The Comprehensive Plan and the Cedar River Study both suggest that the residential character of this area should be preserved, along with its amenities. While the map element of the Comprehensive Plan appears to designate the site as commercial, that is not conclusive. The map is only a guideline, it does not set up strict boundaries, nor should it. What the map indicates is that somewhere north of Bronson Way commercial uses will end and residential uses will'begin. It does not state emphatically: "North 2nd Street shall be the dividing line." The map element specifically includes the following language: "The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is not a final blueprint, but rather a general design for future growth. In most cases, the Land Use Element Map identifies generalized areas for future land use rather than precise boundaries between uses. Implementation of these designations in specific locations is based on a number of factors, including adjacent zoning, surrounding uses, the public need for the proposed use and consistency with adopted City policies." MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 6 The policies of the plan require denial of the request. 9. As the City Council did in Bryant Motors, ignoring for a moment the proposed site plan (pending but not part of this review) and simply reviewing the request as one for B-1 zoning on the subject site, the record demonstrates the request is unwarranted. Would the subject site, simply a corner lot, be suitable for commercial development? The answer is plainly 'no'. It is isolated from the main stream of commercial traffic and is not truly tied in with other commercial uses. And while the proposed site plan appeared well designed and landscaped (staff recommended conditions which the applicant was not sure could be accomplished), and while it would have directed commercial pedestrians away from N. 2nd (if other staff recommendations were followed), it would not be the same as having or continuing the current residential uses. What makes a better neighbor for residential uses and zoning, if not other similar uses and zoning. The best use for the subject property under the current state of affairs is R-2. 10. Weighing the applicant's rights against those of the neighboring property owners, the site should not be zoned for commercial uses. Well accepted land use practice generally does not support or encourage a face-off between commercial and residential uses. General zoning principles and the Comprehensive Plan would not have low density residential uses facing commercial uses. West and north of the site across Meadow and No. 2nd are low density residential uses. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan appear not only to sanction these residential uses, but strive to preserve and protect them from further commercial expansion. 11. Northwest of the site is a small apartment building, a very small apartment building. The other uses across from the site are single family homes. While the zoning may be low density multi- family which permits duplex units, the predominant land use is single-family residential. We still have a street system that is insufficient for commercial usage. We have an alley serving commercial uses aimed directly at single family homes. The alley does not continue north of N. 2nd Street. Rather, the leg of its 'T intersection aims directly at single family property. Increasing the commercial potential of the subject site will only increase the number of commercial vehicles using the alley. Even if the site plan was approved as proposed and the setbacks and landscaping provided, the current R-2 zoning on the subject site provides a reasonable and probably better buffer. And, again the applicant retains reasonable use of the subject property. 12. The City Council should deny the request since the request appears to be inconsistent with the decision in the Bryant Motors rezone. RECOMMENDATION The City Council should deny the Rezone. ORDERED THIS 16th day of September, 1986. • \14-t•t• FRED J. KAUFMAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of September, 1986 to the parties of record: Dennis Neifert 1042 West James Street Kent, Wa. 98032 Melvin Maine Print Craft Sales Corp. 107 Williams Ave. So. Renton, Wa. 98055 Marjorie Richter 300 Meadow North Renton, Wa. 98055 MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 7 Versie Vaupel 1402 North 2nd Street Renton, Wa. 98055 Ann Lotto 280 Morris Avenue So. Renton, Wa. 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of September, 1986 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director Larry M. Springer, Policy Development Director Members, Renton Planning Commission Ronald Nelson, Building & Zoning Director Glen Gordon, Fire Marshal Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 P.M. September 30. 1986. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is 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 errors relied upon 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, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. t+/I Pc../... - W•"` 98-890—VS S 98—L90—H n /:{ IS 11 •.•a IMr.1•.r•.».a•1r•»1..r1.1•I..wJ 1: } —• •••••MIS•r~r,r14•r1.1 .IrS •M .w1.1r •74/1..»Iw.. 1. '1'/i»----- �F. I /I./r1w4 1. riw w"r r • 4•r•1wr•1•rwi 40 - •4 4 I44/».1Ir0 It 1. .IMM»14.w 'tl ww..w.•aw I..I... Ir NO'•rNIa79 w•.tal trl.a'•» - r.. ...We.. I yi•.a:•w 1/.1»/ilt 1. •trt hlrp tt>i 0J N�10�`` {./01•.Y/.4.1+ I y.....pa le •wa•I•i»ij 1+•a . ��—M rM+l 4/'4.1 1.4t Iwo 1. ID.1.1.•s_ wrr 11a.IWs. •awsr M.M.M '4 .w r I// alb `% '.•r MIS 44•11 anew.rasa.• 1e dvW 1]N DUB One:M 1••..v++1a WWII~NI"VIM. �" •.•/.M•../:»:141.9 »a:i 41 •(�11� I +. 1»taw t•o 1-4 nw. 4 /.1® I 11111,0 MM.011110 a man an I 1»Ir 111.•sann. 14 ass.• 1. ` . or ; &: ' _y`,y1, -I P I I I41r 1-Y IIII. 1/N•4l~ •6t 1 0 , I I M.wlsr.s.wJ r./y •1 • lair I ��r 1 Met M .rH.+sass.+. •t )4lit37a4.4 ` I I1I.' I tw 11y.'•w leIMIIII a orna »1Ir.w4.w..iu1.y 1 1 ; 1 I M MM.{fun NMI /190` 1 1»ta.•r{II 1 IwIIIM• 1 111449.1I.nal w.M1J Yw6~ •• NvJ/. r1..r '/ 911191111 • •::: rl.trr•.,k: : : •I •aM-. •w4.r1 t. .lr»• .wal » ,1' y ' •I•�1+�9 1 ��V �I'''� Iw.a»I4 4•filM Ise .w� •I I I I �• I 'M71`Id 9.ur/ maw." llit ?? P Q i .___——_- S'fl S I .1.0.�inr•hI •bass.p•A1yy I •Or�M',VI /7 ►DIN I.A:+O I 'Y OS f{Li .A./'r 1 L I ■ WV PIS'NY I nag.Mi t/4T.e — r t i•C 1-1i • I -•3� I - 4. I W.;S• I- _ --- v-R ` ( L 'T 1(-.4 -'+e:-m.rPlo I I _ t� L I . - .o.us alawasoar..01 _ I,n o.m.r • �_._ moo rw:.t.•ia+' .N1 n9113 ----I Le —If. I(aa?irs e..1.tus= Call . • r " Dun w a.15 0 I _� MY10 iOH1D We* Jo& ~ " Iw'SI.11/I LIVED 1l�ld ------------i�...--Tv -------t NOlL''I : H:aoN '>:_dWaK7G alma Iw. (. o(os sus t00L1 3tsO0W .I'1-"",,,.. :�-+� waw— a-on HOlO s tooaaNSIWA 1N3M 1M••.r•wm rrIM.)9 woo waw-•� - -- WYl3AV MOiO011HSVM'O$US tiY3NMV 11/11031u.OUV ft LAND USE r"! EMENT . , , \ • , . ) . . . i I Single Family { Commercial . i • \ . 1 • . • . . N ki ..... ..f.„.„ , Low Density tt• ••••••••-. Multl-Family \ Office / Office Park • L. ‘• •-.....,-, ..1 1...`..e.:.•'... '.•re• ';:,..11.te••.• •P....Lb '•e..• .'t •'.• . r...."...ti. •fr.;!:•••••••••.....:'.:. .Z......1....• . . ..• '.•.....,.r ,Vkz.::i:::i.iU::::•.••,i.:.i::i:n:::i:••:::::::i.•:• Multi-Family •.'10o.00o.00o0.0o000o0.0o0.0o „,..•.fr1w...:.:e,..7 n•:./:-`:•...;•.7•‘:,•.--• -"•..• is _.•._.-.: .:J........c..,;.. -Density Public/Quasi-Public .:...:•-••-••••....•,:• ....„...,.. :4....::,..-. ,..:. - - . GOC,..,-zi, •".',..- .t:,,.::"--:-.;,:; -'2.1i:-.T'"::. :" Light Industrial ' . -5......:4?i,v,A.::-':-.:;-k- "e•;./at...°4,1,7f-i:...•,..rs, •er:-cr,-.e.•'-7`,''.4t..;is: High Density c-•-••••:„-„... -,N.c. •_,...:•;;.i.,.!110 1 -../4•••0:::,•„ ;,...,,,•-•,....,..,..... circ•••;;;.:,,,,•• Multi-Family , ,.....••••••:,......:-.. • 7 MI .. Lc-t-,i,..,.,z, • • • • r-tbiert,et Recreation ri •••••• Heavy Industrial • ,. 11111111k. ..;;- Litli-ez".:oxodo i'i -I"- • • • ____ _ . • • ., -,.....i-t-r.c ' b'''''' '•' Greenbelt•.I 0..7.'••:.•., :::-:."-:-.:. Manufacturing Park I •.:.:•:•:•:••• • ..-2-.•••••• \ •••••• :,..., •••: .:.:•:.:.:.•• . -.....--. 1 ,, w .,. • / Multiple Option ••:•:.:.+•„......: ...4„, •••.!... ••••••:•••••::: ., .11,-.. ,17t , . ' 1. '419. . /I: •000 •j::.:::: '..,42 :•,/.71.:,.. !.000.0.• 1:. ,:"... .. 2 .7..::::::: i 0. • .:.:.:•: i• -'-'..• WASHINGTON , .. , --,,,.,,et...:....,_ iiii ,,,...v.s..:z. . . III r .,61,4 Moue - - ._. . ., N, .. fo, 1.. •:,..:•'7, I..„Irs. 1 • :.is „, ,,, \:::___.. ..:14r...er,_• , ii\,..::,, , • - :- '111 i It 0.00000000 __ . _Avg IN 0000• r '10 .010, .. ....... ........••• i AVI.Plir 9'9. , -• • • 7,;) .. A ODD dad, / • • • • • •41, ...,"10!) ,.:.:.: , • • • • • • . ,.: , :::::.:... ... .:.:.„:„.:./.,.,....,, deir • ::::::: tt ation um min , -....„..:,.... INMENE:m - ......... .-• • • • • • • •. ::,:,.:.:,::,.:.::I seer--:-..6,-)':::::::: • misw.wor. Eli '..., •- -.0. • • • • •• • • • ;-• -.1:::::i:::: MINE. -::i:i*: 'sm. 1 Milimill.11:. / \t-00...0 : • im• •••••••••••••• • ,•••• :i' ::i:i::* ilik, ...! ::i.. --•...gulp,. INI IIE /...a::::i ,,--- • . .-tilp„., r v. ':,E,og•g..•- • • • • • • • • • • _•\_•_•_ ... ::: :::.:.:A ::..... se. =Ai. F4 /0000 0 • • • • • • • • • • o • ..•••411 4111.• . Ikli toV ; • • • • • •• •••• 41• •• • • ....... ' '::'S31111111. laa 0ggggg; • • • . . •• • • • • e ‘; e • - .3•. .e. immillin 1.,Mogogog• A- • • • • • • es o • e • • %, si:.: 11111 ra iiiiilir 1111111116Ti . . ,,$)ogogoo.,•it • • li. • • • ••••• %Oa ••••• ,:. i.:•1 ,. IN 0 . . .00 . .j0.141 p. • • .,. ellidill 111.11111 :I :;;:go°20.....11: • • • • o • • • • • • • •. • % . i r,.3. .-"=. MIME (4A1%"g4,0gO ( * .0.0.8.* ••••••• • •110ftiglip' '. IIIIIIi i o 1,.... . -::•.1191.111.11111 V1,°gggeo,',%.,.. . •••••••• ••••••• •••:••••••• 4:0• \ ...i. ... ..0..../ws ,01.,.... . ,. ... NENE - ogogegogo. . ,„ a, . • • • • • - „oo.,„..0. ,„, • • • • ••• • o • • • .:11: ...L.411# 1111111.011:40\: 06,60.0 1-711. •eo.o.011,••• ' 111% I IL'i•l;1111.1111111111 , . a MIMI lei.:?gce,g•k,g2:.• • co . P . • • • 0 • • '.'°•p11.1111.11111111' -a -.,g0g0g0g0g•Lek • -•-•i • o • • • • •x•-•• oo • • ? €1//. \11y1 glad 41 „, .„„ .samissis -?. .. ,000.0...o• .• • • ,• „,....„.„:„....... , . . • . . ,.. , 000 . ... • . • : ..,..,... 1.1. .10g02,0g4' .itt. • • i •• • - Fr.1=1. 19.9 1 le 4110•9 • 4 .,J;tilti .:...;:: 10igi10.ii i . _ I ! VW 6.1111 .00gOgegc,C,V,3.'',.. 6.... lammill o As • 0, 1 #4,. Alb ' '-:%71 i I .A0Mg...V. -=.°.''• OMNI . ,0 .4).° P .11441 ki 1 ..• __J •...: .--.-d-6°.° .:..: ::-..:.-:-.:......:.:....... oomogogogo. ,::,°.g`c••,g- Ji.-,_.,---,4 . ".... ' '.., • j. is ,,,,,..:..., ----.::::::4::::::aiim:::::.:..... -..0.0 ft.•- ..,00,poonfa; ,ogogogogoog, .4k, ,9,0go lin to,,,,.. "-- .. ,. Is. . • 7.: ....x, ,,-.::. ..mii:i:::'::.::::.:,:,:::::::i:::Witt 1 Af.',.. *:.'' .. ..•.::,:i::i::i,i.i:i:i:i,::i ?orn°0°Y,PAvoAll'Auoctuocg' ( k,.., ggggygggOgg.., . 41 . •.,..,.... . ...„.„:„:„.:„.:.:.:„.: .4 . ,• :..:::.:::::::::::::::::::.::::::::: .. ..::::i;i::*:;i::::*::::i:i*: o0o ,....o.o00.o.o.000m. le ' • Irtaibk,afe.:-' . .:.::::ui::i :.4.4 ,,,1,6:1,00„;.,..o. 00.:,0......l00 „. 0 r7„.. , k %*-...• 1:Mw:.: 0o0- 0.09.:(toodnuooca8.. oyr'0o,, liklabawAr4wkw:-. •• • • tispiiT '% . c • - 00000• • 1 ' z -118AMI;t0(c).eg tg'hh4 I lairiLk/(;:•rri,, kAt r... I o o o oo /, -::.i.i::.i::*::i::i:ii: [ . o oo o o o o o• -• • , .oToo,,o0000d.:0%. 1. 1 •0000 :. ::::.:::::::::::::::::::; :. w000p0000n •.• - i:' ''..1"440,,ekeillirlialZharskii iniihiliti":‘(?gi fAj...1\ig, .', Qs .,,:..' . .*::i:iiii:i:i::iii:iii: .',-, Uo°o`lioof• 4- L„: . • • ' 0000000 1,.. DaPda 0, ..e‹,,/".. ...34'...r4e. ''...., .1.; i .;a :i.i :. '.Y-,;:••6.,_. , . °". t..-Jir?. i::: _ 4 .1"41b,11Werargaifirriaj.iiii unroll 'p'-.)::-r•:--- • • iiIiii ,.. ... • •!.' :..]-fi . .i .:.: . ,,.. v...c,--;,--,---;;, . AN mriegam.. 4 gal.!: ,e, .,. .. - tripoisiiia• • Ng iii mil f 4rd '',:t1'...':.0 C.'.. .-.... .. . .'"::.:',:;*•.?•!:',• •'.'•'7).; -'.•,.. ..-;.1.;-;:',..-•,.......I.,'':) -.5",0...0,,-,ne:,,•,5',- .•• .C • \ r ace. m mr:46214.ci • .10 NI : .:.,..,,....,,(..:. .-..,,,,,,c_;.;‘,...t,,,T-,:x..,.u •-•;.,;,`J.',',;t ',•,;:.j.,;,:4•,',F.,:-• :.:•••: ,,c,:.:?, ..1.?:!,::;.:3r,ii:,:::•c11,7:,7f.,..,. ••• :.. . ,.. ...._. 1,_ ariork......rawl .. : • ,...::',.9 : ' . ,..:*,••••--....E.'.••' - •''':.f....1 1,../p 9?,CI"t'n'•4: \ ...0.,`r. •,,• v 4.X.dy'''e ' II& ../..,......d.'f r,-.:-• - ;',,,,,,...4.. • , •••reMt__,,,„: s . 64.! i • . '.:-.:,•:-..•::::::::::....:. ::.:::: • "•,••,; '',.,, --' '''' • Itillipb,..• . **kV'. IPIP "1• t C' • . '•:'.::::1•x.:::•• .•:::•:•-• Wass- -.. N • libt i 7..-_-- ' : ,..SIMIBRINIMriut us• IP' ,....,.... c.....,. :777:7.1 .,...... ,. .,:;_,,..,..4,2_,,:::. *41.... 41,,,, .,,.. „., -_-_-_-_-_ . .........IP . ..i:;"'''''';.i."‘,";i's$-.'"'"1-777-1-1-F(773 i• '-'"g- ' 'Mit'ICt 4 •.> '.:,.; ,-.,..t.l';;;-:.•''..•-•07%.,•`• `'''.`• si:' - „ ..-t.e. -- -- - - - - - itell=•-- ,@: -21 ;Timri. ITV()1.1.0.0 .!:!,!i1 1:‘../1•A.••0 O.)0.;t...•r1.0.........;:) . .s% ' . ....... .1 .7.:. 72- ::'"::: :-::-.. ILI-...; F.::::t..soow i III .s..00 0•.(1',!:•;A••'•'.',g A.i.--..!;:r - - ,'••••• -S <),;'e:n'''',f,''.. ..; -..1'4, ' . .-. . . • ..- ._- _-_-_ _-_-_- mem atonal ,,, ..: re% _ _ urea unit'•••'.•(' -.awn , 1,,r,.4,•••,..•;!...•.:.11•,•;,`.‘,.',...,- ;• •:',,,;c,..,.•-:•-•,,,..,,„....-ri:"0: . . 1 4Fizisici- memo memisaa,-- www• ..11.gC __ at traw.m..,ammissu WWWWW. , ••,., •-!"-,-,•••• •. ..c•• - ,-.oh,0• .(-;•(....,•..e.w.:•0,•..-,".6,,•••:'•''...f?- • ;•`.;•!."' .• ; 7 - . ''-•:',..,„ • • .„ ,.,.).inl• ,...,.;•1 0 ..• ,..„ IN a. c.),..,. .,.,•,•,,„.c., .,/)o, . ,..,•---- -- ----------- • ••••• ,. . .. ,. ,t:•..,.. .t1..„;, :V(Z1. ''•.r•••''•a". 4..••-.."Ve.•."-'..:, '‘ V',`•)'..t 'i,..' . • . --. --- --- _' . 1 hilliZINUMUI MMMMMMMM : .•.:::•::::::,:::.:-. . ...,7':V, V.::'.".'''';'1.3 • " (1‘'''1':1‘ ' .:•:•••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•. iiiii.:;,‘,I:.fd.,.0, .,t1.s•..,;...:0 ,.ov '0y:ill...ill 0 . i•.• .,.‘,1...1...„1,,,;:,:,:::, :•,.,ts;1,1...t.t... !"--- - fro---- ...OS •''.. SaIMMEMOPONNIIMMIN I le. . ''..:::::::.::::::::•:::::::;:: 1..l't• .IV-_- Fig Pet . ,d,:_.,....::::„:„,,,a :,,,i:„„:„,„„„„„,,„„,:,:,.. .,;:„...,.:,.,,,,,-.%:-,• -., ..ci,,,,,-,.„ ,:i.,,"7 . -'777.777.7.7'.,.. ....2.‘ 1•::L t:. , . . .- -_ ':. plum.- r :;M:ii:i:ii:.:,::.*::::i:.' , ...,,,-•,,-;',••••'.-, , ', 9,;',.,°8',? • -\,\ ::.:•:.K::::. ..:... `:;.).:sr...,:,.,74 JRsik . -^'•'• );,:0•.:. 0°8'd' ';'• . `','('(). -70 __ •,,..,-,,..,,,... .,.,,, .-_ ........ ...,• ,....:I,1 • . -I-- ... ,_41 mu;..,..•:.:•.•:•.•:•:::::.: .:,:::::::'.:i-, :';',1'.... 0 0 0• f:,,,'s )., '_•;:i.:•,',0 • ----:---14t° M.Ul WI II! 1.1 -4),.•::.:;V:::iii:gii::].::i:ii:i:ii::. .. ......:4-„7--.- ;%-...!-,. • .,,.. •:.: - .\ 4 ...a‘ '..:::i':::...::=:•;:. :;'' ...-s'L'''''' . iii. • I°°...il. .......... 0000.0.• - '...(0,,!,-, •••••-•• i,L , 00..• . ..,. ... ..„...000.00.00°.• kIN .0.0.0.0••\.2 ,..• ,.,rk:I. -,.--- - ...-...- ------ , •-----.----- ----- , -- 4f*.•:!:"':''';'.1, 12:: bi:\ •000• ., • `:‘,",•1 r. ---••••--..--- ----- •_ ° 00.6. t t 3.;e;''t.'• .. -1-41PAWO--- -=-:---------K- :?: 0 0 ::.:::::::, Op:),• i .4,, ,.,.2,-;. •0 o o ...• 4 7-- --j‘xxi__-'------ :.-.------- :..-71 0°0 .*::i::.:i::•. •,::1 ,,,,,,,,•, 00000 I •• .--- _"..-_e_f-PS.,. 00.00°::-:-:-.7 • ti ) ?0 0 •:.::::::::::::.. ,..:%I .0. , •000.0 ..,.,,,..: .,•...• ,§60.0--_-_-_ ,..,. s:-., --:-"---:-'-:. ---- - . • • ' -f7:7-.: i:....'1/.... iii, .. • • . , . .. ::-::•;:::::::.:•:..::.:.:.. -0. •• • :.• __- ______ .. I..-- .• •-•- oc...00 ....„,.. . . -„,... . . .:,:,:,:,:.0...0.•-\. / •00.00• 00.00. w. .. ..,.....-.- .....0,„ ,.., . ..:•..n000000 • ?,Nt, I , •00000• .:,'..*%%OM'I ;) , • ' 000000 ‘k% MN 000000 ' ; - •00000• •• --.-- '' • • tr.,:'e.7 '' ..{000.1 ..el• 000000 S2.4 c".s... -AK1. ----,.-7.:. ..,...." .1.ii , _V -• ..., . 4. . :J/-ice 4 Q`1 yW Lie i 'ram 2.--1 ll A / /// \ "�w' \,. Q... • ' i � :— I. , � � ,/� / l . jt�''v I - - • + .12 I 17 rg , . , = , R. bt ! /: I,l L., /i7 • ce , ' L • W _ � . -f"�-- • � 0•-- 4„iy o : f= I/ramj r 1.' L_Ll • 5 .• . . _ • t.' . :::..: . !il Lt. W., il'irp.AH-1-1 .1-17_,....!. / P.1 hf,///ic.j_r)i''. . . .. . .�: ` ,1 - ',l. ', -. •. I ,. ►, /'. ' L-1 . L" ,=•=r-,----Ft4i, . Li- , .- • 1 '111 • rtri4 N ; z'•-''••,•J:'—i- .}+, [. all E~, -y R� L: f�l j . / :7 ' • \ lard � a ,� � � _— '•��1'`� � • /; 1 l I ,(;21 p, .,' p \ . . 7--• .. . k- ' .---N , .,,,,.. 7.4:Y/ 7 I''' ,- ": , -j. "ICI -I P7-3Bm.-5 -12. ii--t--'17 ! : 1-:" / 1/Z /.;1‘.: - :\))) All './. ---4 / \ •' / /�, • • d .:a O. ��: PARK / �i`� - b ;0a ' 4-� • /�• CEDAR RIVER \ ' - �_-_�11. Ru.rdl .1 / PARK �\ l" / i• T i• / _ _ �;-� :7 II= mot' �r%P40-� ( . ( I 1 r ``�: • ,� / ' "i ry• ' \�_� \ 0_1 ,, - 1 2 (,AL: • 9i !r � a /� • 11:� -- r-��� "1---- •II-'-_,1 • -;1) .-'• . . „ -1 ..-4, 4 . - ...J.;, .,:.; . . • ...0 •. „r.. is .. . . II"ii ivi .,_ \ \ �, ,Iwo. �:• , . . =ear lirlit,'1 ; . ' : 1 ...,,i ,. 1 ''. •P ' • s*.,.. MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 & SA-068-86 , • APPLICANT MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES TOTAL AREA ±16,480 SQ. FT. • PRINCIPAL ACCESS MEADOW AVENUE NORTH ' EXISTING ZONING R-1 , RESIDENTIAL-TWO FAMILY EXISTING USE UNDEVELOPED/SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PROPOSED USE COMMERCIAL PRINT SHOP • COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMERCIAL COMMENTS OF RA, `c, 0 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • MAXINE E.MOTOR, 9A Co' CITY CLERK • (206) 235-250I ogTeD sEPrt._k# October 1, 1986 APPEAL FILED BY JON POTTER, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. REPRESENTING A. L. LOTTO, RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, dated September 16, 1986, 'Melvin Main/Print Craft Sales Corp. , -R 067-86. To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision has been filed with the City Clerk, along with the proper fee of $75.00 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. The Council Secretary will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Committee meeting. If you are not listed in local telephone directories and wish to attend the meeting, please call the Council Secretary at 235-2586 any weekday after 1:00 p.m. for information. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor, CMC City Clerk OF RA,� _ w Ak o THE CITY OF RENTON 4$ ® % MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 n rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • MAXINE E.MOTOR, 0-o `o- CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2501 0,9gT�D SEP1E���� October 2, 1986 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) MAXINE E. MOTOR, City Clerk of the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is 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 2nd day of October, 1986, 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, a true and correct NOTICE OF APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION FILED BY JON POTTER, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES, INC. REPRESENTING A.L. LOTTO. I Rezone R-067-86. -2-2p.-‘_e_,,c.e._ e ,2.-x _._ _.0-i-- Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 2nd day of October, 1986. AA41 !a'< y\--- Notary Pu.' is n and,,fort the`-SYa.te of Wash' von; reaiding;in..King= County - ,,,k, s.` I I tITY OF RENTON N? 18145 FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 f"a' 19e RECEIVED OF i4 Z 06le0 1P0f.a f %/n/iza- d Received by TOTAL 75 �� WRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER' S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICATION NAME: FILE NO. -R - Oc.2--�� /VIP va Ill a yr � ( �� Se-tLg Cel!s.r - The undersigned interested •arty ��q � `c'tice of Appeal from the Decision or Recommendation of the La d UsV an `E'S� 9'�r, dated � `�? 19 ;4SEP,ID_ 16 1 . IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY D CRY CLERK'S OFFlCE APPELLANT: M E M 0VIs EPRESENTATIVE ( IF ANY) : Name: MQ1V\.v\ 141Od 1 - Name: '--- -V/. .a,re s Scx Hr I Address: 1D-7 "U i lIl te74) e, ,�t,�, Address: I-�U A' Qfi� ,LJA A c=P Telephone No. Telephone No. 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: cAJJ FINDINGS OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner' s Report) - No. Error: lJ 1 0,01 J Correction: CONCLUSIONS: IIi No. Error: Boor L'ed+ pro p 1 1AH11 ���>'1�i �rl o Correction: —TQ„r r`e_a rAt�0t l d!�" w t44 �l � � OTHER: i� �( N o. ' Error: ` U.c o�.1 1 I-c;e_ p C ° ►'Zjkija3 tt - Correction: ((-F sQI Is Cp-rsls'Ic��� y �,,�We�sr1 i up) 1`-, 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired). Reverse the Decision or Recommendation and grant the following relief : Modify the Decision or Recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows : Other: Appellant/Representative Signature Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 30 of the Renton Municipal Code, and Sections 4-3016 and 4-3017, specifically (see reverse side of page) for specific appeal procedures. 4-3016: APPEAL: Unless an ordinance providing for review of decision of the Exe sr requires review thereof by the Superi ourt, any interested party aggrieved by Examiner's written decision or recomn lation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Clerk upon a.form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. The notice t. of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with the Fee Schedule of the City. (A) The written notice of appeal shall fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial errors) in fact or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief. (B) Within five 15)days of receipt of the notice of appeal,the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the retatei'of'the'tappei Other parties of record may submit letters in suppor>z of the J.'•i ' n}p��v{ t hirten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification oft ` .1 rorthe.notice of,appeal. (C) Thereupon the Clerk shall foaId•.to.the members VP?' the City Council all of the pertinent documents, includiing..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. • (D) 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 may remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the appellant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional 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. (E) 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. (F) If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to Section 4-3010(A) 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. (G) If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to Section 4-3010(B) or (C), 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 pursuant to Section 4-3010(B) or (C). (H) 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, 9-13-82) 4-3017: COUNCIL ACTION: Any application requiring action by the City Council shall be evidenced by minute entry unless otherwise required • by law. When taking any such final action, the Council shall make and enter findings of fact from the record and conclusions therefrom which support its action. Unless otherwise specified, the City Council shall be presumed to have adopted the Examiner's findings and conclusions. (A) In the case of a change of the zone classification of property (rezone), the City Clerk shall place the ordinance on the Council's agenda for first reading. Final reading of the ordinance shall not occur until all conditions, restrictions or modifications which may have been required by the Council have been accomplished or provisions for compliance made to the satisfaction of the • Legal Department. (B) All other applications requiring Council action shall be placed on the Council's agenda for consideration. (Ord. 3454, 7-28-80) (C) The action of the Council approving, modifying-or rejecting a decision of the Examiner, shall be final and conclusive, unless within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the action an aggrieved party or person obtains a writ of review from the Superior Court of Washington for King County, for purposes of review of the action taken. (Ord. 3725, 5-9-83) _ R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Planning • Landscape • Environmental • Economics September 3.0, 1986 Principals: Jon Potter Robert W. Thorpe, AICP City of Renton Associates: Renton City. Halal Joanne Polayes-Wien Renton„ WA 98055 ATTN: city Clerk RE: '.kelvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation CITY OF RENTON File No. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 ,�E� 3 01. ..- Request for appeal of Hearing Examiner's -recommendation for denial. • CRY CLERK'S OFFICE Dear Mr. Examiner: • n� '. , _� � __it_. • We have been retained to represent the proponent to appeal the Examiner's . September 16, 1986 recommendation of denial. Attached is the $75.00 Filing fee for appeal to the City Council. General Arguments for Appeal are as follows: 1. The proposal is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The issue of whether the land use is appropriate for the site location has already been addressed during the Comprehensive Planning process. The proposal would only make the zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation. Further, the issue of incompatibility is not supported by the Declaration of Non-Significance made by City staff. 2. The Hearing Examiner's recommendation for denial is not supported by City staff as provided in the preliminary report to the Hearing Examiner dated September 2, 1986. 3. The Hearing Examiner cited the Bryant Rezone request, which was denied by City Council as having similar issues to this proposal. The Bryant rezone also included a conditional use permit request to authorize parking of buses. A conditional use permit was necessary since bus parking is an industrial use. The proposed service use is not an industrial use and impacts are significantly less. The issues are not similar. Hcwever, the Hearing Examiner did note that the present request is inmeasurably superior to the Bryant Rezone request in sensitivity to homes across the street. le The Examiner noted that the area does not represent the greatest example of. good land use practice; however, he then. defends the land use pattern os the area by stating that it is reasonable to place a. boundary between the commercial zone and residential zone at a mid bloc. point. "That division properly creates an interface at the rear of the properties". However, it should be noted that the rear of that commercial property is generally less compatible with the residential use than the front of the commercial property. The rear of the commercial property generally contains dumpsters. storage areas and other functions which may be unsightly. • • Seattle: 1 300 Alaska Bldg. • 2nd & Cherry • Seattle, WA 98104 • (206] 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503 • 111 0 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, AK 99503 • [907] 276-6846 • Page 2 - City of Renton 5. The Hearing Examiner noted that streets are substandard despite the traffic engineer recommendation for approval with conditions. 6. If the proposal site was developed with residential uses as provided under the current R-2 designation there would still be a demarcation between the new residential use, and adjacent commercial zone designation (i.e, gas station). The issue of incompatiblity would still exist. However, if a site is rezoned to be commercial, appropriate mitigations can be imposed to lessen the potential impacts. Under the existing zoning (R-2) it would be less likely that such mitigations such as landscape buffers and building orientation would be required of- the residential development (i.e., single family or duplex) to mitigate impacts of adjacent commercial uses. 7. One can assume that under the existing R-2 designation a duplex could-- -•~~ be constructed. Based on the proposal it would provide a transitional service oriented use between the residences north of the site and gas station south of the-site. If the site is developed with single family or duplex no transitional use would be provided between the gas station and new residential use. In summary, the Hearing Examiner has ignored the staff's recommendations for approval with conditions, ignored the adjacent commercial land use's impact on development opportunities of the subject site and the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site, and ignored the Determination of Non-Significance of the Rezone request made by the Building and Zoning Director, Policy Development Director and Public Works Director. It is on the points made above and others which will be made at the Hearing that we respectfully request City Council's approval of the proposed rezone. Respectfully submitted, R.W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES,• INC:. Jon Potter, Principal Attachment c Hearing Examiner Roger Blaylock Seattle: B1 5 Seattle Tower•3rd A University• Seattle, WA 98101 •(206] 524-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503• 1 1 1 0 West Sixth Avenue• Anchorage,AK 99503°(907] 278-8846 awl rH�L. R.W. . .iorpe & Associa..Js, Inc. Planning • Landscape • Environmental • Economics Principals: Jon Potter September 29, 1986 Robert W. Thorpe, AICP Associates: Joanne Polayes-Wien City Clerk • City of Renton City Hall Renton, WA 98055 CITY of RENTAL! RE: 'Melvin Maine/Print Sales Corporation $Ep4 3 Q ,,. • File No. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 Request for appeal of Hearing Examiner's D ( CAYCLERWSOFFlCE )11 recommendation fcr denial. Dear Mr. Examiner: We have been retained to represent the proponent to appeal the Examiner's September 16, 1986 recommendation of denial. Attached is the $75.00 filing Fee for appeal to the City Council. Arguments for appeal are forthcoming and will be presented at the Public Hearing. Respectfully submitted, R.W. THOR' . & ASSOCIATES, INC. Jon Potter, Principal cc: Hearing Examiner Roger Blaylock Attachment Seattle: 1300 Alaska Bldg. • 2nd & Cherry • Seattle, WA 96104 • (206) 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503 • 1 1 1 0 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, AK 99503 • [907] 276-6846 1 . September 16, 1986 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION APPLICANT: MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP.. File No.: R-067-86 and SA-068-86 LOCATION: Southwest corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval to rezone from R-2 to B-1, and approval of a site plan to construct a one-story building for a print shop consisting of approximately 5,350 square feet. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Building and Zoning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions Hearing Examiner Decision: Recommend City Council deny rezone request. BUILDING & ZONING The Building & Zoning Department Report was received DEPARTMENT REPORT: by the Examiner on August 27, 1986 PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Building and Zoning Department Report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on September 2, 1986 at 10:35 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit #1 - Yellow File containing application, proof of posting and publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit #2 - Assessors Map. Exhibit #3 - Site Plan. Exhibit #4 - Written testimony of Versie Vaupel. The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jeanette Samek-McKague, Zoning Research Technician. Mrs McKague announced that the applicant had suggested a possible continuation but it was felt by staff that the review should be presented as there were surrounding property owners in the audience wishing to testify regarding this proposal. She proceeded stating the proposal is to rezone property and place a print shop thereon, with the building to be approximately 5300 sq. ft. The rezone and site plan requests do meet the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code; a review of departmental comments was given which suggested reorienting the pedestrian walkway to North Meadow; landscaping; the sign in the northwest corner needs to be set back 10 ft.; 3 fire hydrants will have to be placed in and around the site; the driveway in the S.W. corner of the site needs to be 30 ft. wide with underground powered lighting placed around the site; with the Design Engineering Department not commenting on this proposal as they felt they needed, more information regarding the grading and utility plans as well as the storm water retention/detention plans. Looking at the rezone request, the three criteria to be considered were discussed noting the property has not been considered for a rezone since the land use analysis was completed for the revision to the Central Area Plan in 1983, but due to opposition from the neighborhood the City did not follow through with the rezoning; the property is classified for the proposed zone pursuant to policies in the Comprehensive Plan; and she reviewed the surrounding zoning and other uses in the area as proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. McKague stated the site will be a buffer between heavier commercial and industrial uses and the residential.uses; staff feels the B-1 zoning, with some limitations, is appropriate. She advised the print shop is a service use; the use is being considered in a delicate transitional area between two zones; improvements have not been provided on Meadow and surrounding streets, and when considering possible traffic patterns it was noted the streets are considered to be MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 2 substandard. Meadow has a 60 ft. right-of-way but is not presently built out to width. Staff is working with the applicant to upgrade the road system in the area and until the time the system is improved it is probable there will be no further commercial uses permitted in the subject area. Reviewing the site plan, Mrs. McKague stated due to the sensitivity of seeking a rezone in such a sensitive area, the Site Plan Review Committee felt this matter should be presented with the rezone for a public hearing. Conservation of area-wide property values was discussed and it was felt this proposal would not affect those values; the city will be watching development in the area between Bronson Way and 2nd Street which is to be limited to offices and similar uses. She stated there is a height limit of 35 ft.; it is felt this is a more compatible rezone for the area than a previous application for a different applicant (said rezone was denied by the City Council);.there should be no problem with noise or odor from the print shop; it is recommended that due to the sensitivity of the area the conditions for this site should be placed in the form of restrictive covenants. With this information, it was suggested that the rezone be recommended for approval to the City Council and the Site Plan be continued to provide time for staff to review with the applicant such matters as the relocation of the main entrance, landscaping, buffering to the north of the site and relocating the service entrance to the south portion of the building with the placement of all loading areas on-site. It was also suggested there be a limit placed on construction time in order to ensure expedient completion and return of the neighborhood to a normal pattern. The Examiner called for testimony in support of this proposal from the applicant or their representative. Responding was Dennis Neifert. 1042 West James Street, Kent, Wa. 98032. Mr. Neifert stated they received the staff report on Friday afternoon of Labor Day Weekend for this hearing and felt they did not have sufficient time to review staff requirements, which the applicant feels are substantial, nor did they have time to analyze how they will affect their project. He requested they, be given time to work with staff to determine how they can comply with some of the requirements or possibly come up with a revised Site Plan. Mr. Neifert feels the applicant has been very sensitive to the fact they will be adjoining a residential area and has tried to provide safeguards to ensure there are no impacts to the neighborhood. They feel the criteria in the staff report is possibly criteria they could live with, but need more time to review. He requested a continuance to September 23, 1986. He then introduced the owner of the business. Testifying was Melvin Maine, 107 Williams Ave. So., Renton. Wa. 98055. Mr. Maine explained his operation is limited almost exclusively to acting as a broker in the printing business, with very little printing on-site; they discourage walk-in business; if they do receive walk-in print business they direct them elsewhere; they deliver their own product in their own vehicles; they receive deliveries from UPS. As far as noise on-site, Mr. Maine stated at the present time they have duplicators and presses which are very quiet; no old equipment will be used; odors from inks and/or dyes are not detectable except inside the building, and only then if you are standing close to the machines. Due to the fact they received the report late, Mr. Maine requested a continuance to review staffs suggested conditions to their request. He had no further comments at this time. There was no one else wishing to speak in support of this proposal and no one wishing to speak in opposition. Wishing to comment on the proposal was: Mariorie Richter, 300 Meadow North, Renton, Wa. 98055. Ms. Richter referred to the sign at the northern end of the property and felt it should be moved further to the south toward the business parking lot. She stated it was also felt the entrance for the business should not be located across the street from the residential property due to the street noise from trucks as deliveries are made to the business. She stated the service entrance should be located in the alley or located in the parking lot area. Mrs. Richter felt there should be screening and/or landscaping to try to continue the continuity of a residential atmosphere. Commenting further was Versie Vaupel, 1402 North 2nd Street. Renton, Wa. 98055. Mrs. Vaupel lives directly across the street from the proposed business. She submitted her letter of testimony to the Hearing Examiner setting out her concerns such as retaining a residential atmosphere for the area; possible noise and odors; moving the sign further south near the delivery entrance; placement of the delivery entrance to be considered carefully as the alley and street in the area are both very narrow; asked for a limit to night and Sunday activities on the site as the property adjoins residences; and , suggested outside safety lighting for surrounding residents. Mrs. Vaupel questioned the length of time for construction and it was stated by the owner they anticipated a 5 month building program. In closing, Mrs. Vaupel stated the proposal does seem to be more compatible than other proposals previously submitted for this area. There was a question as to whether the use proposed would be permitted in the B-1 zone, and with that in mind the Hearing Examiner asked the applicant if they would want to have him consider the Rezone portion of the application today and hear the Site Plan portion at a later date after this determination has been worked out. The applicant felt it should be determined first if the use was permitted because if it was not the applicant would have no need for the rezone. It was noted that the determination of use would be the responsibility of the Building and Zoning Department at the time someone seeks a building permit. Mrs. McKague stated staff has determined this use would be permitted, and to date that determination has not been appealed. It was determined the Examiner would consider the Rezone portion this date and will review the Site Plan at the continued hearing. The applicant agreed, and wishing to testify was the owner of the property, Ann Lotto, 280 Morris Avenue So., Renton, Wa. 98055. She stated she wished to have the property rezoned, feels the rezone would benefit the community as the property is currently in a run down condition. At this time the Examiner MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 3 confirmed the continuance of the Site Plan portion of this application to September 23, 1986. 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 11:10 A.M. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Melvin Maine, for Print Craft Sales Corporation, filed a request for approval of the rezone of approximately 16,480 square feet of property from R-2 (Duplex Residential) to B-1 (Business/Commercial) together with a request for approval of a site plan for a one-story building containing a print shop. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a declaration of non-significance (DNS) for the subject proposal. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located immediately southeast of the intersection of North 2nd Street and Meadow Avenue North. The site comprises the northwest quadrant of the block bounded by N. 2nd on the north, Meadow on the west, Factory Avenue N on the east and Bronson Way N on the south. The southern end of the block fronts along the Sunset/Bronson corridor. 6. Meadow Avenue is a residential grade street. It is only 35 feet wide. When parking occurs on both sides, which is permitted, only 20 feet of driving surface is available. No. 2nd, the other street the site fronts upon, is a street with only 30 feet of width, and again, with parking on both sides there is only about 15 feet of driving surface. 7. The subject site consists of two (2) single family homes and a vacant parcel. From the west and moving clockwise, is a vacant R-2 zoned lot, which is the site of a rejected Bryant Motors rezone attempt, similar to the current application. West of the vacant lot is Bryant Motors, a truck, bus and tractor/mower sales and service operation. Across to the northwest are single family homes located along N. 2nd and Garden Avenue North, the next street west of the site. A small apartment building is northwest of the site. Single family homes are north of the apartment. Directly north of the subject site are additional single family homes. Southwest of the site is a motel. Bronson Way North, a major arterial, is located to the south. 8. While the applicant applied for a particular site plan, the late delivery of the staff report recommendations did not give the applicant time to respond. The applicant requested that the site plan be considered at a continued hearing. The parties agreed to allow the rezone hearing to be conducted separately, although the applicant indicated that his purchase of the property is contingent upon approval of his site plan and the rezone. Staff agreed to separate the items since staff believes that the rezone stands alone, and can be approved subject to certain conditions without a site plan. The proposed plan for a print shop was predicated upon an approval of the current B-1 rezone request. 9. Staff recommended approval of the rezone subject to: 1) a maximum building height of 35 feet; 2) use of the property be restricted to office and similar service and professional uses (subject to the discretion of the Building and Zoning Department regarding similar,services); and 3) further limitations regarding entrances, parking, circulation, and location of mechanical equipment, all of which would be prohibited along N. 2nd Street. 10. The subject site is currently part of a multi-block R-2 zone. The R-2 zone extends north and west of the subject site, wrapping around the Bryant Motors building, just west of the site. It also extends east of the site to Houser Way. The B-1 zone immediately south of the site extends east and west generally along the north edge of Bronson Way. It then extends up Park Avenue, a major arterial. The R-2 zone, divided by this commercial thoroughfare, continues to the west and to the south to the Cedar River. 11. The R-2 zone is developed primarily with single family homes. The B-1 zone generally consists of a strip of small scale retail and commercial operations following the Bronson/Sunset corridor. The subject site like most of this R-2 zone contains single family homes, as indicated above. 12. The site is approximately 103 feet wide measured from Meadow, and approximately 160 feet deep measured from N. 2nd. An alley forming the east property line parallels Meadow Avenue east of the site. MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 4 13. 'The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial or low density multiple family uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the plan. The site appears at the periphery of an area shown as commercial, but abutting an area which is shown as low density multi-family. 14. The Comprehensive Plan Compendium contains a number of policies, some quite general, referring to respect for neighborhood values and calling for the elimination of incompatible uses. In its more specific statements it describes residential neighborhoods as areas where traffic which is not local in character should be discouraged. It calls for single family dwellings to be buffered from more intensive uses by low density multiple family uses, and in turn indicates,that low density multi-family uses should be buffered from more intensive uses by medium or high density uses. Incompatible uses should not be allowed, but where they exist, screening is recommended. 15. The Comprehensive Plan continues: Commercial areas should be located and designed to minimize travel and congestion and to promote safety; commercial areas should be compatible with adjacent land uses. Buffers should be placed between commercial and single family areas. Development should be designed to avoid adverse impacts on adjacent property. 16. The Comprehensive Plan also states that a variety of commercial, industrial and retail uses must be encouraged. It also indicates that provisions should be made for diversification and wide- ranging employment opportunities. 17. The plan also specifically identifies North Renton as a quality residential neighborhood whose viability and stability should be preserved. It is an area in which land use decisions should limit conflicts between residential and non-residential land uses. New development should be designed to reduce the hazards and nuisances of arterial traffic volumes in North Renton. 18. This Office takes notice of the fact that the City recently completed a study of the Cedar River Corridor. The study was accepted by the City Council and they have funded action to begin the recommended strategies contained within the study. Extracted below are comments from the study regarding the North Renton neighborhood in which the subject site is located: Most buildings, particularly single family structures, are in good condition and generally maintained by neighborhood residents. Residential neighborhood boundaries are not well defined [and] future plans should define the edges of the neighborhood and prevent non-residential encroachments. The neighborhood has walking access to the Cedar River, downtown, the library, City Hall, and a number of major entertainment uses. Housing structures have character, are affordable and easily rehabilitated or rebuilt. If the neighborhood were suitably planned and improved, the area could sustain present residents and possibly attract new resident investment from households interested in living in a convenient, comfortable urban residential setting. (Pages 14 and 16, Cedar River Corridor Strategy, January 1986). CONCLUSIONS 1. The proponent of a rezone must demonstrate that the request is in the public interest, that it will not impair the public health, safety and welfare and in addition, complies with at least one of the criteria found in Section 4-3010, which provides in part that: a. The subject site has not been considered in a previous area-wide rezone or land use analysis; or b. The subject site is potentially designated for the new classification per the Comprehensive Plan; or c. There has been a material and substantial change in the area in which the subject site is located since the last rezoning of the property or area. The requested classification is not justified and should be denied. 2. Staff has not succeeded in distinguishing the current request from the Bryant rezone request. already denied by the City Council. While it cannot be denied that the current request is immeasurably superior to that request in sensitivity to the homes across the street, it still is inappropriate and generally for the same reasons the Bryant request was inappropriate. Commercial zoning, even if oriented away from the residential homes is generally an inappropriate neighbor to residential development. MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 5 3. There is no compelling reason to shift the zoning boundary in this area. While the area does not represent the greatest example of good land use practice, the earlier decisions to place the boundary between the commercial B-1 zone and the residential R-2 zone at the mid-block does represent reasonable land use practice. That division properly creates an interface at the rear of properties. It avoids incompatible uses and incompatible zones facing one another across a street. While a street may serve as a good demarcation line for changing zones, for instance when stepping down or up between similar classes of use, it is not necessarily the case when switching between commercial and residential zones. 4. While the Building and Zoning Department recommended approval subject to strong buffering • standards, it is not simply a matter of erecting a screening fence or planting tall leafy trees. Zoning and land use cannot always be a simple matter of buffering incompatible uses. Zoning does not just separate the incompatible on-site unsightly uses or noisy uses or noxious uses of a particular plot of land from adjacent or less intensive uses. Zoning is also intended to alleviate the off-site secondary impacts such as delivery traffic, noise, customers, etc from circulating in an area preserved for less intensive uses. These are the secondary but no less consequential aspects which are meant to be segregated. Good land use practice seeks to preserve residential amenities by reserving land which can be held in quiet comfort, while also reserving other property for more intense, less restrictive activities. The rezone would permit a wide range of uses and even if limited to professional offices, it would still introduce commercial traffic, both vehicular and foot traffic into the area. 5. Zoning requires the establishment of a line between different districts. On one side of the line uses are permitted, on the other side of the line they are prohibited. The courts have recognized that the establishment of the line creates or denies rights unequally, but that the line must be drawn somewhere in order to give effect to zoning. When zoning and uses are already in place, modifying the line requires a review of what impacts will result. Will the applicant be denied reasonable use of the site, if the zoning is not approved? Will neighboring property be adversely affected by the request if it is approved? In the current case the facts demonstrate that the request to modify the zoning is inappropriate. Single family homes already occupy the site and remain a reasonable use of the subject site. They certainly remain a more reasonable neighbor to the single family homes across the street. 6. In addition, the fact remains that the streets serving the subject site are substandard. They are even substandard under today's standard in terms of serving residential development, and are truly substandard as commercial access streets serving commercial development. The same question asked in Bryant Motors is still relevant in this case: "Is this a corner (N. 2nd and Meadow Avenue N.) on which one would establish commercial uses?" Asking the question from a slightly different perspective: "Is the street frontage along Meadow, a street on which to establish a commercial use?" The answer in both cases is: "No." The commercial corridor of Sunset/Bronson is generally only one lot deep. The narrow streets do not invite commercial traffic or exploration. They were not meant to. The commercial focus should be maintained along the corridor. If it were to shift as requested, more travelers would begin to enter the residential area, uninvited and for the wrong purposes. 7. The recommendation adopted by the City Council in the Bryant Motors proposal stated: "While a major commercial thoroughfare is only a half block away, the land use and street characteristics are dramatically different surrounding the subject site. The site is located at the intersection of Meadow and N. 2nd. Meadow Avenue is a residential level street. It is only 35 .feet wide, and with parking on both sides approximately 20 feet of driving surface is available. The other street the site fronts upon is No. 2nd, a street with only 30 feet of width, and again, with parking on both sides only about 15 feet of driving surface. The question again: Would it be reasonable to have a commercial use at the location of the subject site with a front door on either No. 2nd or Meadow Avenue North? The answer: Unlikely." The same result, of necessity, follows in the current case. 8. The Comprehensive Plan and the Cedar River Study both suggest that the residential character of this area should be preserved, along with its amenities. While the map element of the Comprehensive Plan appears to designate the site as commercial, that is not conclusive. The map is only a guideline, it does not set up strict boundaries, nor should it. What the map indicates is that somewhere north of Bronson Way commercial uses will end and residential uses will begin. It does not state emphatically: "North 2nd Street shall be the dividing line." The map element specifically includes the following language: "The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is not a final blueprint, but rather a general design for future growth. In most cases, the Land Use Element Map identifies generalized areas for future land use rather than precise boundaries between uses. Implementation of these designations in specific locations is based on a number of factors, including adjacent zoning, surrounding uses, the public need for the proposed use and consistency with adopted City policies." MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 September 16, 1986 Page 6 The policies of the plan require denial of the request. 9. As the City Council did in Bryant Motors, ignoring for a moment the proposed site plan (pending but not part of this review) and simply reviewing the request as one for B-1 zoning on the subject site, the record demonstrates the request is unwarranted. Would the subject site, simply a corner lot, be suitable for commercial development? The answer is plainly 'no'. It is isolated from the main stream of commercial traffic and is not truly tied in with other commercial uses. And while the proposed site plan appeared well designed and landscaped (staff 'recommended conditions which the applicant was not sure could be accomplished), and while it would have directed commercial pedestrians away from N. 2nd (if other staff recommendations were followed), it would not be the same as having or continuing the current residential uses. What makes a better neighbor for residential uses and zoning, if not other similar uses and zoning. The best use for the subject property under the current state of affairs is R-2. 10. Weighing the applicant's rights against those of the neighboring property owners, the site should not be zoned for commercial uses. Well accepted land use practice generally does not support or encourage a face-off between commercial and residential uses. General zoning principles and the Comprehensive Plan would not have low density residential uses facing commercial uses. West and north of the site across Meadow and No. 2nd are low density residential uses. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan appear not only to sanction these residential uses, but strive to preserve and protect them from further commercial expansion. 11. Northwest of the site is a small apartment building, a very small apartment building. The other uses across from the site are single family homes. While the zoning may be low density multi- family which permits duplex units, the predominant land use is single-family residential. We still have a street system that is insufficient for commercial usage. We have an alley serving commercial uses aimed directly at single family homes. The alley does not continue north of N. 2nd Street. Rather, the leg of its 'T' intersection aims directly at single family property. Increasing the commercial potential of the subject site will only increase the number of • commercial vehicles using the alley. Even if the site plan was approved as proposed and the setbacks and landscaping provided, the current R-2 zoning on the subject site provides a reasonable and probably better buffer. And, again the applicant retains reasonable use of the subject property. 12. The City Council should deny the request since the request appears to be inconsistent with the decision in the Bryant Motors rezone. RECOMMENDATION The City Council should deny the Rezone. ORDERED THIS 16th day of September, 1986. • '14)A-t. FRED J. KAUFMAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of September, 1986 to the parties of record: Dennis Neifert 1042 West James Street Kent, Wa. 98032 Melvin Maine Print Craft Sales Corp. 107 Williams Ave. So. Renton, Wa. 98055 Marjorie Richter 300 Meadow North Renton, Wa. 98055 MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 and SA-068-86 • September 16, 1986 Page 7 Versie Vaupel 1402 North 2nd Street -- Renton, Wa. 98055 Ann Lotto 280 Morris Avenue So. Renton, Wa. 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 16th day of September, 1986 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director Larry M. Springer, Policy Development Director Members, Renton Planning Commission Ronald Nelson, Building & Zoning Director Glen Gordon, Fire Marshal Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 P.M. September 30, 1986. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is 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 errors relied upon 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, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. • Ib1 No awvo _ . a:.a...aa 98-890-VS 5 98-L90-21 !limo tp�p1A M<AMsaap 1 •J•.•t••t11.1 a4—la eta 'J'/.t[.,1'oa.'•f••••ly•ylafgl•t n•,aaal 1• I AAA 'at • ewl••w at w•\J Di i.wIM4 1• 1 •wi•Mossy It•4.1•pe i4aa..I. '{l 1�f!14IWi 11i?•0j-I .••9.•ip7 M•0� 11•AI.•4 (• ti span.. <• e.•ir. • ,..taay •.l i Iwtwi. 1Ia Stl,[AOty Musette I• IIONM WISH., •t1 •w.Iaaa••af 1•IaMI 1. •Ia St IN•t•w. I. 0�9 •aJ.•'4 II VMS•.O 1• 9J.I sons Iwo./ 1• NOl�K/V.= o�+is ai aa.Ln .. a.+...a'•w°�..w.�.i..iiil in I: Yi NRf'o a.15 \..I) A-J.,N3:nos •.Diet a.•a a N`dld 3 L IS lnnin Dam u•,o! II m•M soy ale.a....,wt n[van au a •....D+•.a Ilv ODle a•DDq pay/ll',A.I,Wn woaJ U i ill.•ItStea U•.Al f'r ,peal•...••aMy LDiDl1.. 'si lln.L aw Air .i A' •J•.eslc wit •5•4,op[•Dial IS �r�r:� Jain.a tit Ito I1 •J•.t1L•.l Isl IO•auo.I` SIt[• 1D C�'vIl IWN•i�✓\ /nil:' I.w-v.•9 44.4%.. aM .y.at. 'n PION,Mast T•ClJaf IV• •J•..n Yi I• 1• -St cif ell • It•ia..o L-al ib la...a ID I .�A1. /�. //�• v. IIIIt•SU.,t•9CO l!t III ' jj I•{,.awp 1• .� J..ar�.: I t ■ET 'q.' �]_7-�la IT•MI t•01•I1 oa I. .111• _ •ean\saot0.i i6woa :II • ,f 1- f Ity' y: .� I Usti wuuna a lrnn m I s.,4 •n _ I Wei'Wa mo•Tell It.l••.•1-11 t-a loco,WtDll•a 'Al I2ii = lf•tl•lC...SUM/t•1 ttrIV- AvoAdvave V. I -� I a ttlsl',lie9i)i.A •.I : e- 1 tau .'• W Ili al���``-- Ilcli•uat• Ilovialliia' ' }• .' AM IJ•nA Alta•an•-• /�!`ti.• I , I...AM./UV Lint.•i.asa5 • Sip [�6 f 1 a—-- — i s- � �!`' m.laa.aioa.n waaa.a.•.a,nn.awa aaLem •c U _ 1 _ I, C �-�J \\ n`,,�/✓��_' -� I nR-•cq.Itetl I•..•. • • 1r✓1 t_�v.n; i I I l' I : • n .a ,nt1a•a..aaai MSS sees[I: ,( I SII 1 y` I »aiVaa• n9••••1..ily...a IL,yi•ILR• •1 I fgt.+K I 3 �� Ftj '✓ a!•aO as,.o/a Autos toll I5aatO •1 • ••1 'a I 1 ram" -• I `I '''L 5rw.d Pwio1 J t•'MI ` I 1 IV N sal.MARS y� ' —_____—_ x I S •'1..",.-,r/II Sd•M pv/. - z$ I 1 $ •ov,da-Ild 1 ay¢o iaa,W v:i na 1 i :a a I 04141 linen• I -lf L'^[cLS C •9GAI$ i..91 ,'!Ga a.AN 9111.0 a ( • L I CCE! 9 t wla Li�W ctsosra R -, , t' .qt :u I 1 --rc=zl- "iidv�— IrNsc'; _ a..'D•6, A I N G�I.•Ys]. , 4:14' . ' I N✓d 9^BI9Fr2.SY.IC I e7.•� T' a`S�r8 H•c z D I — -- - -k•i I '.YIltc11S..Lo,:-...ia IL 1- rmla Dw.lRvle_ jl8 O.•LJ•OSCN/1.,4�,. • < j34! L (�,.J :O.OLIS CI.driSC, A ,{ I Itl in Onre.O 7•�JIrI ` i''-�• � a« 1 1.91%�:arc, O (c9laru 99 me awsca • ezia c r une�.i J y� q . An CHM DMJStaJ i 1?51-t1/I JAVI}� rlowv"a—.� H.aoN :J:1dW=F• :I\4W941 V {Teel 2,1. EDn3cra.1 ~" ......... ...., ..t+ r�.•» ,a i )., LE09eONOl HBVM-31 Hd pWaa 6n:vCIICD � \IJ`/B Nr'iaq 1•Pa'Sn)9 NlalI9 t.Ca7 3)1 3f N3AV NOIONIHSVM•OS etc �a 6N3NNYtd/51.0311HJ W Se• t��[`� S . " , . . , . . , - . . .....„ LAND USE PIEMENT . • . t •, ... • . . . . • . , . I . s i Single Family I Commercial y iN ., I • .. ....,,, .. ii.. •.:•:•:•:•:.:•:•.•.- •A 1.;-...'.4.j..-;•• .::.:.:.:.:.:.,:::::, Low Density ::::::: km Office / Office Park ,- :7„.!:: .....-.-:c.. •., .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: Multi-Family • ,,-16-, ..c St:;i 4'.'::%••,....,. .11..' L• ..." •.......6.•-•;-,'...E.I.:..,. 7.1::•*.i. '''-';. '......-C.1'...:.• 1 ,.;,.;:a..;:c''..' . • .;• -", .....,.r. .0000000' 1 - .; , _:-,.... ?...-,.:.; ..! Medium Density 0.00.00. -00000.09§6000 Public/Quasi-Public • .,.....t.,:,..:,...,.., . .-_,?: „::::::::.•.:.:::::::.:... ........ ,:.....ii...r'C",...4•• ,*". •:.C.;c,•'-'.'fi r c C.: 1...,;•„".•',...,•••:••••;,,s..,•'•-••••••••• M U It I-Family •-,,,....c, ,. . :.i.-.....,...v.,--, ..,.., , ...,;.,,.....,.•4: 1.... •••,-.A:.i ,:.:Fse„a 114 '*'• . '•••• ..,..44.i...7:7,Og.:.2•,E..;.:• ."......f7r:::::,..**,!..:.0 41....,',....,0.', ?C`.(ti.,,,:• .-..:(;.,;...c,.S....0 .1•••• :1;••• l;::::::t..i.S• .:•.;...•e:',4.4,:::•:••:',. 't1•::ig:,;/1+.11 High Density o•oo 0.,oo 00.. . .. Light Industrial 1.6."-•..zz-ci -1,'.;....;:::-..i.; 2,..0 .....:gr.s..-,..;3..,..,..,. , •.::),•::.Ki. 1;,44%,Jax- Multi-Family •••••• , ki....A,.:„.....-I.i.i.;..t.:,,,.c,Cr,4r•.f_)••I,••tA-, Recreation .0I,0.,00 Heavy '11$:".....-:.•.A,...i:-..g. iic,t 1.4it C o0. o00.o00o, t 4 04 • { .- '.1'1 ..•4"-4-''...*,• 'C.-.•$:1:;.• :',..''5., • •,..,..,....*,::4.;0:`•;'...s"... • 7.:.;''1;.-••2%.•:. Greenbelt • Manufacturing Park! I ••-- 1 .":•:3-u-_q. . ' ••••••••••::-.":•:•. ..,:44,...... , •• 4. ....•.•.:`,-;(,,44 • - / Multiple Option ', i .:••••••::.° :,,... .:,,i,i,3.:Ipv, _- • zattilt:::::: iii-,;.:::::v.,,, -,,,,.‘ , I .,•:".,,,vii i ......0.,., :.,:,......:: ., .. ........:71 ..,, ' to oo•:.1 7. •• •/*•- ......, , ',!,0 0 Ali':.:::::.:::.:': tts, -.Z.CcI.:q!• I 14 04 ,,... ' •---;',.'-•=7,e-&44•-•,...,• `..•• . .-54,.,..,;,, • ..... WASHINGTON . . ,, , ... ..... , ..„. ,3..)...,.., N. .,, u *.• • '4 ,- s.,,,,_.., .,f Frfailr,.....--,,,....._, ••..,. .•.5„..61 , ..., . A . ....\N\N ..., •.e.„. .. .... • ,rii,......., .... ...,,,,,44,4 i:::0" , ...,..,. ,.. • .0.00. . J.... : #,,, Iii , ...:7;,42,:,.7., , lino,. . ._, ,,.„.....7.1.,16., 00.00,. ,•.•• r „eat!!!!2!r..• - • • I 1. - c ....' 1111111\. ..!.,-,- IIIIIMIIIIIN, j ..,,,,. 0.,,..or ..,.4 7::1 iv ,,..,, 000v ... A 1r,!Pk,. '-----::=---strilairinro--1 likti:::::i:i:ii,i*:. i.„ ..,,o.nr, , z ct, ,D000 ., ell,y ,,„.. „„iiiii „„„,„„„tr,,,„„,,,,, 41 ..,.. 0000000 c:\ I :::::::.:•:•- 4,--..._ft. .. ::::::: - JAvainoisat 141i __...-• ...1 0 0 0 0 0 0 .• 0.-i• -.\k . :::::::::•::::::::•:•: eStr,-"' 1.1111 ......•- . ......4 o o o o 0 0 ••• o o ,•,..'‘",, -..,.. •:::i:i*: k•-•..‘.,,,,,,ii ;:i:if.,:K: ini, or.immoj ... • 1.1.1111 ' ;10- •':".-,,; 41," 410 4". 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 ...Id ' ,.i:i:i:i::: iitiogigiC ;:i;i:i.* yrfarri, a . .L ,..00:0, , . . . 0 0 , 0 , . .•• 0 ,0 0 .0-.,•\,,, ::i:i*:::::( 2: ........., .:]:. -'"*.oheAft OINK ..MIE Ili, ii.gog•;3., o o o o o o o o o o o o, o o •,, . ;;iii:ti:i:i: ziggiongi ,,. ..;k111,,,11,..; . ___ El :a, 20.00.. . o o o o o o o o o •• o o o o .:. :::::::::::: Ft& ..06iogogog• ',. o. o o o o o o o o o o \o o o •,,. . ,,,:i:i:::i:i:1 IL ----41111.11k4. • • Immo : •;.,:>0 iiii ea••::,,,ogo<c);0130;-, . , 0 0 0 , , 0 a ., ,-.) 0, 0 , •4.(.‘„,\ A.i:i;i:i::*( mom - 0..0• sC,•000000000.p,,, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .k., .:i:isi:i:i .1. Bib 1.111-1, '711r.= . V gq,ggcSgggo it,o ,o p 000.o0o0o0o.o0o0 000004,,..A . •:: Irini I _. , , ._ 1111111L.Irt MEM _,.1"!'Og.S'ggg'Ogg.,' tilt V.gcloR 6 o. o o o o o o o o o• o •,..'‘. iT. ,111111 I c:e.,l'e .°0°1 ., •,_ .-•'::,,.:.,,..;_,,,:.,.i...: IIIaEEIINIl.I.I.lI..:..-".:'7.1A.. p,Vt:04,..Z 0g'.bi2g:,igg0ggegg0g2g',o.iiig,,gsi,gggoi'c:','g2..,E,;,o1•o°,,ao0o o0o oo00 0o0o o00 c,, 00, .o o 00* .o....000*O0o0oi c000LO0o0o V0000o0o 000:2ino00ii0o0''',.0o.,:,,,;. r‘, M. 4 ':Jul? 1ogogogogo 00o . 00o '..: • • ogoo . . •a o 0 lr,,,..,,....;,:! 1 '. o o o o ,o ,'.::.; ., ,o'f, -o. '' •-ilL.,' ,5:•'°o°:, ••7........ :.';'' ., .3....„... ... .,• 00000eo ...................... ,... 0 ,,,, 11. . il .000000.00• 0 0 L.4::...:_..e.,,',.,..,JR i;4>.., ? 9, ..--_,,4), „.... , .:.:•:.:.:.:.........:.:.....:.:.:„..., ,, t. i , IR ,......;•z,egogogogo,e3 0 0 0 rti-rm 1.4 00.% 00.1,...,i .'77 n, 24,qogoigoi,,: .....; .r.• 1......, . 111(0.......0.?i ::.:*::::i::::: :.i:.:::ii::.:,:-::.: . ,, •-•-: .:.;" 000.o0o0000..., . ,gogogo , „. 1.11 I 4,1,q 4".. 4,, 4 , •0' 0) A I lit drAl• 111411 ' ' . . "bk 1' '•• •''''''.':':':':':'''..' ill-- °O°0°0 00000'0 .. eipis gogo°0°°.°0°40°°0°0ggigekx .' °,°°-...001 1 i .. I 11621161L-.\,.1 p f,,4 ili 0-b....V 4,k>"•:'-'1.6(4'1.A.,%...:4..'; :.:.;:::.:::1;.:::.:::::.:'...:.::::.:::.:::.::;::::::::::::::, oc°°°:°°0°%°0°°°°O.°107o°0(1°O;o°:.0;;;;°:°o°°°0°:°0°0°0°0°°0°04:0°:°;"! '.: -aka. :-, .1 .111 ogoogogogogogor; t•Ce„k1',O2, INIIii Nip woo; i )(;):a tto.., . ....::i::in:::::::::i:i:::i:i :00-.1,00.00. 00....0.000.00,100., t , list 0000000.o0o0•" „,1 , e,-."-1111.`A 1'' ';,• •-'' .-., ...:i'-i:i:iff::iiii?:iiiii:iiiir.iii:i°*°50°EToVo%caVo°0°01?0°0II °.L . ,Ilk. _ iir, 41L11" '''''' ' ' ''''''''''' - 4 ilkokgr '-inn 4.7 ip .z,r.`-'-•• .,.. .-,. ,,,i.:..!.:i.ii.iii•-:•:::.i.:.:•:,i.i:•:::•ii.ii.:i.ii.:4.0.000.000.000000000.0.000000000000000.: .:•...,• 4 cr.• •••-4,..•. • • •giittl, 1 1:1,. ,s.,.. 1 .,...:-,{ Loo 7-eir. 41116#11,11,. ..,;4. 2.;g ft 11111:744VIP:r.c, ' ,1-... r.Amiss •000000°000.0 ' r. J......,,,. , ... ...„;,. -,.,.. • •%„.,. :.., ' • . maims 000000°000o. . • 3-,, smition.L.,„0000c,0000.. I 1:1111:11741,.‘<on, ,, :',,,,-1.•clis-,:::::- :,.. 00000• :.:•:•:.:.:•:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:•:. •0000'. . „„c,,,,,,,,..,),; .:.:. / • t 0 0 0 0'4 k F., * :i ::::::::::::: . ............... :i '1"1•300°00°000°0°• A: V. ....:, •0000000.1 - .^ -.;;;,: 1,41 ik;.... ..4 instibmia,....--,,--...„,,:z• ,,,,t.' liat-ir'.411P°0 01'„,..p ', "..1:••• , s, \• :• .''.;'1.•,.....1./_...1 '"''• ,-.4,• •:':':' imsammissi.migti' iiiii iii:'°0.:4?d- - - ' ' -:' .''AIIINV.,•• 1, ' :' ,,:-..CS•41.....,.C*.‘:.4•••••••.C.' e' ::::::: .. 4 111NeVisna........nrammill 1:::11:14,...°_,- •••••••••••• '. "IIIL".;,,e9."ai X••• ,.; .:M :. 'i'ri >'-?.;•');:...i!A.,*':•1:(..,%f'1:PC7,,3:`,.; • •( A4111171111ER:119iiiiiiiiiiiiiill ''.31..'''' ; t:xx::e•,.:r7"..kVir;:';.,67',?,,• :.;:'•::C21:?:.; • ' ''.1:',..42--;Z;',12--.5. :;.:1:;:t(3.:•Y•':'."?.''_:.e '..-' ..:.::::i ,4'...mixam.savisinm.... :ow NI: j„eimiii.4 .;;.,!?,,,c,., .3,-,..„,.„......vvy,.;.,,,..•••-...?,,:i.6 ..,",;/,.:'44,'.,';'.3%;,";;.,.'tr.?/..W,:IP,Tj•63.4:•c7!:.7:1;. .. •.. , ' of a&sigenk ; ,.."--ill, Is....,•4111p04. .;;.,?..,.o.,. ..v...e,,,,,,,,i..v.i..< 1,116-2,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,:,....4..,?,,,...,,,,..,,. • -r,,,,,,,,,,.,, •.•,./0•,:,,... -:•:•. --••• -1,.... ...... ` . 114WEI1111.11 1;,.* 1‘smoi ' f' ' '''':,439‹$'-('\lirio16•.'9•••'...."'•'?P'.•'' . ,;ry,..1.6**if..S. ::::••, 6:::::„............77N ,,4 VEMIENOlit4.111H IP ' ' el "Cl•';‘•Co'l'.'C'k. ...;:f4:-,.,;.1 ' lismair•-, "J.'fi- '''''''-',,,. ':•-,•••••'• '''r•D '' A ,.,...• "•:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::........::.;, •,.......,„..... _,‘„,, , ,„. ., .,,,,,,,,,,;. .....,,•,... ,..,. ..,....,.., .,,- - -,,. ...up* '.-v. co ......_„.....,,... • •...._....... , ,_ ..,.... , ..,•..,‘ , ....,„ , ..r- .-:::.:*K:::::i*i:-:.i.imams imatr(..,s,.iM::ft!;. 111 •,;u:',..,"s1-4,-, .,, , ,. • -- - „,ic-• .• f. -„.,•• ..;.;n.(.-0.., , - - r,,s194:-.;-cr••...., ,„.......'10 40. - 'i' ;'..ri -....:1-___•_ ... •••••:.::-:::-:::*ii:,tal,innui caw ,i...&..K,::: ::•••,„,...' ',:. . fir ".''-,:(1',;,••••:'.•0,..'''',;,,., ' ---''• ' . ' •• • . ' ‘ -Titte„Ilk* N's'e'. , .smaz''''''I •.%,, ;% ...,,; :., , .. -__-_-_-_-_ NE a mi,:.." . ., , - •• 14 ..„01.,. ''.;,:••,,,•.t.);:,,,,,,r;V!•;..-:.;;: ,-g7,74"1./.;....g.-.:1,;;;;,\? :,)L's.?.,.,., i. '';,---.:‘,„„s Ailik:C.\,..1 --------7,-,-------.- . 113111:::kilt *A1 to''' i 1 L. '6'''',:?.;Vilri,;.q;i:L?,.0:•.;,`.1.'..,..L';'°0;:.11..V.Z?..',1...lit•;•,'.,-,1 ‘.•e.,. ' -':',+.7‘1 C:\?:! •),_ - rillillerVIIMONNIBI...24= ,_ :4•1,11,• • •,...°7,xt . _ . _ _,_ _ __' 11111146-111iiniallY IMIIIIIIIiii.V r ' ' ' 1:1,q%....?':1.;-1,1•TI'1, ..tr,',:inri,;:..,....,,,?'e:. ..5;%. ••••• ____.::::•••,",,...` . ..r. • ..°0°o°o°0°.' ...-.,,,-_--_-_- -_-_,. 11111111111111111,tUraM1111111:000 EN1110.11. '7 •'11 ii:•e,/,'_. 0 7.,,N,,e4:Li‘,-.:•,•<',' A lyCeir, . , \`',..:.,:,.c, 0000 --':-------- ----- IIILII r.""'" .°0°° 11:1111 . .' '°°(- •L')....T;.:('''.' '.`').`',.,'0'•''',f i`i..ic.,.. °,4).6,WL.'' \ .:'•-- :-_:-_-.-_-_- -_-_-_ is.....tammai:Mt gorndoon,' ' ',,F.: °0°0' , '•••`,..,',;<0 c.„+';. !:•g'v.'l',*?,.L',..-,,'..,.,' ".•....).;,',4_1:4.3,4,,,, '.• \\)_.___ ______ .0 0/...a.siam IM •?i,i,re. 0' •.:'4,f".....•,-.• ..;,?... •,:,•,,,,.)r..!.c:„..,,,•.„,..e'd;„, . ,,,..(• 0, -:----t-:- 4 1 Eta 4 0-, a 11101111:11*.g.`u.""""1 1', i,,;.. - IIII ere,',1;••- •6,:'.':-1.,)>:''.e...6 -,;:.(i.c.',Q6-;'':•'2,r:••••••30",'6:1-'i''''.;:n43'.P.V.:',.:ti ----.---------------- 81.--/-t" I'''. ! ./' / .•:....'-'. ,.9 , , ,•Qi.-..,•,.;.`1.,,•_::,.''''%.1...`.11( '•`•r:,',..`.:', ..n.<6..,-, ',..,`?;',°,. ..ic,l'i-:,d:',;:* -•,`•••; ,)•`!;...`'.;1!;.• • _- I._1•__-___-, -_:,17,___--; ,...„,.. -_ ,owe mmmmm......... , . 40..:::iiii:iiii:iii:i:••::„; ..,--;?,•,•..., .','-:•,;-;,-,..,.., •,...• • ...,••••,i,A.:-.4,3••`•-4<i,,.',•,,..n...,?c,z„ic,,•.',...,..,.,;.•;,,,,,;,.!•,-;,::‘:!•,••;, ...;s: 'it -----, --ow-- . rpr:P•r"• 1........••••....1., • ..::::::::::::::::.•::::::::::::::. - • .1 •. cs,‘",••L?:y;..0,., ••..• • 0 4 • 4.),0,.,... -'...• • •• -L'••'4'"0""U••....* ''. -_. • I,._ ... ..• vaimem........... '•. ...,...:.:•:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:.:•:. -.• ,..,.", !,..,.-',.:.::-. ,I. ,c,,,,,c)00„*„ .„•••.,',.. ....1 ...... •....,',..,,,..c...A.,zi.2. . , ..,..y.....i.•,..,:„..y.,.:,... „. .00.0.0.0000 .:.3%. ..\•::::•:„...................... ,.‹).:. • ......• ........._ ____ .,...,,i ., .•::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::... .,C\ 1'•,..V.)...). AIM 111,110,11017„..„,....:•••;0•i•IL ic :i::::::7:::::::::•:.:.:.:-:•::!••••:...,,,...:,:,':' •",z,..*.,,,•,.', .'c,-,)',) ',:•.• °0°0°0°, . * •':'::::•:.:-:.:-:•:.:.:-i••:-•:•i•:. ,:i7.,.:, - -ttIC- -- 151:ig•- :-.40 ___ ;.._1____,,,,,„,„,_,„'S.!!•;...!,-...4,,••,- so iiinist,• '. ,..?0,,,,In.....(,1..,...,:,....?: ..,.:'•::',... .%%ed., ,,:!,,:.,.. •ocpuct.. k"'.1.,,..,T,,:;.'::::'''' ',/"..4..0,0.,?,i't''• .' ..• 144---".-kilrip All la ' 'ilgoh;:z ..'r .,1,..,::,'.;.:: 000....',.ri.',... .... -- ,-,z..;•,,,,, • --2--=-71,/p Avi tia 1- i :.. : ., .,...•.0.-<;;,...-.::•'...,,._ ,,.0 -,-,-.. ..::. -.7:t,_7.7..7.1,..- .......-„,.,L-t._..4. - - :,.'sn.-..\ „.:vi *N... .. ....:.:::......:::::::::::::::: .;,..• :,.. • • • • A ,0•0041.,,s, .. Ni:,.:... . •...0• ,,i,,,,, ,0000000. ‘. ,..e. .•''•:: : : .44 g...00093000• . ‘,..7.i. -Y•t„.i t 4,, ,-,,, • :,..6.0, 0. .•t• * • .o• __-__, --___ _ . • --MP-iiiie: -----------I.--r.. • 00 ,..:•:.:.:.: ,,•••••• • . IMF : 0% ,:•:•:.:•:.:•:.. . •• , ,. 4,\••• ., 0. .,.•::::::::::::::..,;..:,•„,. :._ -,_ ____.....000.--_-_-_.=e•,„..., -, _-__- -_-_-_- •0 0 0 7-__-__ I :i:''..; t :t..,. .0- •00000• _ "t'' ------E--------'OVA' ILlirimilphil .. •.., ....,...., __:_i_____. _____ . ,,..ii:::x.....::.e...,:fi. ....l•• ,-. ------ ......:*:'''.:....:.:*i::::::.. •''' .. . IT.9, _ -•I-•,,-,f gz_,- ,..-•-,-.„-_-:__............_:,,...... . ..•1__.._„._.,,.:„.•.. :.:...00:.0"0_., .00.00.0.00000....:,;.i•.,:,*..,.)„..„.. •.,,',• , _ ..000.00000,0300000..000I.0..I00IM0,00 :0 .. MIUMMIie F,i,,C‘its„,%, .... - ' •. _-itiv•wrzl. . ,•1- ,,i, 1 ; ii__,-,,,;i - -1 /i ,,, !7/7.1.i., ..r\f `a..,N,j;.:,,. s.,.‘ II i lifil $ A e. 't li— -ice--, R1 ��('7��7� , ' „ I ,� \ • - 1 �e.. �, �,J1 I( t i +' ••�—�-�� gm. l.1LiW— _Pi I I'I , 1°' il'Bt\Z ,o 1 ; ammo 4.. ..-irt : - :':I, pi, _tr ' 0 7---r'... ' 1111 IT.i.p/ . 10, , ; __, i __ v.,1 . ' '''' - ' -,• .1 - 4 J ÷ . • ... .....4 ...., i Q. is II'',. 710 '- _l. ' _ t, . 0 W --;p% bl: 11..- ; l� t> ,• I ' •,• , : — (t le st.:':7.-1, Z', _:-71 .•.,J a I--7 i, 0( t T „ --;" a ir:� RION�sI' .�!/ I j �+�'(� • ��' fr ,,� -�1, ai ��i7 , • a 4`'i ' ? L- I l 1 l . . 1 r ; (f}! ' � -•:i3' I I f > �'S ..L' �l. Imo, •*ate../,J/t ��/� f 1 . l_ v. 1 f ° .' ' ,tom.' J- „ -2-? S . , , ' -• 4. , •jt . 9 .L I"- _, 1 q S . „A LI'ID'., t+! ,, /�.i•,, .p �h!-: .,. <•,,, ,,, a � -I ' I I 1 ii• jli=1'2 (9 !- ryy .4—'e 1,-•n 'J' , ,1.0 ,(1,6 .'ih'#°t.„ „0..•kwi�1,,,,;11111,,,is,• k d4.,' ` ,,,,mj, ,,, to ,. JIl ._$ ri,e__,•t_� t4_1r }�}': `"Y!kid fW ,/ /// / y"��y^i ,. i. i -'e itt rho 'rI -' �u-I a'f�� "4, _�l�r�^r-1a' x,y �r F..,/ /C % rw�• ...fi., :wI ri._ - -)' 1 1 I• }i . I W _ i h - 1— ,, .l ti--2 t i `91 -t f / �' +w..� y i,t s,. -�.. .I / � � 1r el ,, 'fi it f i �I ��` r: l i / . `�y _ )�S\\� i'1 a „', i �- dt ' r--7• L.[_1 .44,7 - /i fi �I i - C� 'r. ' fi- e"' tom' ± f '0 , 5._ ;J 4. ,/+ / 4 1) 1 3 N- - , / it :: I 1,,.. . ,:\,..., ,, ' F. 'IMP. ." I,\ , ii l a -AKA_ �F,'�\ \\�,' ° r PARK -0 //, \ -_° ,v o ! �'.� I ' - •y Q�� �r CEDAR RIVER \, i +-.7,- — - �l / PARK \ • ` s 1. 15 1'i' r' �/ � . 2 i ' I1.5C) , \ �. • t ] , 00111 Ia . „li ., . tiA,_, , t , III* a \ ...�® 1 I. ,: s7 , 1I \4 29 3 i -- -.* -• , 2,t, .. ,,,,..,. N, 4 a , ' h , 1 MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 & SA-068-86 APPLICANT MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES TOTAL AREA ±16,480 SQ. FT. PRINCIPAL ACCESS MEADOW AVENUE NORTH EXISTING ZONING R-1, RESIDENTIAL-TWO FAMILY EXISTING USE UNDEVELOPED/SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PROPOSED USE COMMERCIAL PRINT SHOP COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMERCIAL COMMENTS ' k" AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss. County of King ) Dotty Klingman , being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on, the 16th day of September , 1986 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. /al Sx8SCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /‘1 day of / 1,14,LL4ti , 1986 .. Notary Pub' 'c ,1 an for the State of Washington, • residing at ' ` "" , therein. Application, Petition, or Case #: Print Craft Sales Corp/Melvin Maine - R-067-86 & SA-068-86-- (The minutes contain a list of the parties of record.) 3081Z BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 APPLICANT: MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. FILE NUMBER: R-067-86 SA-068-86 A. SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval to rezone from R-2, Residential-Two Family, to B-1, Business Use, and approval of a site plan to construct a one-story building for a print shop consisting of approximately 5,350 square feet. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Ann Lotto 2. Applicant: Melvine Maine/Print Craft Sales Corporation 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) Southwest corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North 4. Existing Zoning: R-2, Residential-Two Family 5. Existing Zoning in the Area: R-2, Residential-Two Family, and B-1, ,Business Use 6. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial 7. Size of Property: ± 16,480 sq. ft. (.378 acre) 8. Access: Meadow Avenue North 9. Land Use: Undeveloped/Single Family Residence 10. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Single Family/Multiple Family East: Multiple Family, Commercial South: Commercial West: Residential. Commercial C. HISTORY/BACKGROUND: Part of the original townsite and has retained the original zoning applied to the property since zoning was first adopted for the City in 1953. D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: a. Water: A 6-inch water line is located along Meadow Avenue North near the subject site. b. Sewer: An 8-inch sanitary sewer line is located along the alley located adjacent to the east property line. c. Storm Water Drainage: Storm water drains in the Cedar River drainage system. 2. Fire Protection: Provided -by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: N/A 4. Schools: a. Elementary Schools: N/A b. Middle Schools: N/A c. High Schools: N/A PRELIMINARY REPORT T _ii'HE HEARING EXAMINER MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP., FILE R-067-86 AND SA-068-86 SEPTEMBER 2. 1986 PAGE 1 5. Recreation: N/A E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-708, Residential-Two Family (R-2). 2. Section 4-711. Business (B-1). 3. Section 4-738, Site Plan Review. F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1. Commercial Goal and following objectives: V(A) Commercial Areas Objective; V(D) Community Commercial Areas Objective; City of Renton, Comprehensive Plan Compendium, January 1985, p. 16-18. 2. Industrial Goal and Objective VI, Structures and Sites. City of Renton • Comprehensive Plan Compendium, January 1985, p. 19. 3. Central Renton Area Plan and Commercial Development Objective. City of Renton, Comprehensive Plan Compendium, January 1985, p. 62-63. 4. Section 3014(C), Change of Zone Classification (Rezone). G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The applicant is seeking approval: 1) to rezone 16,480 square feet of property from R-2, Residential-Two Family, to B-1. Business Use; and 2) of a site plan to construct a one story building consisting of 5,350 square feet for a print shop. 2. The Environmental Review Committee issued a determination of non-significance on July 23, 1986. The determination was not appealed. 3. The subject rezone and proposed print shop generally comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the area. The Comprehensive Plan map designates the property as Commercial. Further discussion of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan follows in the analysis of the rezone application and site plan. 4. Various City departments have reviewed and commented on the proposal. The Police Department approved the subject proposal without conditions. The other reviewing departments and divisions commented as follows: * Parks and Recreation Department: The Parks and Recreation Department determined that the project will not impact the City parks system and approved the subject proposals. However, the approval was subject to the applicant doing something to the London Plane trees which are felt to be too close to the sidewalks along Meadow Avenue North. * Zoning Division:' The Zoning Division approved the proposal with the following conditions: 1. Recommend that rezone and site plan approval be approved. 2. Recommend that pedestrian walkway/court be relocated along Meadow Avenue instead of North Second Street. 3. Unused space east of the building should also be landscaped. * Building Division: The Building Division approved the proposal subject to setting the sign back 10 feet (the required setback for signs in a B-1. Business, zone). * Fire Prevention: The Fire Prevention Bureau approved the proposal with the following conditions: I. Fire codes and ordinances complied with. 2. Fire flow requires three hydrants. Primary hydrant within lip' of atrurtnrR_ Thn nthar twn hydrants within inn'_ PRELIMINARY REPORT T•_ HE HEARING EXAMINER MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP.. FILE R-067-86 AND SA-068-86 SEPTEMBER 2. 1986 PAGE 2 * Traffic Engineering: The Traffic Engineering Division approved the proposal subject to: 1. Driveway width to be 30 ft. 2. New underground powered street lights are required. * Utility Engineering: Utility Engineering only approved the site plan with conditions subject to meeting requirements of Fire Prevention division and water and side sewer plans. It is not clear from their comments that they addressed the rezone application. # Design Engineering: The Design Engineering Division has not approved the subject proposal. The following information is needed before a decision will be made: 1. Provide detailed grading and utility plans on 22" x 34" original mylars. 2. Storm retention/detention required to include possible downstream analysis. REZONE 5. The Hearing Examiner in reviewing a request for rezoning must consider specific criteria established under Section 4-3014(C)(1). Each of these criteria are discussed below: a. That substantial evidence was presented demonstrating the subject reclassification appears not to have been specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning. A reclassification of the property has not been considered by the City since the land use analysis was done for the revision to the Central Area Plan completed in 1983. The City did consider an area-wide rezone to bring the zoning map and Comprehensive Plan into compliance with each other. However, due to opposition, the City did not follow through with the area-wide rezone. b. That the property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and conditions have been met which would indicate the change is appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as Commercial. The property is located on the border of the commercial district. which lies between Park Avenue North and Sunset Blvd. North and between North Second Street and North Brooks and Bronson Way North. The property north of South Second Street is designated as a residential area on the Comprehensive Plan. The North Renton Residential Area residential character is to be maintained as stated in the Central Area Plan (see North Renton Residential Area Policies, Central Renton Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan Compendium, p. 66). Two other policies of the Central Area Plan suggest that office uses should be used in transition areas between residential and commercial/industrial areas. A general implementing policy states: "Office uses should be utilized as a transition between residential and commercial/industrial areas. Where opportunities for adequate-size land parcels are available, office uses should be an alternative to multiple family development." (See General Implementing Policies, Land Use Objectives, B(3) Central Renton Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan Compendium, p. =61.) The second policy implementing the commercial development objective states as follows: The subject rezone to B-1. Business Use, zone allows a variety of office and retail uses and 95 feet building heights conditioned so that uses are in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan policies stated above. These conditions would include height limitations, buffering requirements along the north property lines, and use limitations. PRELIMINARY REPORT T^-_,'HE HEARING EXAMINER MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP.. FILE R-067-86 AND SA-068-86 SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 3 The proposed print shop appears to meet the commercial policy of "office and similar service and professional uses ..." stated above. The meaning of "similar service" is unclear and therefore the Building and Zoning Department interprets this to include service uses which are supportive of office use areas and which are no more intrusive than the office uses in transition areas between residential and commercial/industrial uses. There are certain modifications as discussed below under the analysis of the site plan, which must be done to ensure the impacts from the project on the residential area are kept to a minimum. c. That since the last previous land use analysis of the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. The commercial area around the subject site as designated by the Comprehensive Plan map has been very slow to change. Rezones to B-1, Business Use, have generally been done in the 1960s with development occurring about the same time or during the early 1970s. Nor have there been any significant public improvements in the area. The lack of public improvements, however, does not appear to be a problem. Various staff persons did not indicate the project was premature due to lack of improvements. Rather comments from the Public Works Department indicate essentially that the applicant will need to upgrade the old, existing infrastructure system. The Planning Commission and City Council recommended and adopted respectively the commercial designation of the property during the last revision of the Central Renton Area Comprehensive Plan adopted in March of 1983. However, as stated earlier use policies exist for the area to ensure that commercial uses are compatible with the residential area located north of North Second Street. Finally, the City is receiving more and more infill projects. The applicant's proposal falls into this category. The Comprehensive Plan policies tend to encourage the development of vacant properties surrounded by development. SITE PLAN 6. The applicnt has applied for site plan review in addition to the rezone to B-1, Business Use. The project is being routed for public hearing by the Site Plan Review Committee since the subject proposal is in a "sensitive" transitional area between the North Renton Residential Area and the commercial area to the south. 7. The site plan review code section lists ten criteria which are to be used in reviewing site plans in Section 4-738(D). The above discussion on the rezone includes discussion of three of the criteria in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, compliance with the land use regulations and the availability of public services and facilities for the proposed use. The following discusses various aspects of the proposed project under the remaining criteria: a. Conservation of Area-Wide Property Values The project should not cause a reduction in property values since commercial uses will not be allowed to the north of North Second Street. The Central Area Plan is quite clear in its direction that the North Renton Residential Area be preserved and protected. In addition, we are attempting in the site plan review to minimize any adverse impacts on nearby residential uses located on the edge of residential and commercial Comp Plan designations. b. Provision of Adequate Air and Light The proposed project maintains adequate air and light. PRELIMINARY REPORT HE HEARING EXAMINER MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP., FILE R-067-86 AND SA-068-86 SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 • • PAGE 4 c. Prevention of Neighborhood Deterioration and Blight The proposed print shop should not cause a decline in the neighborhood. d. Mitigation of Noise, Odors and Other Harmful or Unhealthy Conditions The applicant indicates in the environmental checklist that noise produced by the equipment associated with the print shop will be located indoors. However, the applicant does not say that the walls are sufficient to prevent noise from being heard by nearby residents. The applicant needs to provide an analysis of the noise impacts of the print shop. Noises are regulated by City Code. Noise will be produced during construction of the print shop. The noise will be temporary. Construction hours are limited by code to period of time 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Consideration can be given to limiting the days when construction can occur to Monday through Friday with no weekend work. D It does not appear that odors will be a problem based on the information provided by the applicant. However, should an issue arise, the City would investigate to determine whether the odor is unreasonable and whether it may be harmful to nearby residents. e. Mitigation of Impacts to the Site The subject site' is basically flat: :Vegetation. on:the;site:consists of : i trees and lawn. The applicant's-proposal appears,to-be.sensitive-to site. f. Availability of Public Services and Facilities to Accommodate the_. Proposed Use As noted earlier in the report, comments from the Public Works Department did not negate development due to inadequate public facilities. Instead, comments included that 1) the driveway width be 30 ft.: 2) underground powered street lights; 3) sewer and water plans; 4) fire flow analysis and 5) detailed grading and utility plans. These conditions of approval are essentially to alert the applicant to submit this information with the building permit. In addition, the Design Engineering Division will require an analysis of storm drainage retention/detention system for the site which includes a possible downstream analysis. As indicated in the applicant's environmental checklist, an engineered system will be developed. The applicant must work with the Design Engineering Divisiion in preparing the analysis and submit the analysis with a building permit applicatiion. f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation The parking lot complies with the requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance. Primary access has been directed to Meadow Avenue North. North 2nd Street does not meet design standards for commercial access. This suggests that the pedestrian access to the site (' should be focused to the parking lot and Meadow Avenue North. The site plan should be modified. eaj\A-\ Commercial traffic should not intrude into the residential area. Traffic should be less in volume since the business delievers most of it printed materials. It is not the typical retail commercial facility. g. Mitigation of impacts to`surrounding properties and uses. The interface between the residential area to the north and the subject site should buffered with mature landscape materials and possible a berm to create an immediate separation and screen. Relocation of the customer access from the north and south to the south .and west would substantially reduce the impact on the single family residences to the north. The sertxwe entrance fluted on the east side of the does intrude into Fh.� eycQSti P•annilc/ naQirion4-1n nrcen fn north harnliaa of thn Inr_atinn PRELIMINARY REPORT Try-:rHE HEARING EXAMINER MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP., FILE R-067-86 AND SA-068-86 SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 5 • The parking lot would provide a better area for manuevering service vehicles instead of the alley. This would reduce noise, light and glare into the residential area. H. DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, the following recommendations are made ,to the Hearing Examiner: RezoneCtire-r-aZtI' D h't The rezone for Print Craft Sales Corporation be approved subject to the following condition: 1. The building height of any development on the subject property shall be limited to a maximum of 35 feet. 9 2. Uses on the subject property shall be limited to office and similar service and professional uses. The Building and Zoning Department shall review projects under the category "similar service" uses to determine whether the ws!� use will be allowed. r A,,,,,c_ 3. Entrances and service areas; onsite "park''ing and circulation.:areas.:aiid'= mechanical equipment is to be oriented away from the residential area to -- tr-A the north and are prohibited along North Second Street. (.2) p i,- ' Site Plan The site plan for Print Craft Sales Corporation should be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Relocation of the main entry to access onto Meadow Avenue North instead of North 2nd Street. • 2. Installation of a three (3) foot high berm along with a heavy buffer of mature landscaped material [trees at least 2 1/2 inches in diameter and shrubs at least five (5) gallon size] along the north boundary of the site adjacent to North 2 nd Street. 3. Relocation of the service entrance to the south side of the building. [If this allows a widening of the building in an east west direction for the additional five (5) feet then additional site plan approval is not necessary. • . De is Ncafert & Assocdetes ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS 519 SO.WASHINGTON AVENUE KENT,WASHINGTON 98032 . ��� �a111149 i r[�.vea1n erm+rJ eP:OII PHONE:(206)954-5019 r Fp..o:Mce F-2 fora .'c.nm9 . .- c....a-.....tom=_ ",f r_- .. •'. :.. .. V 1 nNo�I oters•wan ..,HEMPiIG NTH �'..NATIOhI I ------- Q.NORM Vid STREET__-_____--_-- R'8�TCRA���t��/� I/LImILpt T ¢I T bIS blbT_ _ _ _ OFFICE VG BUJLiJilii7 1 10.S1INO 0JR11 trlc fXISTNO PIANTiNG StTOfA P( 0) • . Goo."1D UT. iH 0'lA1:O5Ca➢Wc SETBt(]( . anal' r r.•:� J uvJ'LANOSCPPWG 1�.' : r te�aa/ G?,3 5114EVet•.5 P1•N A!y�,r1•1. I,{ I c+a. '-v " a •1 9 W Ix , .. I G-11.9 o..cNf.1.?as_,.sa 9x1 1-AN1GA 1 I 3 - /.11 �i m F� ���_7J g QQ_ ,. ^Z0 y 60 ' ` .•�. ED PROPOS PRINT SHOP 5]5]S0.PT. ,fie B•+LTIG IVY C 4�•�1 16/4L 31oTO.e:, � I 5 n :''',,nit I 0 A:1.:F1. W-�4N _ • 1�I I < 'y7 t9•^L9c IVf EecU.r:KtNEG IPr.I..•isdaG. Ir = t Z 0 VineMnP.-6. I've-t-21 CaL. i -------T I O_a oet.tYa o,t: r:� , - !1- j J\ t la+m.1 Prw+c 2'nl 04., I I I y I� 1. 02029. Mel Milne c/a Prlat craft �" I I n 5'J6 t��1 .. �5'.'FJ+C✓E I ]. laeniteRz Bennie Mal Jane•tree',Ma,Architect. \.;;.,s% ' I 5„r_ OBI]Went Janes Street,Mae 103 I ( - I .,� „t Phones (206).54-5010 I 3 I� �__ _____i LiN Q 5. faITACT Denis meifert A Almon...foe correction.. }T __h6era.LT ;TIWQ I W • enrrAG PrwecT 91.ee1PTlm. I v.wtle•t9 sfi•Llro I �' w/ 1. Governing Code.1915 MC • •el Ian WTI L'tUVI UM I I I (1'M Zo'NP) 1 I � (D q. 5. Owe a. Ow of Lots UM remdoll) Addition(1 Alt er.tl on(1 arW wan II♦♦Ifi t.- I I 1 v) Calamine:9a votaBealdeoce P.M.Mr.MEL win t_ 16T1'+6' I ('Q H 0)) trope....Mint bop .• MCI MALT.NISI TO I .' S I JXl[y- T. mpancy..m0. -] 71 Rr I I . f. 1 1. Type !Construction:MI 6� 16m.,P/5 1 (ram - -- II. Rendinga�..i:-N 10-1 overlay) N.N twaten[•P SUM. ��J I -�1J-t- " 11. Fire amen 111 TAnfa 0 100.1rtie`OtrN I 30' � T ,�`."� \\\\„�( 12. . le of Adjacent Gets. To fuvAaT �5 a �.�� C ..�.j�+t`�.� Il d'�( a) Earths MI f[T MM tT.LrfIAI.[IreT llr ..i'FJL-�I1�w 1 - ^• y W `� AZ �� • Rein(0--](5-1 ceeeley1 I. DI nul51 13. City sees.11.100 0.2. Ten011(MIWO.wtTn[ .2NK -P1 .yi ire VIOW(N MAP N. Nita Cevnew. al Allowable eo.en.gst 651 10,712 C.P. Trill TN 1/3 BT MAP 01 Antnal Gooupsi 10.51 5350 11.2. AMY Mew o l IS. Building Setback. qun.d) % Kuser saTIM 1 Stan a• N a; teem Tam.10 ft.fog Gendscsping SITE PLAN We Gae.d 0) ride Tams 10 rt.foe GeMoc.01.e and.ate rt. fd1,1112T[A Mtvlll Gas,'�JiIV Yards No SCALE(t/ta'-t•-0' CD di ..cle w SCALE(l..Aback./r..ewota,raw • min.tl[Na.t[All Yguva GL r`JE/A710N 16. Dandle,Setback.Provided( .) .e t tend.If ft. P!ZOJ..G?loin; b) 0ida Tam.10 rt.,5 rt. .1 a.55 ft. O) Mee. a. Oa. Oo 17. Da1IE1o9 00iget. a) Allwabl.:aigbtt 15 ft. el Bonding Haight.If rt. ...Iasi I alias 1C. 00001.2. a) &acute.a.15 1 11Ce-'17a1:111”""'"F•JP1 u, b)).aewuima.lk YI urwi 1. al ep lead.If rt.at.'.eat.1eaa e) Provided.11 rt.at eeeeee.141.e NI. maCm... al tiding'oaf Areal 5150 C.I. CI Concrete.'sidew alk..dal.weye.etc,).6111 B.F. a l 1.I71.•r• mYa 6�oT Wt M Nl, ..'aDar loot. Age. Occupancy Lead 1Mooed/1st.'loot. 535E 32 R-0 67-'8 6 & SA-0 6 8-8 6 Drawn NeTR twtm b M.4 1.P 1 Om 5.11•pG ( L ' .LI L t .t)' il"' - :41. —7 uttia: i,n7. ,_ ,a_ii,:i • k' — R• ipp 1, rl;il y , --•,----- --.,- 1 7T)' ' •� W Pp _� Iik I`i\�IIIIII � � p�U-, � _ -; �-���Q J �•...� Q' T l rl� '? � i�—ya• �E U IiYM'f`. RIO � ' �' Q Ill If) " /��J �. 3 3 ///�- ;r �N t* r „p, J$�T�\ !�-? `` �.�w ..- • •.J Ll`�_\J/. I //•LI •11 IF Fry ._-L }_ 4 poi • ' _•�.2- -''},'j'''' I �i4. n if.D.•I,tl r ra•1' k"'...� .A: 1_ ' •. ;s _46,-•_ „ l tom. F' '*' ."i ' t . F1 �!' , �j� �1L _ L, aW Il' �Qlit Q ,Wp : � , t ' ti 1 a u / /Ne\ ��, .7 iz it nirim .{ -�e �Y'�%�1! 1 -�•. , 1 / \ --',,_ i } �� kd ly'^/.\ Ili wooer7 9,.. jp�"'-�'}+ 4�`�y�7 ] .^�' 1IA } I`� (\. • ;asr,.. , par -P" ,_�• , __`-1[i.�/.--._' _ '•i�/��r•.... d' .\\Z) 1 WIi I=tl ��Q , �• ,/ 4 misiL7 1_ \i P' ✓ 1 'I j' , / ',. ,t 2 .. ho \\\ -1' : ;:‘lM I I IE I'"I,.I.I \ '' L' M`n L/BERTY � ; ,%' ,. ' \ i, © 1 ." g ,/ \ ?� �C '.�1�9§1- ( 1 1 v •!� ^.,.., r'S• f tI •� _-1 / ,..Jr \ \� ; ElliFIL ,1 . _ MI._ a AL- — '' r liiEs .. 1-12"' ; V. ' ,. . - -,-.:,..-.._. . .' ... .. .... . .......-„, N../ 4,c, .MIIIMIN � fl \ "" \ \I ; `,, 0 1 r , \"VAIlla 4 Z :T11414113 IM.‘ ' ' , ''' r-iii - v° ; , ,... ,,,......, ._:..,,, , , , "� 3 — . ;... ........_, Q V1V1a ,. , c, , --,IFtr-il , ' 1 ' ' Mir. '-'"1-4*--,.. • r, • MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. R-067-86 & SA-068-86 APPLICANT MELVIN MAINE/PRINT CRAFT SALES TOTAL AREA ±16,480 SQ. FT. PRINCIPAL ACCESS MEADOW AVENUE NORTH EXISTING ZONING R-1, RESIDENTIAL—TWO FAMILY EXISTING USE UNDEVELOPED/SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PROPOSED USE COMMERCIAL PRINT SHOP COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMERCIAL COMMENTS \.- 1 t El �ongBe Family �; Commercoa6 v ®w ® �t I.. • .Y.: r��_, egQ�sBtg9 l—Famally• 1"\\\` 'e$$uce / Office Park G^ ,: t Medium Density _='r.�' t. - ^ <�G , ,..000.0000..00, 0000 0 c �a� �a—�a��B6c ;�.:L �: .�.:� .',M .... ulti—Family •°°0000 '� :0000000• �. .pr`r y`V r.Gu ^`v,�^^� • ,C✓Cw^.C.^ F ulda—E�aae�o0 ':moon°' Light 1nth.straal ;1: '°:o �:a�' •• <�;' ` 1 5 .•� .:r,'e•F. * O oe ] � °0000° f • . , Recreation O 0 0. Heavy industrial a yd.,: illk , i. im -. r Greenbelt Manufacturing Park I • = : _.�� L•.,, / Multiple Optionilltrit . r :r:;.;:.:,::,�m• ;'•,. r s« E f00o 4 •I.rO[" ffo t l :'/ # 000• . i, : • ;c�'r ;.- \\...., , ,...<,‘ To -• mik,„;„1" .,1:: -k ; ,,, ,,k, III , r I „r,.3 C iiIL Mai 11 tfiii� wa d • :;'':c' . !It .0000 ,. ii ill YY ,,,, 111i r /1 ` . '.:2 11111ft,. 0 0 0 0 0 0,40. ivo t...„,„„iiiiiillilki:.:::::::::::.(t..7",...01 moot �._ "" . •l "00 r O O O O O O O I r O O t 1.....____ , ,, o000 . 0 .,. 00 , 1...1. ..:.:.:.:.: •:•i.nil ■. -_ . ,,.;:.,:a' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , O y 0 O .�l !..I ,ii',4 O _, •00000.,. •© 0 0 o O O o o ® © o q o o ' ," % e�/ `i!•'°' -��, o°o°oO° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ® u 0 t+ 0 Q d � .� �' �°o°000° O O A ® O O ® O O O O O O © � � + ��•■ � �� � ' ° : �ry1 °0000°°° I�i1.■' 0000•,-_ i;■,"^o°°°Oo°o0 ® O O O O O O O m O ® O O a) __,+. oo•-_ 7, 0000°°°°°a ' o o ® o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 u ■, '' 0 0 ■'• 0000 0 1n t4 " 0,-_ ao 0 0 0 0 ® 0 0 0 0 0 0 ® + O O O O O r 11111111iTt rii °o°o°o°oo�{ ® 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O s 11•7 0°0°0°0°ot� is g P(p O +( O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 •1Y ri �i eV�-_ �000000000'i��Y7�tCl'`O 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 4t� �Vgs�O- 1 `�•°o°o°o°o°� ? 0000 000 +sn ;. oap ,< ' r 0000 ' -_ '. 1:°°°0° go. kr O O O O' © O O O 0 i O O O O 1Mil °0 ••1 t, n °0000tl0000 O O O O 11I OOOO.y� O�. ,:i • ' 0 0 0 O b O �°• �.I.0°0°0°0°0°• ` O 0 0 •1,'V" �ifi •.>>�■11■�• 00000 1 �,>~» o. tt 6 °o,� _,� '�1��+..°°Op°°°°°° •� D O O�'\{ram\��>)�h°■1�■: r O O �O--QO, O �d� I ...::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. 0` '1 • o 0 0 0 ° Fp O O ��■Y"■: w © +:, - o°%•o°o'� . ne.`o 0 0 o qq jy�'Oi•0000000°°°: '■1 008SfOQ '1! .pe.� ,, roo.oo.+:::71r•'o 0 0°0000• x:. �O�!"v -, •�>� vl"' �•.0000°•�'�:;:■1 O O O O O .°•O•O' ME !1 J. �I i. •}t3•••.••'••iiiiiiiiii:iiS••' '-•1 "141 :•:;■1 0 0 0 0 0 oo /I- ..,.•.w !1■ - `++�,o0 0 1 f1�t �— .y(i.__ ioo oj -■.;,o o ° ° 0 0 - 0000 i ■ i { rl 11..�r, . - • —'1 ■1,'0°0°0°0°0°0°0� �" / ip�� II t L • oo r � - � ttE oo•{_a. i0000000000 '�� . •°0°0°0°0°0°0°O4:: °o c0]'1,' Y.. ■It/1 .! ( -.Ss r/II,X fiy;:yy. 0000 °°°.0000° �,J y.; o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,7y o MuE� O■•.•', 111� >: ` 000000°oo°••°000000°o°ooff'[ ' tt 0°o°0°Oo0°0°0°0 .. 1 . >,, �Q�' �e. v + . o000000°0cp.0°0°00000000`a°� th•gggggggogogogeopf,%.,s,"\m„, .1,o0o00...gog0g000 ,,,,,,:.?o' •■11■ I`�",r. •` ' _1 )i r..f,\�,„: e^ • •°0000°°0000•:°000000000• V i. O■ 1= r rJ ". ,`- 0 0 0 0 0 0°0°•°°0°°°°°°°0°°°0000' 1 �■YU ,,'�� ���•. r ,.°0000 ,1r • �■ J�u113 ■■ ::�:"._ •`•` :i:l.[bob0000000.000000000.to;.. _ I, f ;. �,� -•- !it1��� ~` �r ��� ■ � ,0 0°000000000000000••p 11P°111 r �, L ■11}�-...1■1�`�=■1�11/ 7■ •t---tea/j '..'.• ....I.,.\.;.o, -�' ► ___ r ■ri■■.I .,,,,i" ',1/ 000 :•0000000000000000000• _ -��,.;" °\{e�.3• '•:_,�,-, 1 :■1111): 1` t '0000•, •0°°°°°°°°°000000000 • i �. e. 111P•,, i■ , 0000 ��o000000000000000000•: � i} a1a1111 `••'o'o o ; 1} •sin...* .111 ,, "`t•.. ' '•0000° ::::1•0000000000000000000 ,-x•,�5...I• °0000°°° , !' .,, •.0000° ; .0000°°°°°, r0: � - .•o ° ° ° ° °t :•, �: ..� .0000° �, +f+),c.,• 7.1■11l•O O O O O O r" • ( •! < 111'■11 °°°°°°°0°0°Oj 1111111111414": t' -fir• .°00000. ...,;j ` i� u1.1 �r o 0 00 00 t•i ,.��c o � i�.6 h.1u11: •°0°0°0°0°0' I :::1-' . .c• •9„� 1111.1111Ic W`" -•c•ccf; •0000000y^k•:- I■nr.... -- -1. n1.122-1y1,�o. •{' � )-•. f,' [ 0000"-. =E� :::::::: �,a �_�� J�''��.+iii�i��ia-f 00 Ja7 4 �, L'4u�, 4- ' J � . '.� 4111;1.111...r■11.111111•'1111111.11 000 r - . ypp, ' ; 7 Y.,•' a '. - . .111. 1'■n11111rlIi .'entm111 ° , •i �3•'„ <. l FJ?�•�&A`•� D O■11111\.1■n1\111■marlin ■11�IIn.1 / "'�\1►•�o } , + '3'Ci{� / CO\tl'It�.:�:a :.r •{gip E3 . Yr [ r r r .:2, ° rj, 7..•J S \ ■■t!,1111117■■,.1��11�:.1`• 7 ;'<� t '1.ff, •r,'••,•• .,;C ' }. n :". 3'• '� d. ►1.1ie)0•( ..11111 e.n..:}1.1 a a,. 9<u;,..�...^• c . !� F?4 . ?.rJ, fq:?�.,o A� . ,r' .l '7!� ..11 �1�71111.' ' -i ) C{, .4. 'n f.'•.'-. �1I.R'r�'�i9{r'1[J".;J.,It-�,' j••� �.F9- O f,,^('.'l.r''.'N , \`% IC •.,0e..■\► al:\■I Y, • Q' �tV�'[0 U►v C7"6 ,�v.. h}.c'n^ r,,f5^dr +•?•.°;!•909`•;-'-' • .• Abb. / :_ ✓" /,,uA 0,�: •i HP<: ?`rf, 2\11\."4c.o 1 J,. ,J! c.9>' ° •4'3h"' °c. `�' aer ii1uululi n 11r I \ ,,0,.,-,'• tit <?.< o1 any E! :•,AMUM .111IIun11.■\vs-.tg.t.A,.:a Aii :t'BRP a :. ;,, {�`•'f „91ugt � , `y . �. ;PVC .'•,.•' ►.1111111\►}OMI /I; 'f� a r. .•v 4' a•, .n ^�R:•�' ,i '.. N yl .• 1. .\fir. St illy. Si y ) •r4;• ot4.'- , e,,,..• .t" �d.•, iT r - -- ---- "1uu1il, }i/i± : Z..` Mtii ..:r , ,<<,,Sc<l Ii"^ oE.v f, :•v,.o ^n;�,•.,,t�ij•< `� y: ��+.�•• p -=— —— ——— .. :':mot" <Sii7 , ": •> <, 1, i`t �• "..?'1 r, # „��, C { - --- 1��\I��.i'o o ````, y r °000°• • '.E'(1•,`;(,•••C'}Eq.c E 3n.0--,.?>:. � —.� 1) ' 1 •°o° T 4{ .0000 'dt , �..•9t. `0000 1 'Etj`t,o.4 c`(j•<!�)�<l�l,.,i<�•'(� �'�•' 1 I 1•°O° `. 000 E ;'"•idd c7�?C. }rr i•n F c p ,ti -_j-_ --_- -- ■ Ilr t•o o .7Y11 ` I 1 ` • oo• o.0,: tt.. 0,o•R., „•<n c.« i, ed}f..., , ,`� \ ra -- ;i111101.:°o°ra.c. 1` ..i4�'`Q o°r •1•o:0•',.-•••••• 71P•,�•r;,.,,. �}... il`•n . ),••L. •� • . ttt _-I=_ {, _-MG v111P..ri J , ! ?' •.. 1."�.tx{ '.. „ :'• ,fh.�aii'<1j°• 'o n cJ'-3..• '[)is,-,,..J��fa.t•�ut1/..,, 12y1 _ ___ . .Ea/1'■ .` J'�t. .:f. r Enl ) 1 t, _•:O' n t., r�••vi<'r d:j).•, °•ot�.c o•'• t• -! - _ -- Zr• •. `` t _ J t .t ` ...".-; vt'i`• ''2 sr )•. o t fit,; !ii>„:'9 <3:°e<L', _ p i + ,,...: ,1 ` ioi. )(.°2 .c, 01:',.P.V,' '•t,, .*. a�`0.00 1� .g.:3+''`c;{•?e, Eytt l ' (5.:: o^<-•�; -. L } `th'3 rii•.'• D 2 'f' ,3 J 4�.r,° Ci`f•tt� ll E O t "' •,T ����'� �-. ,�' .:.R•�.(•�.E;ji�. :°°0000 •�` ,�Y' ! ,,,A' ; •w.•,r:••t,r. •°0000• •l�;S•rY [ •£t, rt >S V s • rr 3n�" .00.000000. °o n 000• <- ...,...• x• < 10 r.-..._..1.r, 7'“--0--wit, Alinkhk ....es.:::*]:i:i:i:i:i::.:: ::.i;ii:-,:]:•:...,:, . ,• ''''i',.", -2Y ::•?'l.:•:0' . 0000 ► 000• ^o r o c` -- 0000°: y''' 0°000.+ •,7 o C,';:: ::-::°;:-"':'P.:.:-':•A:—'.•.'•'•'U".';.'''-1•;'-'L•'..3- .',J"', d'i ml'"Pk 0•3.0,c:0‘. k. ----- 1 _ ,C oo dry o00• •. q. E•.i - _-1.r l )o ,E .,. <`, 000. 1y0j, _ ✓_ 00 '::r$:::1 . ;c ..1 C•• •000.. C,n •1')i _Ii C•,; )o 0000• n.' - - -—— J 00 't:'>}:}i?? '. � •=�f.�\A 0000• '�'r �- - 000 r.-� '•.`•' • °0000 ,•! �000•'--- )00 \,7::.}:?•::•.'.1'P t.F °0000...r= 000 .�.•:::.:•:>:•.' e '+iir>''i, .':�rV 00000•a 000•- '' {J• - < A1 � ;^`.‘o.• •�• J ---- 9:cC:', z r -- -- . 0000°° .__. �rp•i•' r we- ° r •0000 i :[,0°000000 'J<; °0000° t __ _ --_ _ _ ; •0000 p+1 000000•t 0000° _ -_-_-- )C:+ OOOOO 1 '°°°0000 7.• °0000• a•;[ — _ —_ r •0000 ,; °°0000 '-per °°0000 Ibk l Rom}/ °0000 °°°0000 1 J -[17CY. ------ -,r„O •000.. ! �00000.• rex Yi REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVTON : (13L-(t) ---� n APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ® NOT APPROVED cfte OD 7(// '; DATE. j SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR nR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1882 Form 182 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POLkY iDEvEe.o rn Arm n APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 60-.0 -t-A1/64. 4,--/-&=4 14e0-7 A7,2„._Ln — Kra tuLte-x-",t,g.-JL, Z(. /,(e->. DATE: �(.1-8/ec SIGNATURE OF DIRECTO. OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1082 Form 182 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : OAPPROVED NI APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED LCfdlun YI 1'e cifL (Ano(4W6 ( 6(4 dam /(3xmi,N o Si �I ICE Glyn P / r�� �� A1 �00« ) 00 . 44 � Tel ,ot14(A �c�M� D err_Mnri ne �/r_ ,Acpkar-rn�; ATE �� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIV;`"',ON : C,v,�,rra-••••‘ nAPPROVED _T APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [31\10T APPROVED '1—A;,(-7-) Z---51rvl- -` 7 /9/6e DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 FOrm 182 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : /„4/Ty tE/�lc //1/,E4e/AlG(h r-1 APPROVED Ea APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED SITE 4PeNVIL O&M/ aCOTS /� Z, 4 4.Lx (724..eGti4,c - ; -WATER 1 • O .416 NO i r,..1,1 GE-WATER S 4 •.04 A• r X/(,,4e01 — ' Z1s�z0 Ei I, Y�,FtA I5,'1:IY t4:.1'_'1:'" i x �� ''� x '� = ' ` as/7. 2 SPEC&' ll ;; y :;t . CHARGE-WAVER 0. . ... ._ 27��. F SPECIM MESSEWIT AREA CHARGE-SEWER NO f ARMED VAS PLAN 1 ES r��• QPPROYED SEWER PuII I Si0C-1 e.z/cn-- o�c. IN-ROVED FillE 6116R411., J 1tTIONS1E5 i146603 7 1 /8Zie DATE, SIGNATURE OF RECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 162 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : DAPPROVED IPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS JJ NOT APPROVED /. Fie, c'a of,62.1* de?,v0 o sr®i.✓Alit/e,ems e o fiP /iEo uJ i�'' /174/0 fi/2,F .Peep u/ ¢s /ljv,P�A/-5, / 1 cl,7/n' i /S O ' 0 !'e s i,e u e i ez dee E 077J ? %o 4.o. .3oo, __ DATE: 30 /9ere REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIV-0N : t n APPROVED ETAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [:".1NOT APPROVED YlU 7Wl0 44EJ 3.0 -78� Urschi ram p 5ere tevviid :� DATE: � /6) /%E 4 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : APPROVED Eli APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS LI NOT APPROVED A 0 DATE: � � -5� SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : -010111)6-> APPROVED NAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED -g G O Iin t\f\,.N)o -1\ Kr PL t�til A\Dmo E 0 FEc-oivAorop Ar \ 1zl AWN uoAL,Ku0mAovz-1-' c26 N Oft) 1'Y1ADo c ) K10( 11 s--r PAD G'' I�?O AYH ZND �1c j' -1 c rI+C buiooRx 514wL, ) P‹(,so .1 1h DATE: 7j7 -No 200912 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NO. : ECF-060-86 APPLICATION NO(s). : R-067-86 SA-068-86 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet. PROPONENT: Melvin Maine c/o Print Craft Sales Corp. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 235-2550 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination in writing to Renton Hearing Examiner no later than August 11, 1986. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. DATE OF DECISION: July 23, 1986 PUBLICATION DATE: July 28, 1986 trAk' Ro Id G. Nelson,eve/ ------- arry H. Sp 14 ger II Building and Zoning Director Policy Devel• 'ment Director A41(""(49 4674431-• RIEhard C. Houghton Public Works Director156- 3066Z CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING SEPTEMBER 2, 1986 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 A.M.: COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SECOND FLOOR, RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING The applications 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. CONTINUED ITEM PLAID PANTRY Application for conditional use permit to allow gas pumps in a B-1, • Business Use, zone as part of a Plaid Pantry store, file CU-015-86; property located at the southwest corner of Union Avenue N.E. and N.E. Sunset Blvd. NEW ITEMS - AUSTIN COMPANY Application for a special permit to allow approximately 130,000 cubic yards of fill material from the P-1 Drainage Channel on a 14.63 acre site, file SP-078-86; property located between Lind Avenue S.W. and East Valley Road and north of S.W. 19th Street. +-MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86). Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. of R�� �� ;~ ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0. RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR mill • 9 �" MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 • 235-2540 o9.17, SEPSeP BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR August 26, 1986 Melvin Maine c/o Print Craft Sales Corp. 107 Williams Avenue South Renton, WA 98058 RE: Application for rezone from R-2 to .B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of_one .story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86) . Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. Dear Mr. Maine: The City of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on May 21, 1986. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner has been scheduled for September 2, 1986. The public hearing commences at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. Sincerely, Roger J". Blayl ck Zoning Administrator RJB:JSM:ss cc: Tor-Jan Rohovde Ann Lotto OF RA, �� ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT NIL RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 9 �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 oggT�D sEP'rEM��P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR August 26, 1986 Tor-Jan Rohovde c/o Dennis Neifert & Associates 1042 West James Street, Suite 103 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story -approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86) . Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. Dear Sir or Madam: The City of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on May 21, 1986. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner has been scheduled for September 2, 1986. The public hearing commences at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of. the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. Sincerely, 7-StA/LA Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:JSM:ss cc: Melvin Maine Ann Lotto OF RA,A " {f o BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT tto RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR Z " ;r o 09 e " MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 0 235-2540 0114,. SEPSE*�P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR August 26, 1986 Ann Lotto 280 Morris Street Renton, WA 98055 RE: Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86) . Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. Dear Ms. Lotto: The City of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on May 21, 1986. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner has been scheduled for September 2, 1986. The public hearing commences at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Building and Zoning • Department at 235-2550. Sincerely, CTS(41(-44 RogerJ. Blaylock g Y Zoning Administrator RJB:JSM:ss cc: Melvin Maine Tor-Jan Rohovde 3066Z NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON ON SEPTEMBER 2, 1986, AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: AUSTIN COMPANY Application for a special permit to allow approximately 130,000 cubic yards of fill material from the P-1 Drainage Channel on a 14.63 acre site, file SP-078-86; property located between Lind Avenue S.W. and East Valley Road and north of S.W. 19th Street. MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86). - Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 2, 1986, AT 9:00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED : August 22, 1986 Ronald G. Nelson Building and Zoning Director CERTIFICATION I, JEANETTE SAMEK-MC KAGUE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and fo the State of Washington residing in on the . a2 9 day of August, 1986. CGS L2cusU o`/� 4Zv SIGNED: 4��c \,C ""`"'"" eiltd4iL • • y. REN1 I BUILDING & ZONING DEPLJIMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT : MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : S.R. CORNER OF NORTH 2n6 STREET AND N1FAfOW AVF_ NORTH TO: fl PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 ENGINEERING DIVISION 0 TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LII UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION Ell FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT (EIBUILDING & 7M1Nt DEPARTMENT ❑ POLICE DEPARTMENT Ei POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON 7-17-86 . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Z V �r 0 APPROVED I1SAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS JJ NOT APPROVED /0 / . gl Xc' d-3 -d ,--( -%;�'s�-9 ii_e_7_,70,.._- DATE: 7---/eP SIGNATURE DIRECTORnR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 RENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPt, MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FO.R SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SO. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVF_ NORTH TO: El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 ENGINEERING DIVISION El TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 0 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ID BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT d71/POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT L OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POL/c( VX2.0,4/10Arr"-- APPROVED El APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1 4/ 74 - , Krort9-44-14,A•Jdf--L, A-?fl , Covvi-,-uJt-c---- geegw/44-0; /1,1'73> -5( i4 DATE: /�- /r I ‹ SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 REN1 . 1 BUILDING & ZONING DEP;.TMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 060 86 , APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: ' MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MFADOW AVE_ NORTH TO: El] PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7'17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : )0 I Ei APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED London 1)1Am +az ckfq Unw(4 1a � o Si ci KI Glyn RVIOQOUUer P IooKI �� . ) Ick � . Tel i4-0\yOkt DATE: SIGNATURE qF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RENTt BUILDING & ZONING DEPAU. WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 060 — 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT : MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1—STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OP NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE_ NORTH TO: ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 /p/ ENGINEERING DIVISION ■ TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LI UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION LIII FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ® PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ® BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : C LI APPROVED ❑ APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 53 NOT APPROVED' I C' �'Y-o u ems„ . % vo.`�/ B ��� Nce 4u ) S 'o /Q7--W;Vq-10-1 �— 7 /74fl DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 RENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPI_,WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : $.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MFADOW AVE_ NORTH TO: ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 El ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: &3111TILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ® OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING. DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : (4-4L/7-y tEIV /A1.E,5e/nl/ ® APPROVED ® APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED SITE ANNUL. &al ,Lars /, Z, 3 ¢ /LA g eGtIO.�XS i . 't ._ TO !R -WATER _No -SEWER A10 Za CNARRE-WATER y,,,Es.$o•o4/ rx/C0,4E02e _ SJ -a CHARGE-SEWED '� = snail y�.�•!� SQ x ✓� SPIER 111111111110rt AREA CHARGE-WATER A/p /3/g a SPECIAL ALIT AREA CHARGE-SEWER NO APPROVED WATER PUN XGS ra 664 APPROVED SEWER PLAN Si h Cr Se'/cv- oh AP!ROVED5T '�. 1E5 06605 1 51-4 / /O[, DATE: �( / SIGNATURE OF RECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Fnrm 1 R7 RENT,..,, BUILDING & ZONING DEPL ;MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT. SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SO. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MFAnOW AVE- NORTH TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION ® TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION a FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU LI PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : fl APPROVED BIPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS EINOT APPROVED /. , ,'ef eo PEt , / A/p o,eo/41�.si e,Es C e 0.2P /,Eo cc) i,/ / ./o cz. ieeo t/f;fl 7 -,eEE A/yp, 69 A/i-', .2�‘4°. A dry /4Yo. tv/Tied/xi /SO O lc. S i.eue i U.PE % e 07xiESP /a Arya. Gu/T.ii/y Soo DATE: 30 /,7J7-r SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE i REVISION 5/1982 1 R'7 RENT' BUILDING & ZONING DEPL ]MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, sA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1—STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MFAnOW AVF._ NORTH TO : ❑ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 ❑ ENGINEERING DIVISION F5kTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION [1] FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ❑ PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT E .BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ri OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : e/S // EE.e_` D APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS DNOT APPROVED iY'I b�1ce 4 /4J 4 c H a /.o t2- 0 s# kits; , tegu,i p6 w-eA9-4, s 404 iii- kets aPe- tece71-/ifcer <CP DATE: 7-e-,4SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Q 1 REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 RENT 31 BUILDING & ZONING DEP 'TMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SO. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVF_ NORTH TO: 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION El TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 0 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 'POLICE DEPARTMENT LII POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I ( OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 4APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED DATE:: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 JJJ Firm l R 7 REN1 1 BUILDING & ZONING DEP TMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 - 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT : MELVIN MAINE C/0 PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. , LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH TO: ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LI UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Eli PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LII OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : -010II\V n APPROVED NAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED 0 kn i)0 1 1-� T �Ni �, ��' .I�tiI NoPRoVPA- bE. APFlum.0 5-E6)01AnorVfoi) 1) Dee,S-6z1 Ni\J (A)ALKLufq/(dooR7t- e26 No Vf 1-t 7,NI) -TR88f, ULi �� sp c� cP 'IBC 2,o)uolavX 514wt,JJ 5O L k)D Al b `�•���Gl DATE: 7- 7 -8(0 SIGNATURE OF DIRECZ OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 non rzENT,4 BUILDING & ZONING DER , rMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 060 `- 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. PROJECT TITLE : ' PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND _ APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION : S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STRFFT AND MEADOW AVF. NORTH TO: 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 7-23-86 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 0 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING. & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7-17-86 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : OAPPROVED � APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED . DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 tnVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SnacT REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JUi,v 17 , 1 ()RA ECF - ncn - Rr APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNE r/n PRTNT CRAFT SATES COPP_ PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT ' BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 'SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross):, 5 , 350 SQ.) FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare C- 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: DNS Q MITIGATED DNS [—I EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: DATE: _ FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 u 13025 138 Ave. S.E. Renton, WA. 98056 July 22, 1986 _ CITY or. PC-N ON City of Renton jj Building & Zoning 200 Mill Ave. S. JUL 22 1986 "s Renton, WA. 98055 Re: Site Plan/Print Craft Dear Sir: We are owners one-half block from this proposed development and have concerns re : traffic that will be generated. In reviewing the site plan, it seems inappropriate to have the main entrance facing to the north, which is residential in nature. It would seem to encourage traffic along N. 2nd (which is very narrow) . It might also encourage traffic from the north to travel south on Meadow, which is wholly residentally developed. The sign location at the northwest corner seems to encourage south bound traffic on Meadow also. We feel that an entrance on the west side, facing a business use would be better and less apt to generate traffic through the residential area to the north. Yours truly, e cIPPti Donald & Mary Ellen Hamblin Owners at 222 Meadow Ave. N. • • July 22, 1986 204 Meadow Avenue N. Renton, Washington 980.57. • CM OF RENTON 3u Fr 101• S,r Zoning & Building 1111 Renton City Hall JUL 22 1986 Renton, Washington Subject: Rezone at 2d & Meadow • • To whom it may concern: I am writing in response to the notice of change of zone from resi- dential to business, at the location of 2d and Meadow, My home is close by, being the second house from the corner north of the building planned. . I own our home and live with my children here. Especially for that reason, I would prefer residential housing on the site, but .if the proposal is approved, special concerns of mine are: a. Why the entrance and sign are pointed toward the residential. zone on the northern edge of the property; b. Why the "service entrance" is on the alley near residential zones • and uses instead of to the south toward the service station; c. The problems associated with traffic (deliveries and otherwise) on narrow North 2d or through the residential area north of that street; and • d. What type of printing would "specialty" printing include or not include. . Thank you for addressing these concerns. Yours very truly, 4(--2 M ry W fgram C� . CITY OF f:ESAITO61 PgirdiTCB : , 03 Warren P. Vaupel - J U L 2 2 1986 `�`.. Versie Vaupel P.O. Box 756 July 21 s t, 1986 ;, . Benton,.WA 98057 (206) 255-3684 • • • To: Building and Zoning Department Re: Ann Lotto site plan and rezoning request; North 2nd and Meadow Avenue North There are some statements we'd like to relate', as well as some specific' questions..we would like to ask. 1 . 4The. entrance :to and address of the building should be oriented toward Meadow, toward the present business developments. Putting the entrance and address on the . north side of the property could and no doubt would cause undue infringement. on the residential side of the project. In this case, the company's address and main .bus- ' iness. entry would be directly opposite designated residential use;.this would be . half a city block (from Meadow to the alley on the east) facing residential uses, our own front door and view from our living room, and our only recreation .and loung- ing area outside in our back (side) yard toward our own alley. There would be more traffic put into the residential area in spite of the parking lot to the south. The residential' area' is already struggling with business and industrial 'traffic plus parking on the street caused by other than residential uses; more-traffic and more parking problems are. not welcome. We are aware that deliveries automatically come to the entry/address side of .a building where autos/vans/trucks are often left running while delivering or finding out where to deliver, and often double-parked. 2. As•the Richter letter pointed out, there should be a berm, shrubbery or some, kind of definitive barrier on the north side. of the property delineating business from res- idential . . This area is trying to survive, with a newish duplex nearby and with young couples with children coming to the central areas. Within half a block from the north boundary line, there are a minimum of 13 children presently living here.. Granted, some are not permanent residents but are tenants, but this gives you an idea of the num- ber of children now in the neighborhood. This point also supports item 1 above-- the relocation of the entry toward the business area and lessening traffic on North, Second. The plan we have seen shows only an expanse of sod in a goodly portion of the northern border of the site. :. . • 3. The outdoor business sign should not be at the northern edge of the property at North Second and Meadow. This also would be more appropriate near an entry on•Meadow and south of the indicated placement. Any other outside signs of any sort? 4. The service entrance is shown at the alley. The service entry .should be' from 'the parking area to the south. The alley will not accommodate large trucks to go all the way'through, and we would end up with more maneuvering of large and small vehicles - on the street, i .e. , North Second, next to property zoned R-2 with multiple family residency and opposite home-owned, single-family residence. You will recall that the alley from North Second does not go straight through when traveling south but has a sharp dog-leg turn to the left out onto Factory, a change in configuration the city • unfortunately allowed some years past.. In addition to the alley problem, there would be noise and fumes and vibration associated with such service entrance--again which should be oriented south and west from the location shown. 5. What about garbage collection? I see no mention made of this problem. Again, this should not be located at the alley's service entrance (where presently shown'). Page 2 That would be too close to the residential area. No doubt a dumpster would be used, and presently picking up of the dumpster at the Texaco station on the south is. on Friday mornings at 4:00 a.m. , and can be heard in our house and beyond to the north. There should not be an additional noisy nuisance so close by. As you probably know, downtown business pickups are made in these very early morning hours, not at the same time residential pickup is made--and in fact, on an entirely different day, which means we who live in the area here have two garbage truck noises each week, with backup beepers, engine noises and air-brake releasing, jarring .sounds. We should not be subjected to additional noises even to accommodate an apparently good- looking business development. We have to remember that the residences were here first though, 6. What happened to the roofline, by the way? It seems that the company, in its good effort to be compatible with residential looks, had originally' planned to have a composition or similar roof, instead of the flat roof we see on the drawing. Has that been abondoned, or did I hear it wrong on the grapevine? 7. The community, I am sure, would hope to see some limitation on night and Sunday activity such as working hours weekdays from 8 to 8 and little or no activity on • weekends. We as homeowners directly across the narrow street from the project hope to spend our retirement years here with some degree of quietude. 8. Outside safety lighting at night would be welcome to us neighbors on the north side of the site, but would be reasonably sure the company owners and the city would not permit unreasonable glare. 9. Under answers to 6a of the environmental checklist and 7b(1 ), there is an indi- cation that energy equipment and other noise-producing equipment will be located indoors. We would trust this includes all types of equipment. . We trust, too, that no outside air-conditioning condenser and fan will be directed toward the residential. area but instead toward the commercial. and noisier business to the south. 10, Will the business owners have their own •trucks and company cars? If trucks, we would hope these would be shielded or parked where they would not infringe on either residential use or businesses. We have that problem in the community already, but ' there should not be added nuisances. 11 . • We are also concerned with construction time. How long will the construction take from ground-breaking time to completion? What about "staging areas" during con- struction? This part of town has had too many problems with construction equipment on empty lots that the thought of yet another appals us. The last time we'.had'con- struction equipment in the area., the contractors abided by the actual beginning time EXCEPT that they sent a man down very early in the mornings to 'w'i up" old equip- ment, and sometimes we had noisy equipment running at 6:00 a.m. or so. And what about night parking of equipment if a staging area is not used? And for how long . a period will the neighborhood be subjected to construction noise, parking, dust • and fumes? Will dusty areas be kept down with watering or other means? 12. What about printing-chemical odors? 13. One very important point: Would the owner/developer be,willing to, .r:.etain'. the. present "No commercial parking 9 pm to 6 am"? The residents fought hard to . get these erected in the first place so as to discourage overnight parking by out of-.;town truck drivers and others who came down here off the freeway to stay,allor nd part of the night, often with refrigerated units running, .4 _sometimes their diesel engines, for long periods. Surely a decent business would not want to return to that. Lastly,'.i s the rezone void i f this site plan is= abandoned"at-any point? / Warren F. Vaupel Versie Vaupel • OF R4N4/ e• .".'z c.E • 0q 6 O•60 SE PI E05, O Q City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner • will hold a ‘.. UBLIC • in CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL • • ON SEPTEMBER 2,_ 1986 • BEGINNING AT 9:00 A.M. P.M. M`% O N CiE RN I NG•• • MELVIN MAINE c/o PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. APPLICATION TO REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 (FILE R-067-86) AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1 STORY APPROXIMATELY 5,350 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING: .A.SUE HAVING 16,480 SQUARE FEET (FILE SA-068- ) E-1PG No 'WA71p _ &M.'M, a i,o..'V:Tx'��•—:sue �,1 ��' ' `` - • • , ,._.w_._. .6x3I • �`• "" 1 w•.naws'v.a ... ' ru y. 9 • i_ (e� -- 9I- BEd pl • • • ENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SECOND STREET AND MEADOW AVENUE NORTH. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL • THE CITY OF RENTON • BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE - REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION • ,;'. A 1 S r+m tF�d� i APPLICATION NO. ECF-060-86 APPLICANT f KELVIN MIAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORPORATION PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO.B-1, SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 1-STORY PRINT SHOP OF APPROXIMATELY 5,350 SQ, FT„ ON A SITE SAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SECOND STREET & MEADOW AVENUE NORTH POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (E.R.C.) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION , DOES x DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WILL x WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. THE CITY OF RENTON WILL NOT ACT ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE BELOW. COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY AUGUST 11, 1986 AN APPEAL OF. THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY . BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., AUGUST 11, 1986 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT AT 235-2550. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a declaration of non- significance for the following projects: JOHN S. SIMPSON (ECF-037-86) Application to rezone approximately 0.59 acre from G-1 to R-1 (file R-037-86) ; application for short plat approval to subdivide said property into three (3) single family lots (file SHPL-038-86) ; application for waiver of required off-site street improvements (file W-039-86) ; and application for variance to maintain the current 30' wide roadway along Morris Avenue South instead of required 60' width (file V-066-86) . Property located 513 South 15th Street. MELVIN MAINE C/O PRINT CRAFT SALES CORP. (ECF-060-86) Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 (file R-067-86) and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet (file SA-068-86) . Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. Further information regarding this action is available in the Building and Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Renton Hearing Examiner by August 11, 1986. Published: July 28, 1986 2009N CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NO. : ECF-060-86 APPLICATION NO(s). : R-067-86 SA-068-86 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for rezone from R-2 to B-1 and application for site approval to construct a print shop of one story approximately 5,350 square foot building on a site having 16,480 square feet. PROPONENT: Melvin Maine c/o Print Craft Sales Corp. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Located at the southeast corner of North Second Street and Meadow Avenue North. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) . This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 235-2550 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination in writing to Renton Hearing Examiner no later than August 11, 1986. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. DATE OF DECISION: July 23, 1986 PUBLICATION DATE: July 28, 1986 ,Aii e Ro /Jaw — ld G. Nelson arry H. Sp ger II Building and Zoning Director Policy Devel. .ment Director 14"2"#(49 /167-(111 hard C. Houghton Public Works A(3-- 2 trv'IRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: CAC- ,ILS bc Pr' DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17 , 1 9 R ti ECF - ncn - PA APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNF c/n PRINT ('RAFT 4AT.FS Copp_ PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5, 350 SQ.' FT. • IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation /X 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: vo c+ dbeD 6)irt 0'\ ►rn aC 14k/ RECOMMENDATION: Myk DNS El MITIGATED DNS 1 EIS REVIEWED BY: Qd 114-07(k:{.V` TITLE: �11 1' DATE: 44\J V) nP FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW Shtti REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17, i q R ti ECF - ntin - R6 APPLICATION NO(s)., R-067-86, SA-068-86 - PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNH c/n PRTNT ('RAFT SATES CORP PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5,350 SQ.' FT. • IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals L 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities e/ COMMENTS: N o pv-c da, kte)-Af Ur r I p t reld� RECOMMENDATION: 14 DNS Q MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: lx TITLE: DATE: /4� / -C FORM(#14.. REVISED 9/10/85 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW Sh i' REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: IC---3 1 G U (*.D DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17, 1 A R E ECF - ncn - Ry APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86 , SA-068-86 - PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNF r/n PRTNT CRAFT gkLES COPP PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. J'.y LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVF . NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5, 350 Sn.' FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources L/ 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics l/ 11) Light and Glare ✓ 12) Recreation 9/ 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation ✓ 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: 66 „c//,) A if telli 6K-/: goloide s RECOMMENDATION: fIC. DNS a MITIGATED DNS I1 EIS REVIEWED BY: r TITLE: c DATE: 7 /J// FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 Iry rt/- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SFitef REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: A--k Z1 , DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17, 1 q R h ECF - ntin - A6 APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVTN MATNE r/n PPTNT (RAPT SALEg CnBP PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5 ,350 SS).' FT. • IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities ✓ COMMENTS: CU 9,0.2,/ itkur a Airi• q )j)-4 RECOMMENDATION: DNS Q MITIGATED DNS EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: 0774/Ty DE/►/P/1)09ER �. DATE: // Ao FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 }_:gIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: t! C 1 DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE OJth f v 17, 1 9 R 6 ECF - ntin - R6 - APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNR C/o PRTNT CRAFT LEsu mpg _0 J PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5, 350 SQ.' FT. • IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services r/ 16) Utilities COMMENTS: 6'...-yr'/,. CC,C.F /, '/.eE Co.oEIs Alm. o.�. ,. . A/ ,Es A:EQ4/.e,' /00P.2oj[i r»A•r G,ef z Soo sr. j.f�s�er.E / if /Vyo. Rep[/face Let'/7,4' ,2/py,"ex /�/� .Ca eATEA &i / 77rc/.s/ /SD 7;4,LEeS U//7-44/iv .fi?c RECOMMENDATION: FM/ DNS El MITIGATED DNS El EIS REVIEWED BY: 046 �./ei---- TITLE: DATE: ,,cask. 3' /9 FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 -LNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SSf REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: €\.Jl L7b 1 v ( 1 DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17, 1 q R 6 ECF - ntin - R6 APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNE f/n PPTNT CRAFT SATES rpgp PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5,350 SQ.' FT_ IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation tl 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: ‘///// pc-1DNS 0 MITIGATED DNS ElEIS REVIEWED BY: r�i�;- � a TITLE: // / DATE / " � v FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 i' 'ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: RAJ Gam/ `Y71 (-J LC 1 I 1 dv\ DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17, 1 A R F ECF - ntin - R6 APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVIN MATNE c/n PRTNT ( RAPT gAyp4 COPP_ PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5, 350 SQ.' FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACTT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth !/ 2) Air 3) Water !/ 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: DNS [] MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: vl�'ue /u,tSc,-, TITLE: AsSOca.,F Ra•Jeli4 er--- DATE: 1R3 f 8-6— FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 " .rivIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW Sr,« rTh REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 3 C-e 1 1 DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 30, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17 , 1 g R F ECF - ntin - Rti APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86 , SA-068-86 PROPONENT: MELVTN MATNF C'/n PRTNT CRAFT SALES CORP_ PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE'APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SO. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5,350 SQ. FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: DNS 0 MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: 1. �' � C CG ✓7 TITLE: , DATE: 7---/-gS. FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 114 OIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW S REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: k DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 3 0, 19 8 6 COMMENTS DUE: JULY 17 , 1 q R 6 ECF - ntin . - R6 APPLICATION NO(s). R-067-86, SA-068-86 PROPONENT: _MELVIN MATNF. r/n PRTNT (RAPT SALES CORP_ PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY APPROX. 5,350 SQ. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE HAVING 16 ,480 SQ. FT. LOCATION: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2nd STREET AND MEADOW AVE,. NORTH SITE AREA: 16,480 SQ. FT. BUILDING AREA (gross): 5 ,350 SQ. FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water , 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land nd Shoreline Use �C 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare \� 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities `'( COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: • IC DNS Q MITIGATED DNS El EIS REVIEWED BY: �C _ 9T LA/V\0LL TITLE: DATE: -7- l-O(C_J FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 • • • July 14, 1986 Building & Zoning.Dept. City Hall Mill Avenue S. Renton, Washington Reference: Lotto Rezone; 2nd and Meadow As residents only one block to the north, we wish to make some comments about the above. 1. We believe the sign should not be at the northern edge of the property, but instead further to the south toward the business parking lot. 2. We also believe the entryway to the business should not be just across the narrow street from residential property. This would encourage delivery of all kinds to be on the residential street. 3. Likewise, the service entry should be farther south on the alley or else at the parking lot area. • 4. There should be some kind of barrier or screening on the north side of the building site --perhaps a fence which would be more of a division between residential and commercial areas. We believe that some sort of division is important to try to help the community retain its identity as a residential area. Even though the landscaping around the building appears good, in general, there should be some addition of growth, a berm and/or fencing along the north, instead of only sod in the middle of the northern border. 5. We also wonder about the looks of a flat-roofed building next to resi- dential buildings. Please keep us informed of decisions and dates of hearing. Yours truly, i Marjorie Richter William Richter Richter CRY e fa., rax Q O 300 Meadow North gg " ` Renton, Washington 98055 1 O ''U ls+ 9 '� i ° J U L 17 1986 EUILD'6N.3i2.4:..n.41NG DEPT OF 124,ti T, POSTED: 7-8-86 4 O © z - E 43. 0 917-F0 solo OAP OF PENDING SITE PLAN APPLICATION DESCRIPTION : R-067-86, SA-068-86 APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 AND APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PRINT SHOP OF 1-STORY, APPROXIMATELY 5, 350 SO. FT. BUILDING ON A SITE APPROXIMATELY 16,480 SQ. FT. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: LOCATED AT: S.E. CORNER OF NORTH 2ND STREET AND MEADOW AVE. NORTH PUBLIC APPROALS REQUIRED : 1. ) REZONE 2. ) SITE PLAN APPROVAL 3. ) BUILDING PERMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ANYTIME PRIOR T • PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS. ***** COMMENTS WILL BE RECEIVED UNTIL 7-22-86 5 : 00 P.M. ***** FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL tHE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CITY o" RE TON Dennis 3, kr Neifert " &Associates J U(V 2 3 1986 ARCHITECTS Ei;A'I.DING/a NlNG DE PT. June 19 , 1986 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. Renton, WA. 98055 ATTN: Building and Zoning Department RE: Site Plan approval for property located at S .E. corner North 2nd Steet and Meadow Avenue North. Project Narrative. To whom it may concern: DNA The proposed project will house Print Craft Sales Corporation, a contract printing company. The building will encompass approximately 5,350 S. F. on one level , containing printing and office facilities. The single story structure will be residential in scale and character and will incorporate brick and stained cedar siding as well as a planting berm as the predominant exterior materials, and will be designed to be sensitive to the neighboring residential uses. Heating and ventilating units will incorporate a spit system with ground mounted condensing units and internally mounted air handling units. The printing equipment will be located indoors and does not produce enough noise to be noticeable outside of the building. Parking will be provided on site for 16 cars. 7-10 employees and occasional drive-up customers will use the building weekdays during normal working hours. The office will not generally be open on weekends. Since Print Craft is a contract printing company drive-up traffic is infrequent. The parking area is located away from the residential zone, hidden behind the structure. The site is of sufficient size to ensure smooth operation and will not cause impacts to the residential neighbors due to excess numbers or jockying of vehicles. The location of the parking area will minimize travel and congestion in the residential area and is designed to avoid adverse impacts. One 16 ft. high pole light will be provided for the parking area . One exterior free standing sign; 6 ft. by 4 ft. high, double sided wood, ground mounted, will be provided and will be indirectly lit by ground mounted lights. Exterior building lights will be wall mounted and will be low intensity to provide low levels of general area illumination and will not cause glare problems for the residential neighbors. 1042 West James Street, • Suite 103 Kent,Washington 98032 206-854-5010 Construction is proposed to be complete within 1 year of rezone and site plan approval . Print Craft Corporation is a low intensity use and will be a good buffer between the existing residential and commercial uses. Si cerely,,,, ,/ orJan Ronhovde Project Architect DNA TR/ls CITY0FMENTOM B rei [ FE ' JUN 2 31986 - F UiLf iNGLordNG DE PT. CITY OF RENTON Dennis E © IE W I Neifert L� &Associates ARCHITECTS J of 14 06 1986 BUILDING /ZONING DEPT. June 4, 1986 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, WA. 98055 ATTN: Building and Zoning Department RE: Rezone of Property located at S .E. corner . North 2nd St. and Meadow Ave. N. DNATo whom it may concern: The subject property is currently zoned R-2. The current comprehensive plan designates this property as part of a B-1 zone. The property is a buffer between 2 existing uses; residential to the north and east and a Texaco Station to the South. The proposed structure will house Print Craft Sales Corporation, a contract printing company. The building will encompass approximately 5,350 Square feet on 1 level , and will be designed to act as a buffer structure between the two differing zones. The single story structure will be residential in scale and character and will incorporate brick and cedar siding exterior materials that will not be offensive to residential uses. Parking will be provided on site for 7 - 10 employees and occasional drive up customers. Since Print Craft is a contract printing company, drive up traffic is infrequent. The parking area is located away from the residential zone, hidden behind the structure. The location of the parking area will minimize travel and congestion in the residential area, and is designed to avoid adverse impacts. Traffic impacts to the residential area are expected to be insignificant. This is a quiet business and will be a good neighbor to the residential uses, and should limit conflicts between residential and commercial uses. The site is close to main stream traffic routes and is a good location for a commercial use. The site is of sufficient size to ensure smooth operation and will not cause impacts to the residential neighbors due to excess numbers or jockying of vehicles. Print Craft Sales Corporation is an 1042 West James Street, Suite 103 Kent,Washington 98032 206-854-5010 appropriate and timely use for this site, and meets the policies set forth in the comprehensive plan by providing a low intensity use to provide a buffer between the residential and commercial zones. S ' erely, i"; r-Jan Ronhovde Project Architect T R/l s .DNA DEAN PARKINS ASSOCIATES p�CITY OF RENTON INCCOMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES } E E IJ V BUSINESS BROKERAGE SPECIALISTS + juN 0 4 1986 BUILDING /ZONING DEPT. June 3 , 1986 City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Mr. Roger Blaylock Zoning Administrator RE: Requested Rezone by Ann L. Lotto (Seller) and Gregory E. Maine , President, Print Craft Sales Corporation (Purchaser) Lots 1,2 ,3 , and 4 , Block 8, Car Works Addition to Renton as recorded in Volume 15 of Plats , Page 47 of King County, Washington. Dear Mr. Blaylock: This real estate transaction hinges on the rezone , and we find that it would be advantageous if we could identify more closely the time element that we are discussing. We would appreciate it if you could suggest an approximate date that final approval can be expected, barring unforseen obstacles , so that we may seek an extension of the agreed-upon closing date . An early response would be most useful. Yours truly, Shelton L. Black Sales Associate SLB:mbw MAIL-PO BOX 48067 SEATTLE,WA 98148•OFFICE-2104 S.W.152ND ST SUITE 3 SEATTLE,WA 206/241-6886 • • OF R4,A .<�,:.,,�,. ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Ci ' z r '"'' RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR sail 1- o0 �` ' �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 o 235-2540 0 9�TF0 SEP1,1,1# BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR May 30, 1986 Tor-Jan Ronhovde Dennis Neifert & Associates 1042 West James Street. Suite 103 Kent, Washington 98032 SUBJECT: PRINT CRAFT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SECOND STREET AND MEADOW AVENUE NORTH Gentlemen: The Building and Zoning Department is in receipt of the above referenced application to rezone four lots from R-2 to B-1 for a proposed printing establishment. In the course of our initial review, it has been determined that the following items still need to be submitted in order to route this application: 1. Provide seven (7) copies of a King County assessor map (scale 1"=100') denoting the subject site in color and illustrating all property within five hundred feet (500') of the subject site. 2. Provide one (1) Super-K reduction or PMT reduction of the proposed site plan at a size of 8-1/2" x 11" or 8-1/2" x 14". Photographic paper reductions are not acceptable. 3. The justification for the rezone is an extremely important part of the • application. What has been submitted is weak and needs to be expanded on. specifically. in reference to the City's Comprehensive Plan (see attachment regarding the procedure). In addition to the rezone procedure that needs to be accomplished for this project. the City has adopted a new site plan approval ordinance that affects all new developments in the B-1 zone. Those projects now all require "site plan approval." This should be done in your case at the same time the property is being rezoned to simplify the process. For your information is attached a site plan approval procedure sheet. Most of the information asked for is the same as in the rezone procedure. New information that is to accompany the site plan approval is as follows: Tor-Jan Ronhovde May 30. 1986 Page 2 1. Revise the master application form by checking the appropriate box labeled "site plan approval." This will require an additional fee to the City of $300 (see fee schedule). Submit six (6) copies plus the original back to this office. 2. Site plan approval requires that we notify all adjacent property owners of the pending application. It is, therefore, required that the applicant provide this office with first class stamps and mailing labels of the adjacent owners. We will then notify them of the public hearing. • 3. Submit seven (7) copies of a narrative statement explaining the project. 4. Architectural information required is to include details of what the outside lighting will look like and information as to building materials and colors. 5. The landscaping plan is to include more information as to the type, species and sizes of plant materials proposed. Submit seven (7) copies of this plan. 6. Include additional fees to cover the site approval portion to the environmental review. We have collected $69 to cover the value of the land. We will need to collect additional based upon the value of the proposed building. This will amount to $1 per $10,000 of value. Please provide this requested information at your earliest convenience so that we may proceed with our review. We are enclosing for your information the procedures for rezoning property, site plan approval process and the land use fee schedule. Also attached is your original Master Application to amend. If you have any questions regarding this matter. please feel free to contact this office. Sincerely, TRitt,a(A.LA_ Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:JFL:ss 2439Z Attachments irra SALES �.__ .®CORPORATION 107 WILLIAMS AVE. S., RENTON, WA 98055 (206) 271-0699 May 1 , 1986 City of Renton Building & Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: CHANGE IN ZONING Gentlemen: The undersigned are purchasers subject to rezone of lots 1 , 2 , 3 & 4 , Block 8 , Car Works Addition to Renton as recorded in Vol- ume 15 of Plats , page 47 , of King County, Washington. Currently the south six ( 6 ) lots of block 8 are zoned B1 , while lots 1 , 2 , 3 & 4 are zoned R2 . Lots 1 and 2 boardering on Meadow Avenue North are undeveloped. The dwellings located on lots 3 and 4 are old and in need of repair. Under these conditions , and since several commercial buildings have recently been erected in this general area, we feel the property can best be developed for commercial use in its entire- ty. Consequently, we request that lots 1 , 2 , 3 & 4 be rezoned B1 . Thank you for your early attention to this request . Thank You, Gregory E. Maine, CITY OF RENTON President RE Un IU W i. D LIL MAY 21 1986 GEM/km [.i VILD1NG/ZONING DEPT. Pn. Hi ;iH r SALES CORPORATION 107 WILLIAMS AVE. S., RENTON, WA 98055 (206) 271-0699 May 1, 1986 • City of Renton Building & Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: CHANGE IN ZONING Gentlemen: The undersigned are purchasers subject to rezone of lots 1 , 2 , 3 & 4 , Block 8 , Car Works Addition to Renton as recorded in Vol- ume 15 of Plats , page 47 , of King County, Washington. Currently the south six ( 6 ) lots of block 8 are zoned B1 , while lots 1, 2 , 3 & 4 are zoned R2 . Lots 1 and 2 boardering on Meadow Avenue North are undeveloped. The dwellings located on lots 3 and 4 are old and in need of repair. Under these conditions , and since several commercial buildings have recently been erected in this general area, we feel the property can best be developed for commercial use in its entire- ty. Consequently, we request that lots 1, 2 , 3 & 4 be rezoned B1 . Thank you for your early attention to this request . Thank You, Gregory E. Maine, President CITY OF RENT N fel RiGEM/km Ef • MAY 211986 !'JlLDING/ZUNING DEPT. V OF R.6., �e ; ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT - e� a, RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR O " '" .,. MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 9,0 ro. 0,9gT�Q SEPI "c3 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCI-# MAYOR June 13. 1986 Shelton L. Black Dean Parkins & Associates, Inc. P. O. Box 48067 Seattle, Washington 98148 SUBJECT: LOTTO REZONE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH SECOND STREET AND MEADOW AVENUE NORTH Dear Mr. Black: The Renton Building and Zoning Department is in receipt of your letter dated June 3, 1986 regarding the timing for the above referenced rezone application. This application will be going through a rezone and site plan approval process concurrently. The approximate time involved for this usually takes three to four months upon submittal of a completed and accepted application. Because of the workload the City is currently experiencing, the latter figure of four months is likely more realistic. Furthermore, this application is not yet completed because of some additional information we have requested of the site plan approval and so the time period has not yet started. Hopefully, this will satisfactorily answer your question in determining whether you will need to seek an extension of your agreed upon closing date. If you have any additional questions regarding this application, feel free to contact this office. Sincerely. -�-� Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:JFL:ss 2478Z r cgr. 6-- DENNIS NEIFERT & ASSO TES fl_--'L A OF --E IRM 11E -'°, [1, ARCHITECTS 1042 West James Street Suite 103 - KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 DATE JOB NO. Phone 854-5010 June 4 , 1986 8607 ATTENTION TO City of Renton . Roger Blaylock Building and Zoning Department RE: 200 Mill Ave.. S . Rezone at S . E . corner N. 2nd St . _......- ......_............__................................._......_........................................._............................................................_.........................._.._............................ and Meadow Ave. N. Renton, WA. 98055 ' • • WE ARE SENDING YOU C I Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints • ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications CCopy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 6-4-86 2 Letter of jurisdiction addition to rezone package submitted May 21 , 1986 . • THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints >El For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS flCfTYOF7o CEO vElfil . UNaG1986. BUILDING/ZONING DEPT COPY TO SIGNED: Tor-Jan Ronhovde If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at onEe.r o e c t Architect y .4<y. o ` (-7 TY OF RENTON FILE NO(S): �-c `1 � P CO ® 1-., �LDING & ZONING DEPARTI,�._,AT � ..0 C �o$� .41\irro MASTER APPLICATION NOTE TO APPLICANT: Since this is a comprehensive application form, only those items related to your specific type of application(s) are to_be completed. (Pleose.print or type. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) APPLICANT TYPE OF APPLICATION NAME Melvin Maine c/o FEES Print Craft Sales Corp. En REZONE*(FROM R=.2 TO B-1 ) '3 CO — ADDRESS tt--�� 107 W i l l a m s Ave. S . u SPECIAL PERMIT* CITY 7� 0 TEMPORARY PERMIT* Renton, WA. 9 8 0 5 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT* TELEPHONE CEOSITE PLAN APPROVAL -300-- 2 7 1-0 6 9 9 E3 SPECIAL PERMIT FOR GRADE AND FILL No. of Cubic Yards: / I • Q VARIANCE* - CONTACT PERSON From Section: * Justification Required NAME Tor-Jan Ronhovde c/o Dennis Neifert & Associates , 4 ADDRESS SUBDIVISIONS: i 1042 W. James St . , Suite 103 Q SHORT PLAT CITY Kent , WA. ZIP 98032 TENTATIVE PLAT 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT TELEPHONE Q FINAL PLAT 854-5010 Q WAIVER (Justification Required) OWNER NO. OF LOTS: NAME PLAT NAME: Ann Lotto I ADDRESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: • 280 Morris St . Q PRELIMINARY CITY ZIP Ll FINAL Renton, WA. 98055 P:U.D. NAME: TELEPHONE 2 2 6-3 9 8 0 • [] Residential 0 Industrial ElCommercial n Mixed L LOCATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: . PROPERTY ADDRESS corner N. 2nd St . & Meadow Q TENTATIVE AvP _ N_ EXISTING USE ��: `•'•/��:''" PRESENT ZONING PRELIMINARY LRes;iden-cE/i/Ac i't R-2 FINAL PROPOSED USES'1-' IC ,,;` - PARK NAME: Print Shop' is -,,., ,;}._ _I NUMBER OF SPACES: • °ti 0 cr 1 fcI[vg•--U n QyAQ `S.O O •'.� ® ENVIRONMENTALL REVIEW COMMITTEE r A�.- ...SQ,.,.r.I. ACRES ,-G� . AREA; I ' • 1J . 3 7 8 TOTAL FEES STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING • DAT:R (� ,�I t, j W N APPLICATION RECEIVED BY: • t� A D APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: MAY 2 -11986 0 Accepted 0 Incomplete Notification Sent On By: ' RI III r•IMr/7QN, MG Dcnr '' (Initials) DATE ROUTED ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED BY: `(`Z9 13 C 6, 0/`8 6 APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE:,t I I,� ._j D Accepted � ' Q Incomplete Notification Sent On PBy: (Initials) ROUTED TO: - Oa Building CILpdsign Eng. 'Fire (Parks • Police Ra n Policy Dev. Traffic Eng. (Utilities REVISED 1-31-84 - 1 Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet). Lots 1-4 , Block 8, Car Works Addition to Renton AFFIDAVIT Dennis Neifert • , being duly sworn, declare that I am ®authorized representative to act for the property owner,Mowner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS /9 DAY . OF M/4-.-I 19_1k: NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESIDING AT ffff,ffaaa%a', c ,. ' AA&t, L!_ Ft ; (Name of Notary Public) (Signature of rtet) ,R, ip•rfi ets;,en .d,tkiye • • 1042 W. James St . , , Suitd 103 (Address) (Address) Kent , 'WA. 98032 (City) (State) (Zip) ' 854-50.10. (Telephone) Acceptance of this application and required filing fee does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other materials required to constitute a complete application are listed in the "Application Procedure." Form #174 Ann L. Lotto 280 Morris Street Renton, Washington 98055 May 13 , 1986 City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 To whom It May Concern: I am selling, subject to rezoning, Lots 1,2 , 3 , and 4 , Block 8, Car Works Addition to Renton as recorded in Volume 15 of Plats , Page 47 , of King County, Washington. The town of Renton has changed a great deal since I bought that property, and I have hesitated in making a decision about what to do with it until now. It would cost me too much money to repair the two existing houses to a good liveable condition, so I 've decided to sell. The purchasers plan to move their printing company into a new, single-story, attractive building they plan to construct on this property. I feel that the kind of quiet business these people are engaged in and the quality of the new building will be a benefit to the neighborhood and the City of Renton. I would appreciate your earliest efforts to rezone this property. Very truly yours , Ann L. Lo to MY OF RENTON Pr/ 1 MAY 211986 _._P BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. GJ,f 5(euAA-a rx��( �wi�c�c 41—'` .-e prbp-ek- crwA? CERTIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS/SITE PLAN * * *FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY* * * PROJECT TITLE: PRINT CRAFT APPLICANT: PRINT CRAFT SLAES CORPORATION APPLICATION NUMBER: R-067-86, SA-068-86 (REZONE AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL) The following is a list of adjacent property owners and their addresses. A notification of the pending site plan application shall be sent to these individuals as prescribed by Renton City Code. Chapter 7 Section 38 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 relating to site plan approval. ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER Dean W. and Jonell M. 2727 Mountain View Ave N. 135230-0840-00 itney Renton, WA 98056 Warin L. Gross 115 Factory Ave . N. 135230-0850-07 Renton, WA 98055 Robert K. and Janice 12515 - 142nd Ave . S.E. 135230-0855-02 Jurcan Renton, WA 98056 Texaco Refining & Market P.O. Box 54419 135230-0825-09 ing, Inc. Terminal Annex Los Angeles , CA 90054 ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER CERTIFICATION I. , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property owners and their addresses were taken from the records of the King County Assessor as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in-and for the State of Washington residing at. e.--74 , on the �pday of ,ce�cp J. L J • ✓� SIGNED;. .1,� 6 CERTIFICATION OF MAILING I. , hereby certify that notices of the public meeting on the subject site plan approval were mailed on , to each listed adjacent property owner as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing at on the day of . SIGNED: FORM MMB .OF R4, . tt EC F:. .0 9% elz City of Renton �u' - � _$selL 0,9�TED SEPTE�O�P ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter .43,21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for allproposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether . the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an.EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You, must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. Use of Checklist for Nonproject Proposals: (Please Type or Print Legibly) • Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: • Print Craft 2. - Name of applicant: I el Maine 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact.person: 107 Williams Ave. S . $anton, . .WA. 98055 Contact':' M61 "Maine' 4. Date checklist prepared: May 19 , 1986 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction proposed to be- complete within 1 year following approval of rezone application. • CITY OF RENTON fel IT, i MAY 211986 C' �It«t✓il`I�J/G.1.71�111i\7 1J 6:.P 7. • 7. Do you have any pla; :or future additions, expansions, o :rther activity related to or connected with this proposal? if yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. N/A • 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No • 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton rezone approval and any approvals or permits normally associated with a commercial building construction. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do .not need to repeat those answers on this page. Proposal is for construction of a Print Shop of 1 story, approx. 5350 S .F. Building. Site is approx. 16, 480 S .F. . Project is to be residential in scale and appearance will provide a good transition between the bordering residential and commercial uses . • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topography map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to, this checklist. Southwest corner of intersection of N. 2nd St . and Meadow Ave. N. Lots 1-4, block 8 , Car Works addition to the City of Renton. • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH • a.. General description of the site (circle one); rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? N/A c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, caly, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. • Silty Gravel d. • Are there,surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No - 2 - e. Describe th rpose, type, and approximate qu ,ies of any filling or grading proposes., Indicate source of fill. Project should not require any off site fill . Grading quantitiesare not known at this time. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. • No g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Building : 5 .50 S . F. Walks, Parking : 6124 S . F. Total: 11 ,474 S . F. Appro'x. 69% Impervious Coverage. • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Storm drainage will be a'h engineered system tied into the existing City of Renton storm system. Erosion would not be expected as a result of the proposed project . 2. AIR a. . What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust and automotive exhaust 'fumes normally associated with commercial construction, automotive exhaust from vehicles using project after completion. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission? No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: • None • 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what,stream or river it flows into. No 2) Will the project,require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A - 3 - • 4) Will the pro'. 1 require surface water withdrav , or diversions? Give general,description, purpose, and approximately quantities if known. No - V so 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No, proposal lies in zone "C""area of minimal flooding" . 6) . Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the . type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No • • b. Ground: . 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground . water? Give general description, purpose, and appaoximately quantities if known. V . No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm drainage will be an engineered system tied into the existing City of Renton Storm System. Impervious surfaces will not exceed City of Renton maximums . 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so,V generally describe. No ' - 4 - d: Proposed me; " es to reduce or control surface, and runoff water impacts, if a Engineered collection system from impervious surfaces . 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: o deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other • o evergreen tree:fir, cedar, pine, other ❑ Shrubs o grass o crop or grain o Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other o water plants: water lily,eel grass, milfoil, other o other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Existing grasses and shrubs will be removed and replaced • by City of Renton approved Landscaping.. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: See 4-b 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other native small birds Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other N/A Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other N/A b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None • C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No - 5 - d. Proposed ma 9s to preserve or enhance wildlife, N/A 's ra 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Gas or electric space heating and water heating electricity as required for lighting and equipment b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Proposal will meet or exceed revised State of Washington Energy Code requirements. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Printing chemicals in small quantities will be stored on site. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A S b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise is present but will have no detrimental effect on project . • - 6 - 2) What types ,evals of noise would be created tr associated with the • project on . Jhort-term or a long-term basis. example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term vehicular and construction noise and long term • noise associated with customer and employee vehicles . Post construction noise levels would be low due to low amount of ° / drive-up customers. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: All noise producing:" equipment associated with-I.a print shop will be located indoors. • • 8. Land and Shoreline Use • a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 1/2 residential and 1/2 vacant . Site to South is gas station sites to North and West are residential . b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not known c. Describe any structures on the site. (2) small residential structures . d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,.what? Yes, (2) small residences . e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-2 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? B-1 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 7-10 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? • 2 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None, rental homes and apartments are available in the area. - 7 - 1 1. Proposed me.- as to ensure the proposal is corn' ..)le with existing and ,. projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed use is allowed outright under B-1 zoning projected for the .area by the comprehensive plan . 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. (2) middle income residences . c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Proposal would have minimal impacts on housing . • 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. 15 Ft . high brick structure . Building design will be residential in scale and would make a good transition between the residential and commercial zones . ' b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. - Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Proposal would not create any aesthetic i_a:mpactss . • 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Nightime building and parking lot lighting . Business would be operating. during normal daytime working hours . b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. , What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? • None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: • N/A - 8 - • 12. .Recreation • • a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Liberty Park playfields are 1 block away from the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. • No • • c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A • • • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there .any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. . No b.. -Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance.known to be on or.next to the site. N/A • . c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: , N/A 14. Transportation • a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Site is at intersection of North 2nd St . and Meadow Ave. N. Bronson Way and Houser Way are 1 block alw0y :aail.d•,-I-4-.05.. is 2,11221-2.(kway. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximately distance to the nearest transit stop? 116 ,:.t.ransit is a tai];able:_.1 '.b}otk aWayo '. • c. How many parking spaces .would the. completed-project have? How many would the project eliminate? ' 16 new spaces . Single Family Residen i6.l,rp.atk g:;Wi11bbe eliminated. • d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No • • - • 9 - e. Will the prol,luse (or occur in the immediate v`_.•. ty of) water, rail, or • air transportation? If so, generally describe. . No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. 40 mainly at start and end of normal business day. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Proposal would not generate enough traffic to cause any impacts . • 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A • 16. Utilities • a. Ci cle • . _ - currently .availabl the site: electricity 6LTral gas - - 6 lephone, anitary sewer)septic system, otner. storm sewer b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Natural Gas- Washington Natural Gas Electricity- Puget Power Water, Refuse, Storm Sewer- City of Renton Telephone- Pacific Northwest Bell • C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresents or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Dennis Neifert an Associates, Architects Agent for Melvin aine - 10 - • #176 11-8-84 ' D. SUPPLEMENTAL SF( FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS - �" (This sheet should only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and • programs. Do not use this sheet for project actions.) • Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to'air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous sutstances;. or production of noise? 0 • Proposal may increase noise levels due to slightly increased vehicular traffic . Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Landscaping designed to reduce noise impacts will be incorporated into the plan. • 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? N/A Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: N/A 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? No Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Proposal will conform to the latest Washington State Energy Code. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, .wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? N/A Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: N/A • - 11 - 5. . How would the pro;', td be likely to affect land and =_Jenne use, including " whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? N/A Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: N/A 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposal would not increase demands:, ausiness is currently operating- in City. of Renton . . . Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: N/A 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Proposal will not conflict with local , state, or federal laws or codes . SIGNATURE I. the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it .!ht issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be a, willful misreprese - on or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: -�;_//,1.. _1. Or NW Name Printed: Dennis Neifert .nd Associates, Architects • Agent- for Me'lv: in'Maiiie • - 12 - -.111111111111 1965 COPYRIGHT BY 'WASHIN '0N REAL ESTATE REGISTER, INC. StAiiLE, WASHiNGIUN (406) cu-55?`1. \ WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE REGISTER BELIEVES THE INFORMATION BELOW TO BE CORRECT, BUT DOES NOT WARRANT ITS ACCURACY. THIS INFORMATION IS LEASED FROM AND REMihdNS THE PROPERTY OF WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE REGISTER, INC. KING COUNTY PARCEL LIST BY ACCOUNT NUMBER PLATTED 1985-86 EDITION 135230-CAR WORKS ADD TO RENTON RENTON VOL 15 PG 47 1 ACCT-NO OWNER NAME SITUS ADDRESS LEVY Z USE UN SALE-DATE PRICE LAND IMP TOTAL-AV #STY SOFT YR RAILING ADDRESS LOT*BLK G- 0- S- T- R LEGAL DESCRIPTION YRS DEL 85TAX ACREAGE W - 0710-07 KUBASTA ROBERT N 208 MEADOW AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 740529 6,000 18,200 16,200 34 400 1.0 890 07 0 1510 N 3RD ST*RENTON WA 98055 11*7 U-Nw-17-23-05 366.84 .09 _. 0715-02 WOLFGRAM ERWIN 204 MEADOW AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 750331 18,200 19,800 38 000 1.5 1160 07 0 204 MEADOW AVE N*RENTON WA 98055 12*7 U-NW-17-23-05 427.32 .09 i _ 0720-05 VAUPEL WARREN F & VERSIE ***** ** ************** 2100 2 SFD 1 20,700 25,400 46,100 i.OB 1860 37 i I0' PO BO's 755*RENTON WA 98057 13*7 U-Nw-17-23-05 518.41 .11 0725 0JOH0 E NSONNDOONALDLAS VEGAS NV 89121251 FACTORY AV , N 14*7 u210017-2541 2 841017 20,000 18,900 12,300 31,200 .11 I I 0 _. 0730-03 JOHNSON DONALD L 247 FACTOR( AV N 2100 101 2 800610 16,500 38,500 55 000 0 3937 S SPENCER #211*.LAS VEGAS NV 89109 15*7 U-NW-17-23-05 618.49 .09 _. 0735-08 JORGENSEN & SHAW 241 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 831123 18,200 20.300 38,500 1.0 750 40 0 SHAW .1 ESTATE*1726 NE 24TH-RENTON WA 98056 16*7 U-NW-17-23-05 432.94 .09 -. 0740-01 TOMICH MRS MARY 237 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 20,200 38 400 1.0 910 40 0. 237 FACTORY ST N*RENTON WA 98055 17*7 U-NW-17-23-05 145.91 .09 _. 0745-06 THOMAS DUANE A 235 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 16,700 34 900 1.0 1040 15 0: ! 235 FACTORY Avr W*RENTON WA 98055 18*7 U-NW-17-23-05 392.4.5 .09 -. 0750-08 GRIMES B.ARE.ARA 2100 2 VAC 810914 18,200 0 18 200 0' 103 UNION AVE SE-RENTON WA 98055 19*7 U-NW-17-23-05 204.66 .09 -. 0755-03 DIVELBISS MARK S 225 Ft, 'ORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 800312 47,000 18,200 19,800 38,000 1.0B 1080 33 0' 225 FACTORY AVE N*RENTON WA 98055 20*7 U-NW-17-23-05 427.32 .09 -, 0760-06 KOKKO C H 221 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 35,600 27,700 63 300 1.06 2120 17 0; 221 FACTORY AVE N*RENTON WA 98055 21-22 / U-NW-17-23-05 711.83 .19 -. 0780-02 MINERICH AND2EW 215 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 39,000 57 200 1.0B 1860 56 I 0' 215 FACTORY ST*RENTON WA 98055 23*7 U-NW-17-23-05 _ 295.00 .09 i -. 0795-05 MOnTOYA MOISES T & MARIA 1408 N SECOND ST 2100 001 840127 55,000 64,900 0 64 900 0' BELTRAN RICARDO 0 & ROSE*2108 BLAINE SE*REN 98055 24-25-2b*7 U-NW-17-23-05 729.82 .30 0805-03 LOTTO ANN L 2100 2 VAC 35,600 0 35 600 280 MORRIS AVE S APT 6*RENTON WA 98055 1-2*8 U-NW-17-23-05 400.33 .19 0815-01 LOTTO ANN 118 MEADOW AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 18,100 36 300 1.0B 1210 07 ; ! -' 280 MORRIS AVE S APT 6*RE.NTON WA 98055 3*8 U-NW-17-23-05 408.20 .10 ' C" 0820-04 LOTTO ANN 116 MEADOW AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 18,600 36 800 1.0B 1050 11 280 MORRIS AV, APT 6*RENT)N WA 98055 48 U-NW-17-23-0`_ 413.83 .10 0825-09 IEXACO INC 1401 BRONSON WY N 2100 553 2 161,200 66,000 227,200 3350 WILSHIRE ELVD*LOS ANGELES CA 90005 5 THRJ 7 &*8 U-NW-17-23-05 LOTS 5 THRU 7 TGW POR VAC ALLEY ADJ LESS ST 2554.94 .10 0840-00 BITNEY DEAN W 123 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 M-D -3 770606 42,000 35,600 51,000 86,600 2.0B 3270 11 _. 2727 MT VIEW AVE N*RENTON WA 98056 8-S+8 U-NW-17- 3-05 973.85 .19 ' 0' 0850-07 GROSS WARIN L 115 FACTORY AV N 2100 2 SFD 1 18,200 14,400 32 600 1.0 580 40 0, 115 tACTORY N*RENTON WA 98055 10*8 U-NW-17-23-05 366.60 .10 N 1 O CITY OF RENTON Ik33 T N -M111 MAY 2 1 1986 E MLDING/ZONING DEFT • JSRNtT* % IJ1JIIUIJ II! vqiiRYIG tOIRIY RAM Statutory warramhr D..d riv „„ , .... 4,... ,.. jR',) IMF(•••Wind AN NA PLAWEC, • widow, y ` .� " ' and in cordnato of Ten Dollars (810.00) end other good and valuable � considerations ��'vS,. reed,.Id.on,ay..nd.,.onum ANN A. LOTTO, • single person, as her - ��, t� eeplraU proyerty 1�f w aifoniM M.cnAel mi watt YtrvuN!the Cann,A King ,WO�f 1y11, .aalun.tan �....4. Lots 1 and 2 in Block 8 of Car Works Addition to • III f1 l.TA Renton, as per plat recorded in Volume 15 of Plats, on page 47, records of said county. "A.: eg.pa Is •Sven in l'lfillment of that certain contract ar,'ed lay 7 t, 1,,,7, conultioned for• r.e conveyance oI' the above ueecrit.ed property, and the covenants of warranty herein contained shell not • +only to any title, int-rest, lien, or er,cunbranees arie'nr by, threurn or uneer ths -,urcnaser in said contract anu shell not a, ly • i to any taxes, ass.laments, or other charms levied or •s . c. e e seyuent to the, date or said contract, Luise sal , _paid se contract under Ling C. ty Tr is -t Receipt N. ; , Dated,w d.r of r e , 1957. `1,m OR C•NIMCI NE ly..2.-1!. / •• .ic' jf 1't C fu..l A.A.lOM%KM coon taws / -- ,. - _.'vr-r" :.r_Roar - - —Lori -I!!I of W'SHINGTON, 1 - t,..ner„r King i t>n,h,d..personally..4r.,..Mfaa of ANNA PLAVYC, ■ widow. n no known to he the 1.n0,4.1 dooe.b.d n ad oh..aee..d,h..Ylu sod lonples le•mar,.and . ..U,...1.dead that nt,e AV*,,Y ear bar Ira.d"ivory f0 sad dud,for tM togs and porn"+Inne,nunwn.d /' RIVEN toad..nr Used..d.lard NW rim / /<, b.f IQy , 1957. -Fin*OW&in owl.*Sic sec../W.Jlyr.e, mid*Of Renton t, 1 CITY OP RIN / - �il AY 211986 R1-/ aUILai)' /.01`.41;'a:; DErT, • • 611,179os ._w e . ®TRANSAMERICA TITLQ • IN{Ul NCI COMPANY e-'" is...._ IUD Mt IftCUIU tar r.7.PTA TT?ft AlaiRa Add.., SHEUAM.PAfLi: ',II'SWIM __. ORA ATTCgKrri f..T 1'.'e•lel a ..A Z!.CA{. —DOW, • my,"36a,— • I ...:d.WI mat Rely Fll TA M_.1A�l r- A Statutory Warranty Deed c L, v THE GRANTOR COMMAS J. YAK Adstaistrator MY of MIA[state of Br HAVOC, ,r` Docwod, for and in u,mldonorim of Ten Dollaro esd otber good sad valuable easeluorsttos in hand paid.conveys and warrants to A A. LOTTO, •sisglo were the following described real estate,situated in the County of Ries ,State of Wsohington. Lot 3 is Mote 8 of Car Yorks Addltloo to lentos, es per plat recorded in Polar 15 of Pieta, pap 47, records of[isg County • SUBJECT to reseresttoo as specified in Trwerrica Title losurence frelisluary[sport No. 334802. i\j y t \12 -rA c, �'° _ - • ar Conveyance oft �'.II'IUaiFI`/9�0 ,,—Tax—_ • OCT-g z — a«sav ? I3.50 = a e M n�:,f�._ _ • I,.ltd in„ A l.y of -se/peradDla C .-C 1 .19 68(/_ Charles J. Lad. ads etracor We of the[state et Arm?Levee, Decd. l STATF.OF WASHINGTON, r •u County of itleg l • On the day,perr,nany solear..l f ole,me Charles J. Lno, Adstaistrator INN of the 4teta at...d. be.wna le rd,vdwl rise oleJ ,n and of.exe.uttsl the within gad foregoing instrunurnt, .mf atkp.rkdird,hot r^ . aped ter same a. hie free and voluntary act and deed,I...,k Use and t urp,se,the mentioned . .4I h E\omits my hand nod official seal this day 1 .. 1 is,.:aikeer e .Neter,Alex ler,se See.a,II atone., • BU1LCINO/ZONING DEPT, • ION 21199r. 3U11itlING/ZO i(I,., a i 1 1-? 64o5srm .�6516i's .rn rr.a snww.o.wow.,e, ..w.sr • .rite.r.d et R.•M•Rrt al -,Kt r.7'.'I rye$ro KI 8 33 I. A.? 1.Lr tL11L...!%"14 RC'R.•CO�AIV/AAAUU�N1TvI{ Ll j `, i OI�1 i1-- 1tr .e LM Statutory Warranty Deed I N.I.RA%-ling MAX.P11 PARKER and MAXINE M. PARKES, his wife .w.dn wee..I TI'.1. DOLLARS ANN LOTTO •r 146.ow dr...1 nal roan...awl m iAe. "r.I..r K INC .Stow d ��rAwa'w •t • Block h Car kirks Addition to Renton, according to plat :rrnl.' I °lune 1) of Plate, pace 47, in King County, Washington. Alaship9ton ��e5-T A 4* VI repo vr A._ M. R WILLIAMS ...� ...••• d.y.1 in-ta, 1%6 4Pan.b.."e..e Ralph Parker and Maxine M. i”n. i..N 1Y wdrv.4•41. d.•.l.d...M who the 'he AIM...d sod d rrrots*and✓ for tiltBard,Vi t1Ny' aPd .1i I. oaa.•rr fwaeiA+Wra a.,• e b•1 .r47 a 1968 i' ,'Al G .C<-� ! i`•. '�o Aware Iran Y sae F.A.tr*N w.ry... 1 ♦� r..dre r Mntor