HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 88-06-DR - DEVANEY - BUILDING RENOVATION DESIGN REVIEW88-06-dr
14805 interurban avenue south
not built
devaney
TAKEN BY
NUMBER, SUBDIVISION
V (/
e a -c:,-
1, 7--;
1 (,f
1? c t F U ( 1.- .
p a • 0 19 6 1 e-rY /1 - 7 --- 6-
12--el)evez-0P6-r-P A< A
7) g 2 . I / GA-5 :71
(S94 - 0027 49 - 003c)
_
.
I
TAKEN BY
NUMBER, SUBDIVISION
DESIGN REVIEW
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
NOTICE OF DECISION
FILE NUMBER: 88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvement
APPLICANT: Mr. and Mrs. J. DeVaney
REQUEST: Renovation of an existing 2,304 square foot, 1 -story building
LOCATION: 14805 Interurban Avenue South, Tukwila WA
in N.E. of Sec., 23, Twn. 23, Rge. 4
The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) conducted a review of the request on
July 28, 1988, and approved the project subject to conditions specified in the
Staff Report. The BAR adopted the Findings and Conclusions contained in the
Planning Department Staff Report dated July 19, 1988.
Any party aggrieved by this decision may appeal the decision to the City Coun-
cil by filing an appeal in writing with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of
the above date and shall state the reasons for the appeal.
(29 /NTC.DVANEY)
DATE:
Vernon Umetsu
Associate Planner
7/1 /ece,
;k•7:.iu:; „i i:i;!.tti�ti:it:; 1_:::.: ;�..�. L..,i.,r,�:ravr:��.::x..: w..r�
MINUTES
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433-1849
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 28, 1988
88 -6 -DR: DEVANEY TENANT IMPROVEMENT
Discussion ensued on the proposal.
The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. by Mr. Coplen,
Chairman. Members present were Messrs. Coplen, Kirsop, Cagle,
Haggerton, Knudson and Hamilton.
Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu, and Joanne
Johnson.
MR. HAGGERTON MOVED THAT THE JUNE 23, 1988 MINUTES BE APPROVED AS
WRITTEN. MR. KIRSOP SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOU-
SLY.
Mr. Coplen briefly reviewed the basic concept of the Planning
Commission in the City of Tukwila and how it is structured.
Request for design review of planned renovation of an existing
2,304 square foot one -story building at 14805 Interurban Avenue
South.
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner, reviewed the project, pointing
out an amendment to Attachment "B” ELEVATIONS of the staff
report. He stated that the Planning Department recommends
approval subject to the conditions as stated in the staff report.
Mr. Jim DeVaney, 18521 115th S.E., Renton, stated he was in
agreement with the staff report.
MR. HAGGERTON MOVED THAT BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF
THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE SUBJECT PROJECT, 88 -6 -DR DEVANEY TENANT
IMPROVEMENT, BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 3 AS
SPECIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT:
1. Provision of a developer's agreement to provide a sidewalk
upon reconstruction of Interurban Avenue, at no cost to the
City.
i:m:cstv,,,
Planning Commission
July 28, 1988
Page 2
2. Submittal of a landscape plan which satisfies Zoning Code
requirements, in a manner similar to the potential landscape
modifications in Attachment A.
3. Submittal of a landscape irrigation plan.
MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
87 -3 -R, 88 -3 -CPA, 88 -3 -CA RIVERTON ANNEXATION - Request for:
1. Pre - annexation zoning for the Riverton area.
2. Amending Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map.
3. Amending the Tukwila Zoning Code
Jack Pace, Senior Planner, reviewed the history of the Riverton
Annexation area as well as the current status and annexation
process.
A letter from Richard Barene, dated July 28, 1988, was entered
into the Record as Exhibit I.
Allen Ekburg, 4123 S. 130th, spoke in favor of the annexation.
He referred to his involvement in the annexation task force as
well as his involvement in the community for 18 years.
Barbara Moss, 2203 Airport Way S. #200, representing the SABEY
Corporation spoke in support of the City staff and task force
recommendations. She commended the staff and Planning Commission
for their efforts. She distributed a letter from the SABEY
Corporation to the Commission members.
Philip Hemenway, 4036 S. 128th Street, reviewed the history of
various rezones in the Riverton area.
Donna Meagher, 13242 40th Avenue S. spoke in opposition to the
zoning designation recommendation by the Task Force of RS -1500
because of the resulting higher taxes on her property. She
explained the development constraints of her property because of
a bog that develops in the rainy season.
Discussion ensued as to buildable versus unbuildable lots and tax
impacts that might be imposed.
Elizabeth Springer, 13325 42nd Avenue S., is opposed to the 7200
square foot designation recommendation by the Task Force because
of the resulting higher taxes. She favored leaving the zoning
the way it is.
.. rt .-^.• N1• Yit". 'r�Y.`.r,.��R'C+:::`Y :3�;•`.. iiS'.'.. v}:.>!`......� .t :'lir.
hc�x.»•w�vu.uws�:•.:ni.aN.�.wa xJw xveu�xxyhdl_°.vrvt!�'h :! m. tv+. awmw.. , �.... v.....,. �...._ �......... �..........-..... �w. �. �rrur....+.. v. du. r. w�. w.... rm. u«. nv. rwr.. �.. v>. rr.. w.+- w. Yw. w�v. n.. rsttn• nael 'YwM'4i "1'B.^vJFpPi'.I:fM1F'f :Y
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial
ZONING DISTRICT: C -2
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
STAFF REPORT
to the Board of Architectural Review
Prepared July 19, 1988
HEARING DATE: July 28, 1988
FILE NUMBER: 88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvements
APPLICANT: Mr. and Mrs. J. DeVaney
REQUEST: To remodel an abandoned service station into office and
shop space, and to do various site improvements.
LOCATION: 14805 Interurban Avenue South, Tukwila, WA
in the NE * of Sec. 23, Twn. 23, Rge. 4
ACREAGE: 0.79 acres (34,500 square feet)
SEPA
DETERMINATION: No SEPA determination is required.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Site Plan
(B) Building Elevations
(C) Building Perspective
"Yw`Jtirtkt•7Yt : p`v,•CGM. 7:.rittECVA ra ?;Ya'.VO)
STAFF REPORT
to the BAR
VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION
BACKGROUND
DECISION CRITERIA
FINDINGS
88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvements
Page 2
1. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to convert an abandoned
service station to office and workshop space, refinish the building
exterior, and provide parking and landscape site improvements. These
improvements are shown in Attachments A, B and C.
In general, the structure is 48 f eg tsquare by 17.5 feet high. Glass
windows will predominate the front (Interurban) building face, with beige
siding to cover wall areas. The structure will be accented with a blue
mansard roof.
Site improvements include four parking spaces, perimeter building planters,
a street -side landscape strip, and resurfacing of the asphalt pad. Access
will be channelized to the existing southern access point which is also used
by the adjacent restaurant. The existing northern access adjacent to South
149th Street will be closed by a landscaped island.
2(ccess: The project will be accessed from Interurban Avenue South and
channelized with a landscaped strip. The southern access will continue to
function as a common access way to this, and the property to the south.
Access to the northern portion of the property has been intentionally
limited by closing the northern driveway with the landscape strip.
The project site is the location of an abandoned gas station and paved to within
20 feet of the Tukwila Hill toe of slope. The southern driveway and southern
portions of the site are used for passenger and truck - trailer access, maneuver-
ing and parking, by customers of the adjacent restaurant /tavern.
The applicant has stated there is a legal agreement to maintain restaurant /tav-
ern parking rights as long as they do not pre -empt development on the subject
property. The applicant desires to accommodate restaurant needs by continuing
to provide a southern, joint access driveway, maneuvering area, and limited
informal parking as shown on Attachment A.
Accommodation of restaurant needs requires the Board to find that the proposed
site plan substantially satisfies the five -foot southern side yard landscape
requirement per TMC 18.70.090 (nonconforming landscape areas). The applicant
has proposed three -foot wide planter boxes along a portion of the building
perimeter for landscape transition to the building. This would probably provide
a net 1.5 -foot wide planting area.
The project site is located north of I -405 and east of I -5 along Interurban
Avenue South. It is thus subject to general BAR design guidelines (TMC
STAFF REPORT
to the BAR
88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvements
Page 3
18.60.030(E)) and guidelines of the Interurban Special Review Area (TMC
18.60.060). Proposed project consistency with these guidelines is evaluated
below.
GENERAL REVIEW GUIDELINES
1. TMC 18.60.050(1) - Relationship of Structure to Site
The proposed street side landscape area and building perimeter planters
provide an adequate transition from public street to renovated structure and
parking areas. The large trees and dense vegetation on the hillside and to
the north provide a vegetated backdrop to help moderate the visual impacts
of this low- intensity development.
2. TMC 18.60.050(2) - Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area
The proposed project enhances the overall Interurban corridor by improving
street landscaping and preserving views of the vegetated hillside. The
proposed vehicular circulation pattern accomplishes the proponent's
objectives while enhancing Interurban Avenue circulation by closing the
existing north driveway.
No sidewalk is currently being required due to the mid -term reconstruction
of Interurban Avenue. The applicant agrees to sign a developer's agreement
to provide a City standard sidewalk upon reconstruction of Interurban Avenue
South at no cost to the City, pursuant to the Sidewalk Ordinance and Board
criteria.
3. TMC 18.60.050(3) - Landscaping and Site Treatment
The proposed renovation would preserve the existing wooded hillside which
forms a vegetated backdrop for the site and the general Interurban corridor.
The streetscape will be improved by a 12 -foot landscape strip with trees and
grass. The applicant states that the planter box and street side landscaping
shall be provided with an automatic irrigation system. A paved area for the
METRO bus stop will be preserved on -site to the dimensions of a standard
bus shelter.
Additional front yard landscape area is required to satisfy the minimum
15 -foot zoning code requirement. One option is shown in Attachment A.
4. TMC 18.60.050(4) - Building Design
The existing building will be improved by the addition of a mansard roof and
siding. Existing building dimensions will be maintained at 48 feet square
by 17.5 feet high. The proposed renovation will result in a low- intensity
development focused on a modest building.
Basic building architecture is compatible with that found along the
Interurban corridor. The beige vinyl siding is similar in color and
compatible with many area buildings. The bright blue accent of the mansard
STAFF REPORT
to the BAR
88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvements
Page 4
roof will reduce architectural monotony and tend to draw attention to this
building.
5. TMC 18.60.050(5) - Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture
No miscellaneous structures or street furniture are proposed.
INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT
6. TMC 18.60.060(4) Special Review Guidelines Applicable to All Proposed
Developments. In the review of proposed development in the Interurban
special review district, the BAR shall use the following guidelines in order
to ensure that the intent of subsection (1) [Purpose] is accomplished:
(A) Proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural
amenities of the area.
This low- intensity development preserves Tukwila Hill views from
Interurban Avenue and establishes a treed, landscape strip along the
avenue.
(B) Proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and
enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities.
There are no directly affected public recreational facilities.
(C) Proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site
pedestrian circulation.
On -site pedestrian movement requires travel along asphalt paved areas.
This is acceptable given the very low levels of on -site vehicular
circulation expected.
(D) Proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and
complementary to the district in which it is located.
The proposed use is similar to the office and warehouse uses in the
immediate vicinity, and compatible with adjacent restaurant /tavern,
motel and residential uses.
(E) Proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse
environmental impacts.
No significant adverse environmental impacts are expected.
(F) Proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant
historical features in the area.
No area historical features are directly affected by the proposed
annexation.
STAFF REPORT
to the BAR
(22/88 -6 -DR)
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed project does substantially satisfy landscape requirements and all
Board decision criteria, subject to the following conditions:
1. Provision of a developer's agreement to provide a sidewalk upon
reconstruction of Interurban Avenue, at no cost to the City.
2. Submittal of a landscape plan which satisfies Zoning Code requirements, in a
manner similar to the potential landscape modifications in Attachment A.
3. Submittal of a landscape irrigation plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS
88 -6 -DR: DeVaney Tenant Improvements
Page 5
The Planning Department recommends approval subject to the conditions identified
in the CONCLUSIONS section.
ATTACHMENT A
JB DEVANEY
site plan
attachment b elevations
C-)
CO
Co
V)
uJ
, .
•
ATTACHMENT C
206-277-0226
EXTERIOR SIDING
J. B. De Vaney Co.
18621 - 116TH AVE. S.E.
RENTON, WA 98058
COLOR SAMPLES
• . •
„..
... . •-A
..‘ -
•
EXTERIOR AWNING
.... .... I .. • • -.,- • ^.•-.
•. •. • • . „
. .
JB-DEV-211M3
June 24, 1988
J.H. DeVaney
18621 116th S.E.
Renton, WA 98058
RE: Design Review Application File No 88 -6 -DR.
Dear Mr. DeVaney,
I have reviewed your application and discussed it with
representatives from the Public Works and Fire departments. I
have the following information requests and
1. Design review application requires the following formation
to be complete;
A. Building Elevations
b. A site plan showing the extent of asphalt and whether
the existing asphalt will be replaced. Will the
existing gravel patch (site of old gas tanks) be
asphalted?
c. Plant materials to be used in all landscaped areas and
a commitment to automatic irrigation.
Site landscaping i s legally r eorr -conf ormi ng. The proposed
improvements require that Zoning Coe landscaping
requirements be substantially satisfied. The Board of
Architectural. Review is authorized to determine when Code
requi rernents have been substantially satisfied. This would
be done in the normal course of your project design review.
Minimum Zoning Code requirements envision 10 ft. wide strips
along street frontages and ; ft. wide strips along side
yards.
3. There is insufficient information submitted for a building
permit application. Please see the attached building permit
application information sheet. It may also be helpful to
note the following.
a. The State Energy Code applies.
b. The Barrier Free Code applies if building value is
increased by 60 percent.
c. If more than four members of the opposite sex will work
at the site, then separate bathrooms are required.
d. A fire alarm system will probably be required.
Duane Griffin, Building Official should be contacted for
more information.
•
r r
•
l
, 0_ C
. j
11 ? r.
M 1
a.
t
*1
. 4 Is 0
e+ t..
•
t
la
rit:
1,,,
Ott
/ ;
l.' I
•
•
• lo-^.. ,yr_yY "- . .,. •
4 lik
•
•
••
• 7'
•
•
a
4. Sidewalk may be required along all street frontages if the
value of improvements exceeds 25 percent of the value of the
existing building. Phil Fraser of the Public Works Dept.
(433 -0179) should be contacted regarding this requirement.
DESIGN REVIEW APPLI bATION . 1 8
N 1�
1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: Submit plans for Building /Site
2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access
street, and nearest intersection)
Signature:
14805 Interurban Ave. South
4. PROPERTY Name:
OWNER
Tax Acct # 359700- 0440 -01
QuarterSE+ of NEI Section: 23 Township: 23N Range:
(This information may be found on your tax statement.)
3. APPLICANT :* Name: J.B. DeVaney
Address:
Phone:
Phone:
18621 116th S.E.
277 -0226
* The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding
the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent,
unless otherwise stipulated by applicant.
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
J.B. & Mary DeVaney
Address: 18621 116th S.E.
277 -0226
Improvements
Renton 98058
Date: June 13, 1988
Renton
4E
I /WE,[signature(s)]
swear that T7we are the ownerr(s) or contra t ur aser(s) of the
property involved in this application and that t e foregoing
statements and answers contained in this application are true and
correct to the best of my /our
knowledge and belief. Date: June 13. 1988
The following criteria will be used by the BAR in its decision- making on your
proposed project. Please carefully review the criteria, respond to each cri-
terion (if appropriate), and describe how your plans and elevations meet the
criteria. If the space provided for response is insufficient, use extra space
on last page or use blank paper to complete response and attach to this form.
5. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE
A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with
the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian
movement.
B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to
moderate the visual impact of large paved areas.
C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation
to it site.
RESPONSE: Existing Structure.
Make improvements for occupancy.
The enclosed drawings show our desired design, landscaping,etc.
6. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA
A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged.
B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be
provided.
C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the estab-
lished neighborhood character.
D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading
facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be
encouraged.
E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation
should be encouraged.
RESPONSE: Existing Structure.
Making improvements for occupancy.
! �R
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 2
Enclosed drawings show the design we desire & feel this is
compatible with and rPrrainly a great improvement to thic
building & will also complement the neighboring buildings.
Our drawings show an excellent wehicular circulation with
Interurban Ave S.
7. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 3
A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of
a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced.
B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should
promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance.
C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen
vistas and important axis, and provide shade.
D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian
or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken.
E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs
in paved areas is encouraged.
F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be un-
sightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or
combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and
summer.
G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such
as fences, walls, and pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be
used.
H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and
the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of
a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area.
Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive
brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided.
RESPONSE: We have responded to the above items taking into consideration
the existing structure.
We indend to enhance the site with landscaping, trees,
etc. as acceptable to this committee and the City of
Tukwila's requirements.
8. BUILDING DESIGN
RESPONSE: Existing Structure.
ey7
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 4
A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should
be based on quality of its design and relationship to surroundings.
B. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and be in harmony with per-
manent neighboring developments.
C. Building components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets -
should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building
components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated
life of the structure.
D. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only
for accent.
E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or
buildings should be screened from view.
F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fix-
tures, standards and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with
building design.
G. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be
avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting should be used to provide
visual interest.
We wish to greatly improve the appearance of this building
as outlined in the plans submitted.
Our goal is to have an "eye appealing" structure by
applying a Vinyl type Siding over the existing unattractive
concrete blocks and add an awning in a Standing Rib pattern
to further make this building more attractive and compatible
with the surrounding area.
9. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE
RESPONSE:
INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT
aesthetic value of the area.
bESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 5
A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be
part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials
should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate,
colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and pro-
portions should be to scale.
B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furni-
ture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and
buildings.
The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area
in order to manage the development of this area, to upgrade its general appear-
ance, to provide incentives for compatible uses, to recognize and to capitalize
on the benefits to the area of the amenities including the Green River and
nearby recreational facilities, to encourage development of more people- oriented
use, and to provide for development incentives that will help to spur growth.
Please describe how your proposed development relates to the goals for this
District. Use additional response space, if necessary.
10. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities
of the area.
Existing Structure.
We feel our proposed design will be a great improvement to the
11. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and
enjoyment of 'public recreational areas and facilities.
12. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site
pedestrian circulation.
Existing structure.
We were given a proposed plan by Tukwila for new
proposed curbs /sidewalks on Interurban.
We will have sidewalk in front of the building and plan
to have a planter between parking & sidewalk.
13. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and
complementary to the district in which it is located.
Existing structure.
(29 /DSGN.APP1 -3)
Our proposed design will be very complementary and
add to the aesthetic value of the district.
14. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse
environmental impacts.
Existing structure.
No adverse envionmental impacts.
15. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant
historical features in the area.
Our plans will make a significant improvement to
this existing building.
Existing structure.
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 6
We are making improvements to enhance the area.
• ve. ,V • Me'
(29/EXTRA.RESP)
EXTRA RESPONSE SPACE