The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutModification Justification MACKENZIE Since 1960 Logan Building |500 Union Street, Suite 410, Seattle, WA 98101 T 206.749.9993 | T 206.749.5565 | www.mcknze.com URBAN DESIGN REGULATION MODIFICATION To City of Renton, Department of Community and Economic Development For Les Schwab 354 Union Ave NE Renton, WA 98059 Dated April 7, 2021 (Revised April 23, 2021) Project Number 2200047.02 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 1 II. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 2 Description of Request ............................................................................................... 2 III. NARRATIVE & COMPLIANCE .................................................................................. 4 Justif ication for the Modification Request: .................................................................. 4 IV. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 5 ATTACHMENTS Building Elevations 1 I. PROJECT SUMMARY Applicant: Michael Chen Mackenzie 500 Union Street, Suite 410 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 749-9993 mchen@mcknze.com Owner: Les Schwab Tire Centers PO Box 5360 Bend, OR 97708 Site Address: 354 Union Avenue NE Renton, WA 98059 Assessor Site Acreage: 5182100010 & 5182100016 33,613 SF (APN 5182100010) 21,124 SF (APN 5182100016) 54,737 SF (Total) Zoning: CA Commercial Arterial Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Mixed Use Adjacent Zoning: North: CA Commercial Arterial East: CA Commercial Arterial South: CA Commercial Arterial West: CA Commercial Arterial Existing Structures: Les Schwab – 11,860 SF Les Schwab Canopy – 1,440 SF Special Features: There is a wetland complex and Maplewood Creek adjacent to the east of the subject site. Soil Type and Drainage: No ground disturbance is proposed with this design modification. The existing site contains an existing storm system that collects stormwater and ultimately discharges to Maplewood Creek. Request: Urban Design Regulation Modification Project Contact: Same as Applicant 2 II. INTRODUCTION Description of Request The subject site currently contains one (1) building totaling approximately 13,300 SF gross square feet. Gross floor area is defined as the horizontal area of all floors measured from the exterior face of each wall per the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-11-060. Net floor area excludes stairwells, elevator shafts, mechanical equipment rooms, interior vehicular parking or loading, and underground floors not used for human habitation or service to the public per RMC 4-11-060. Canopies are therefore excluded from floor area calculation. This urban design modification request a deviation from RMC 4-3-100.E.2.a and E.3.a are limited to the following: When a building includes an architectural feature that connects the building entry to the public sidewalk. The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscape pedestrian- only courtyard. 3 Aerial Image – Project Site 4 III. NARRATIVE & COMPLIANCE Justification for the Modification Request: 1. The intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan is met. Response: The requested urban design modification does not alter the governing land use designation of commercial arterial and the Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial Mixed-Use. 2. The modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of the Renton Municipal Code. Response: The requested urban design modification conforms with the zoning and design standards that apply to the project site. The rest of the proposed development conforms to the applicable code. 3. The modification substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element. Response: The design modification to the main entrance to the building will not alter the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element. The design intent of providing a visual cue to the building entry is met by wrapping the main entrance elements (parapet and canopies) around to the Union Avenue NE side of the building. 4. The modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives. Response: The modification from providing the building entrance off the street is the only adjustment necessary. Other design elements required by code are met. 5. The modification will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgement. Response: The proposed continuation of the main entrance on the north elevation wrapping around to the west elevation was considered on sound engineering. Based on the existing structural system of the roof and exterior building walls we did not want to trigger substantial structural upgrades to the building. A secondary entrance on the west elevation would have triggered structural upgrades to the roof members and additional installation of strong backs within the walls to provide additional gravity and shear capacity for the building. Based on the existing grades from the back of sidewalk along Union Street (inability to meet accessible path of travel) and the presence of a 10’ electrical easement directly behind the sidewalk adding a building entrance directly from Union Avenue would not have been sound engineering. 6. The modification will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: Should the design modification be approved it will not be injurious to other properties within the immediate vicinity. 7. The modification conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code. Response: The modification to the urban design standards to allow the building entry to wrap around to Union Avenue still meets the intent and purpose of the code. 8. The modification can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended. Response: Due to the existing structural system of the building and existing grade challenges to provide an accessible path of travel to a building entrance off Union Avenue the alternative solution of providing a “wrap around” and extension of the new building entrance proposed on the north elevation is justified. 5 9. The modification will not create adverse impacts to the other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: The proposed modification will not impact other properties within the vicinity of the existing Les Schwab. 10. The project as a whole meets the intent of the minimum standards and guidelines in subsections E, F, G, H, I, J, and K of the design regulations. Response: As the project is a remodel of an existing building, most of the other guidelines are meet. 11. The requested modification meets the intent of the applicable design standards. Response: By wrapping the proposed new building entry around the corner the design intent of providing visual queues to the building entry are met. The proposed design alternative include wrapping the 1’6” canopy around the NW corner of the building, as well as providing a canopy over the existing door located further south along the west elevation. We have also extended the metal panels/facia approximately 25’6” around the same NW corner to further enhance and carry the building entry elements around to the west elevation. 12. The modification will not have a detrimental effect on nearby properties and the City as a whole. Response: The proposed modification will not have detrimental effect on nearby properties and the City as a whole. The modification are limited to a small area of the existing building. The modification will enhance the aesthetics and improve the design of the original building constructed in the early 1990’s. 13. The deviation manifest high quality design. Response: The modification utilizes existing materials found on the building, they consist of metal panels, canopies and additional glazing. 14. The modification will enhance the pedestrian environment on the abutting and/or adjacent streets and/or pathways. Response: By wrapping the main building entrance elements around the building this will provide visual queues for pedestrians traveling along Union Avenue. Pedestrians will also have visual slight lines into the Les Schwab showroom/waiting area which activates the pedestrian experience. We also plan to enhance the existing landscaping around the egress door on the west elevation. There is already existing landscaping along the building to break up the blank walls, we are proposing the remove four existing shrubs in order to replant and enhance the entry with multiple Nikko Slender Deutzia and Degroot’s Spire Arborvitae. Please see sheet L1.10 of the landscape plan. IV. CONCLUSION The proposed Les Schwab urban design modification is consistent with the design standards of chapter 4-3-100. The proposal meets relevant approval criteria for modification procedures, and merits approval.