Loading...
317 MAIN ST (2).pdfCITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEETING F- MINUTES 0i NOVEMBER 1,997 5, U) Lu, The November 5,11997, meeting of the Architectural Design B9 hrd was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Chairman (1) U. —0 LU James Young at . & Plaza Meeting Room, Library Building, 65'tb Main Street, Edmonds. V 7 1. ROLLCALL Ln X jj Present Staff Z 0i James Cbalupnik John Bi�sell, Senior Planner Z Jeff Oaklief Ly nnd�Hann, Deputy City Clerk LU LU; Carreen kubenkonig James Young 0 LU Absent Linda Goodrick (Excused) LU Craig Pierce (Excused/Work) Steve Sullivan (Excused/Work) 2. CORRESPONDENCE/COM S FROM STAFF None. S" 3. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD COMMENTS None. 0 4. APPROVAL OF MINMES BOARDMEMBER &KLIEF MOVED, SECONDED BY BOARDMEMBER, CHALUPNIK, TO APPROVE THE k&UTES OF OCTOBER 15,1997 AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED I lxl� WITH BOARD ClIffiRMAN YOUNG ABSTAINING SINCE HE WAS NOT PRESENT AT THAT MEETING. � J 5. CONSENT AGENDA ........... None. rO� IP N AN Board Chairman Young asked if neon beer signs which have been brought to the Board in the past were approved because they were found to be appropriate for that particular business. John Bissell stated that neon beer signs which have been approved by t he Board in the past were determined to be appropriate with the theme and architecture of the building. Boardmember Rubenkonig asked if there are any other signs in the window and 'approximately how far away the neon sign would be visible. Mr. Gogan stated that the only other sign is one which shows the hours of, operation and the neon sign would be visible from about one block away. There were no audience comments on this proposal. Boardmember Chalupnik stated that although the neon sign is small, it appears that its usefulness is limited since the business closes at 6:00 p.m. and it is only needed after dark. Architectural Design Board Meeting INNOW P49C 2 November 5, 1997' Boardmember Oaklief commented that although illuminated signs are not allowed in the downtown area, this sign is small and appears to be appropriate, and there are other small neon signs which have been approved. uj� Boardmember Rubenkonig pointed out that she agrees with Boardmember Oaklief s comments. 21 .0 Board Chairman Young agreed also and commented that this sign seems to be a legitimate form of advertising which the Board typically supports and encourages. He stated that the size is in keeping with LU the scale of the downtown area. _j V) U. LU 01 Boardmember Chalupnik commented that he is concerned about setting precedent and would not be able to support the neon sip due to the fact that it is not needed. He pointed out, however, that the painted sign is very appropriate. LL W w� Boardmember Oaklief asked if approval of this application would be precedent -setting action. X Z Oi John Bissell explained that any past approvals of illuminated signs for the downtown area included very Z LU LU: specific wording in the motion to approve the applications. Boardmember Rubenkonig asked if the neon sign could be considered as secondary to the main painted 0 L sign. C3 t W LU X L) I'_ John Bissell explained that the Code does not indicate primary and secondary signage- U. 1­­ 1 1 L. 1 .1. 0 z LU U) BOARDMEMBER OAKLIEF MOVED, SECONDED BY BOARDMEMBER RUBENKONIG, TO APPROVE ADB-97-92 BECAUSE THE APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE 0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED CITY POLICIES, MEETS THE z REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SATISFIES THE CRITERIA IN THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20.10.070, REGARDING ADB CRITERIA, DUE TO THE SIZE AND SCALE OF THE NEON SIGN PROPOSED. MOTION CARRIED WITH BOARDMEMBER CHALUPNIK VOTING No. ADB-97-131 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO RELOCATE AN EXISTING COM3MRCIAL BUILDING TO A NEW SITE, AND TO COMPLETE SITE IM[PROVEM[ENTS Rob Michel 22035 - 76th Avenue West (New address for building) Gil Rob Michel, 8022 212th Street SW, Edmonds, was present. John Bissell presented the staff report and explained that this proposal is a request to relocate an existing commercial building from a site at 7218 218th St. SW, on which the Board has previously approved a 27-unit multi -family complex. The small, single -story, flat -roofed building will be moved to 22035 76th Avenue West, where it will be used for commercial purposes. The existing building has lapped wood siding with wood framed windows and the colors will remain red with brown trim. A building light at the front entrance is proposed, however, no signage is planned. Mr. Bissell pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan encourages retaining existing buildings when possible. He explained that staff recommends approval of this application as long as the following conditions are met: assuring that parking stall widths meet the standard of 8.5 feet; appropriate trash enclosures or facilities are installed; and, drainage requirements are complied with. Architectural Design Board Meeting 0 Page 3 November 5, 1997 Rob Michel pointed out that his company is not associated with the new construction planned for the site. He explained that the Code does not contain guidelines for buildings which are being moved, however, Section 20.10.70 does discuss remodeled buildings and this proposal may morejappropriately fall under those guidelines. The building is usable and will fulfill a need at the new site, rather than being torn down in the development process. Boardmember Chalupnik asked about setback requirements. 01 John Bissell explained that the site is in the General Commercial (CG) zone and setbacks are not LU LU required. Ln U. 10 Boardmember Oaklief asked if there are any changes proposed for the outside of the building, after it is U moved. .J < M1 Rob Michel stated that once the buildin is moved onto its new foundation, it will probably be repainted 9 on the outside. Once the colors have been selected, he will return to the Board for approval. No other remodeling will be required for the building's use. Z Z Boardmember Rubenkonig asked about the adjacent residences and any impacts this building may have LU LU;1 2 M! on those structures from such elements as lighting, and whether any screening would be required. She M 01 also inquired whether there will be any signage directing traffic off of 76th Avenue. U 0 L-O a L— LU W Rob Michel explained that the neighboring structures are either commercial or multi -family residential, and that no signage is proposed. U. 0 W Z John Bissell st ' ated that during staff review, potential impacts to neighboring structures from lighting is evaluated. Because this proposal does not include any lighting other than a standard building entrance light, it has been determined that there will not be a negative impact to any surrounding structures. He Z also explained that there is nothing in the Code which requires screening and current zoning does not allow residential uses on the first floor. Therefore, all the residences in that area are legal, non- conforming and will eventually be changed. However, the Board can discuss this issue for possible future changes if they feel that is necessary. Board Chairman Young asked if the commercial nature of the business is such that no signage will be necessary. Rob Michel indicated that the property was very recently rezoned and will probably be sold for a commercial use after the building is located on the site. Future owners would be required to make application to the City for any new signage proposals. Boardmember Oaklief asked if any changes will be made to the building which will affect the architectural design, or if there will be requirements by the City for changes. Rob Michel explained that the City's Building Department has not yet stipulated any requirements they may have on the building. If any changes are required they will be done to match the existing wood exterior. Bob Kleppinger, 8134 212th, Edmonds, stated that while this building is not considered a vintage structure, it is a good, useful building and it makes sense to move it and continue its use. This is a much more positive action than tearing the building down and encouraged Board approval of this application. Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 4 November 5, 1997 ........ . v 0 u n U. 0 EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 20.10.070, REGARDING ADB .0 CRITERIA, DUE TO THE SIZE AND SCALE OF THE NEON SIGN PROPOSED. MOTION CARRIED WITH BOARDMEMBER. CHALUPNIK VOTING NO. :C5, x uti ADB-97-131 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO RELOCATE AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL z BUILDING TO A NEW SITE, AND TO COMPLETE SITE IMPROVEMENTS Rob Michel Uj uj�� 22035 - 76th Avenue West �; M� I I : � BOARDMEMBER CHALUPNIK MOVED, SECONDED BY BOARDMEMBER OAKLIEF, To 0 APPROVE ADB-97-131 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: THAT TRASH AND LU RECYCLING FACILITIES BE INSTALLED; THE PARKING LOT DESIGN BE ALTERED TO COMPLY WITH MINIMUM ALLOWABLE PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS; THE PROJECT U- 0i MUST COMPLY WITH THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS; zi AND, THAT IF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUIRES ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES w W� DUE TO THE BUILDING'S LOCATION ON THE PROPERTY, THE APPLICATION BE RETURNED 0 TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION ON ITS z REGULAR AGENDA. THIS CONDITIONAL APPROVAL IS BEING GRANTED BECAUSE THE APPLICATION IS FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED CITY POLICIES, MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND, AS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED, SATISFIES THE CRITERIA IN THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS 20.10.070, REGARDING ADB CRITERIA, AND 20.12, REGARDING LANDSCAPING. MOTION CARRIED WITH BOARDMEMBER RUBENKONIG VOTING NO. ADB-97-132 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A NEW INFORMATIONAL KIOSK FOR THE PORT OF EDMONDS 0 Port of Edmonds 336 Admiral Way BOARDMEMBER RUBENKONIG MOVED, SECONDED BY BOARDMEMBER OAKLIEF, TO APPROVE ADB-97-132 BECAUSE THE APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED CITY POLICIES, MEETS THE 0 REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SATISFIES THE CRITERIA IN THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS 20.10.070 AND 20.12. MOTION CARRIED. Architectuml Design Boud Meeting page 2 NovernberS, 1997 0 W. z t-- 0; a LU LL U- 2 UJ rJ U 3 15 z CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 * (425) 771-0220 * FAX (425) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works * Planninn/Buildinn * Parks and Recreation * Engineering * Wastewater Treatment Plant C. MEMORANDUM DATE: October 31, 1997 TO: Architectural Design Board Applicants FROM: John Bissell, Senior Planner SUBJECT:, Architectural Design Board Agenda'and Staff Report Your application been scheduled for the November 5, 1997 Architectural Design Board (ADB) Meeting. Enclosed are an agenda and staff report for the ADB meeting. Please find your item on the agenda. A representative must be present for each item, including the Consent agenda. The Board often moves items off the Consent agenda and onto the regular agenda. If a representative is not present, the Board will not act on the item. Please note the statement at the top of the agenda. You must obtain sign permits, building permits and any other reguired permit from the BuLlding Division in addition to obtaining approval from the ADB. The review by the AQB is not a substitute for review of building permits, and an approval by the ADB does not grant construction approval. Please carefully read the staff report pertaining to your item. If you find any errors, missing information or if you have any questions, please call me at 771- 0220 before the meeting. It is important that items going to the Board be as complete and clear as possible in order to avoid confusion during the meeting. If the Board does not understand your project, they may not approve it. V) LA. To: 670CIdAl —0 LU Project: Plan review number: :77- 230- C2 _J U. < Address: x Transmitting: Plans & Calcs; Soils Report, Other Z 7 of Letter Dated W LUI 0 For your information: Comments: As requested by your office: 710 LU (Aft' For structural plan review: lev 0 For non-structural plan review: Co' For Washington State Energy Code review: L o"oo For Barrier Free review: For Fire Code review: Note attached comments: 0 For Corrections and resubmittal: B ilding Division, Respond to letter in writing: Resubmit 2. revised.plans: City ofiicial . "M Send directly to City Building Division: A?'* 61' 0 IntorporatedA�g,�i�ii.,�.,1890,10 Sister Cities International Hekinan, Japan p'g pp i ocz 7" Lu LA. 0 z CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA'FAHEY _25Q 6TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX (20 1 61771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works lanning Parks �and Recreation Engineering C. 1 July 2, 1997, Julie Cogan Julie Nails 317 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Ms. Gogan: The Planning Division has reviewed Your sign permit application for, compliance with the codes of the City of Edmonds. Unfortunately, the application materials are insufficient to determine compliance, InOrder to complete your application for review, please submit the following information. The dimensions of each pressed sign. The length of the storefront of your tenant spade. In addition, the photograph that you submitted With your application indicates that you are using a red neon sign and a painted, non -illuminated sign. Section 20.60 of the Community Development Code (ECDC) states that illuminated signs and applications proposing more than one sign must be reviewed by the - Architectural Design Board (ADB). Therefore, you must either modify your application by removing the neon sign, or you must apply for review by the ADB. Since the aforementioned signs have been installed without a permit, the requested information must be submitted no later than July 16, 1997. Failure to submit the requested information will result in enforcement action. If you have any questions about this matter, please no not hesita I te to contact me at 771-0220. Sincerely, -fohn Bissell Senior Planner C. Building Division W t a �Q i,:,j V.... .... . .... . ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD STAFF REPORT October 31, 1997 Z ADB-97-92 REQUEST FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF A NEON cc WINDOW SIGN AND A PAINTED WINDOW SIGN 01 c LU A. Applicant/Property Owner Applicant's Representative a 53 j Julie Gogan Ln U. 0 Julie Nails LU 49041147th St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Cn B. Site Location: 317 Main Street. Z 1--, C. Introduction: The applicant is proposing to in stall one painted -non -illuminated sign and -0, one neon sign on the inside of the window of the busi Z mess. W Lut =I D. Staff Analysis: 0— L Material: The painted sign is proposed to be made. of corrugated plastic. a tZ The illuminated sign is exposed neon tube. W W X 0 2. Lighting: The neon tube sign is illuniinated. LL —0 3. Colors: The neon sign is proposed to be red. The painted sign uses red 21 and black letters on a white background. 4. Sign Location: The signs are proposed for the window of business. Z 5. Sign Area and Sign Height For Canopy Signs: Proposed neon sign Proposed painted sign I Total Allowed Sign Area 1.43 sq. ft. 6 square feet �14.5 sq. ft Sign Height 5 feet 8 feet 14 feet E. Findings for approval: In order for the ADB to approve this itern,, the Board must make the following findings: A. That the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other adopted city policies. The followin are some policies from the Comprehensive Plan that address 9 this type of development. B. That the proposal meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance, or the city has approved a variance or a modification under the zoning ordinance. C. That the proposal as approved or conditionally approved satisfies the criteria and purposes ECDC section 20.10.070 ADB Criteria and ECDC section 20.12 Landscaping. Attachments: V 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant's declarations, elevations and site plan. IN PT, ..... T "T, `7 777- 77-77,77, I zh I . . .. . . .. F�i 0 0 LU LL. w Y I < z LL) u 0 LU �2 LL 0 LU D 0 r Lu. k- -r z , 0 Z Lli LU 0 W LU Ll z A z 0 2 city of e9nonds 41 Jn land use armlication ,& ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD COMP PLAN AMENDMENT 0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 0 HOME OCCUPATION 0 FORMAL SUBDIVISION U SHORT SUBDIVISION El LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 0 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT U OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT STREET VACATION 13 REZONE Q SHORELINE PERMIT 0 VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION L1 OTHER FILE # ZONE D -7 ATE *-7:: REC'D BY FEE — RECEIPT# HEARING DATE U HE U STAFF El PB 1KADB E3 CC TAKEN: C3 APPROVED E3 DENIED Q APPEALED Property Ad�ress or Location z�-/ -? H 0, t'#u A - I�A Property Owner \16 - * Phone ^ - d.--, , I- - z - J r--,% h,.-t i A - A A el N r (',I Agent_,', Phone —, V —(000 Tax Acc # Sec. _ Twp. _ Rng. Legal Description Details of Projector Proposed Use 0 The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents or employees, The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. �,&Ivvrz -- SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT girl 0