Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 - Notice of Decision - Malik David / APNA Investment Group -20130322000243 Return Address: CITY CLERK CITY OF TUKWILA 20130322000243 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 82.00 Tukwila,WA 98188 CITY OF TUKWIL N—RER PAGE-001 OF 011 KINGZCOUNTY,9WA7 Please print or type information WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (RCW 65.04) Document Title(s)(or transactions contained therein):(all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) l NOTICE OF DECISION L11-057 SIGN VARIANCE 2. 3. 4. Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: 10 Additional reference#'s on page of document Grantor(s) Exactly as name(s)appear on document CITY OF TUKWILA 2. Additional names on page of document. Grantee(s) Exactly as name(s)appear on document 1 DAVID MALIK-APNA INVESTMENT GROUP 2. Additional names on page of document. Legal description(abbreviated: i.e. lot,block,plat or section,township,range) ADAMS HOME TRS PORTION OF LOTS 11 &12,Plat Block:2-AKA PARCEL A OF CITY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO 90-14 BLA RECORDING NO 9101160627-LESS ST LESS RD PER SUP COURT#04-2-22944-8 Additional legal is on page of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number ❑Assessor Tax#not yet assigned r/RQ 47/e,690 Q 4 / The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. "I am signing below and paying an additional$50 recording fee(as provided in RCW 36.18.010 and referred to as an emergency nonstandard document),because this document does not meet margin and formatting requirements.Furthermore,I hereby understand that the recording process may cover up or otherwise obscure some part of the text of the original document as a result of this request." Signature of Requesting Party Note to submitter:Do not sign above nor pay additional$50 fee if the document meets margin/formatting requirements Ai./ \�� City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton,Mayor I J l,1 ; AC" Department of Community Development Jack Pace,Director :2 908:=:` September 21,2012 NOTICE OF DECISION TO: David Malik,Applicant Apena Investments,Owner Patrick Hanis,Attorney for Applicant King County Assessor,Accounting Division This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 19.12.090 on the following project and permit approval. I. PROJECT INFORMATION Project File Number: L11-057 Applicant: David Malik Type of Permit Applied for: Sign Variance Project Description: Variance to exceed the maximum height limit for a freestanding sign. Location: 14415 Tukwila International Blvd Associated Files: None Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Recourse Center(NCC) Designation/Zoning District: II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has determined that this application does not require a SEPA threshold determination because it is categorically exempt. Decision on Substantive Permit: The City Hearing Examiner has determined that the application for a sign variance does comply with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application, subject to the following conditions: Type 3 Permit Decision by Hearing Examiner(except shoreline variance) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard,Suite#100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188• Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax:206-431-3665 1. Prior to issuance of a sign permit,the applicant shall remove all existing freestanding signs on the subject property. 2. Prior to issuance of a sign permit,the applicant shall obtain a permit for the Boost Mobile sign. If the Boost Mobile sign is too large to comply with the City's sign code requirements,the sign will be removed. 3. As part of the sign permit application,the applicant shall provide scaled plans prepared by a licensed engineer or architect that show the precise design,height and location of the freestanding sign. The engineer's or architect's stamp must be on the drawings and the plans shall be drawn to scale. The sign must maintain a minimum sight clearance from grade to bottom of sign cabinet of eight feet. 4. The sign shall not exceed 17 feet in height. The proposal must meet all other applicable code requirements,including maximum message area. 5. The variance approval is valid until September 1,2022.Until September 1,2022, the sign may have refaces and copy changes,provided permits are issued by the City as required by TMC 19.12.020. No other changes may be made to the sign, including the structure and location,unless permitted or approved by the City pursuant to applicable Code provisions. 6. After Sept 1,2022,the sign is permitted to remain"AS-IS." Relocation,re- erection,alternation,replacement or any other changes to the sign,including its structure or sign panel/face/copy,will require that the sign be brought into compliance with all standards of the City's Sign Code,unless the City approved or permits such changes pursuant to applicable Code provisions. 7. If the property ceases to be used as a gas station,as determined by the Director, the freestanding sign shall be removed. 8. As specified by TMC 19.36.040(C)(2),the freestanding sign shall be removed in the event of any activity on the site which triggers design review. 9. The City shall record the Notice of Decision with the King County Records Office. The applicant shall reimburse the City for all incurred recording fees assessed by King County. Reimbursement of the recording fees shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of the required sign permit. HI. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Application is issued pursuant to TMC 19.12.090. Other applications related to this project may still be pending. No administrative appeal of the Decision is permitted.A party who is not satisfied with the Hearing Examiner's decision may file an appeal in King County Superior Court. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING Any party wishing to challenge the Hearing Examiner's Decision must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. If no appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Type 3 Permit Decision by Hearing Examiner(except shoreline variance) Initials Page 2 of 3 09/01/2010 2:25:00 PM W:1Planning1Planning Forms\Notice of Decision\NOD Type 3.doc • decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit,the Decision on this permit will be final. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100,Tukwila,Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m.and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Brandon Miles,who may be contacted at 206-431-3684 for further information. Property owners affected by th. •-- --may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the Ki a Coun.' -ssessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. B andon J. iles,Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila Type 3 Permit Decision by Hearing Examiner(except shoreline variance) Initials Page 3 of 3 09/01/2010 2:25:00 PM W:\Planning\Planning Forms\Notice of DecisionNOD Type 3.doc • RECEIVED SEP 19 20121 dO MUNITY CITY OF TUKWILA HEARING EXAMINER OeVELlT FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION PROJECT INFORMATION SUMMARY APPLICANT/OWNER: Apena Investments Group,LLC REQUEST: Variance to exceed the maximum height limit for a freestanding sign LOCATION: 14415 Tukwila International Boulevard FILE NUMBER: L11-057 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Neighborhood Commercial Center(NCC) ZONING DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial Center(NCC) SEPA DETERMINATION: Exempt STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions PUBLIC HEARING: September 11,2012 EXHIBITS: The following exhibits were entered into the record: Department's staff report with Attachments: A. Applicant's Response to Variance Criteria B. Elevation of Proposed Sign C. Site Plan Introduction The applicant, Apena Investments Group, LLC, seeks a variance from the maximum height limit for freestanding signs as defined in TMC 19.08.130. A public hearing was held on the application on September 11,2012,before the Tukwila Hearing Examiner at Tukwila City Hall. Represented at the hearing were the applicant, by Patrick Hanis, attorney at law; and the Department of Community Development by Brandon Miles, Senior Planner. One person,Mr.Ron Harkestad,offered public comment at the hearing. The record was held open after the hearing for the Examiner's viewing of the site,which occurred on September 11,2012. After due consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, the following shall constitute the findings of fact,conclusions and decision of the Hearing Examiner on this application. Hearing Examiner Decision. L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 2 of 7 Findings of Fact 1. The subject property is addressed as 14415 Tukwila International Boulevard and is located at the intersection of S. 144th Street and Tukwila International Boulevard. The property is developed with a gas/service station,and a portion of the building is leased to a company called Boost Mobile,for retail use. 2. There are two freestanding signs currently at the property. There is a pylon freestanding sign shown in Figure 7 of the staff report, and a monument sign which is shown in Figure 9. The applicant's proposed pylon freestanding sign is shown at Attachment B to the staff report. DCD has noted that there are signs at the property which appear to lack permits, and which may be subject to code enforcement efforts by the City. 3. Development in the vicinity includes a number of retail uses of different types and sizes,including a fast food restaurant,a grocery store,drug stores,and a pawn shop. The area was annexed to the City in the 1990s,and the development pattern is auto-oriented. 4. The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC). The Comprehensive Plan describes the NCC zone as generally focused around key intersections in transportation corridors, providing a commercial focus for businesses bordering the corridors while mitigating the corridors' impacts on residential areas. The City's 1998 revitalization plan for the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor includes a goal of removing nonconforming signs along the Boulevard. 5. Northeast of the site is the site of the Tukwila Village project,a proposed mixed- ' use development that will be the first mixed-used development along Tukwila International Boulevard. That project is the result of a private-public partnership,and the City has constructed sidewalks and other pedestrian amenities to support the project Tukwila Village Project. Among the improvements in this area,the City has constructed a four-foot high wall at the intersection of S. 144th and Tukwila International Boulevard. 6. The existing gas station business has been in operation at this location since prior to annexation within the City. The existing signage does not conform to the City Sign Code. The Code permits only one freestanding sign on this property, but there are currently two freestanding signs on the property. The Code limits the permitted message area at this site to 36 square feet per side of a freestanding sign. 7. The City's current Sign Code was adopted in 2010. The new Code requires that freestanding signs be monuments. The Code provides a grace period for legally- constructed signs that became non-conforming because of the 2010 Code changes. During the grace period, certain modifications to the sign may be made if a permit is Hearing Examiner Decision L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 3 of 7 obtained. After the grace period, signs may remain"as-is"indefinitely, but any changes to the sign will trigger the requirement that it be brought into compliance with the Code. 8. The existing pylon sign at the property, according to the City's records, was legally nonconforming at some point in the past. However,the sign lost that status when it was subsequently refaced without receiving a City permit. There is other signage at the site for which permits were not issued by the City. 9. The applicant at hearing noted that gasoline companies will not allow a large sign to be placed on top of the canopy above the gasoline pumps at his station. He also stated that it was necessary to retain the existing location of the pylon sign,because this was the only place on the site where the sign would be readily visible to traffic along both streets. 10. The Department reviewed the application and recommended approval with conditions. DCD's report notes that the variance does not affect the City's enforcement of the Code as to other signs on the property. 11. The Fire Department commented on the proposal, expressing concerns that the sign would impair the line of sight for fire engines entering the intersection. The Fire Department recommended that the project be required to maintain a line of sight above grade of at least eight feet to accommodate fire engines. 12. No public comments were submitted to the Department on this application. At - the hearing,one person offered public comment,and indicated that he was in favor of the proposal. 13. The sign variance criteria are set forth in TMC 19.28.030: The Hearing Examiner may grant a variance to the requirements of this code only when the applicant demonstrates compliance with the following: 1. The variance as approved shall not constitute a grant of special privilege, which is inconsistent with the intent of this Sign Code. 2. The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located. 3. Granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property, improvements or environment in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located. Hearing Examiner Decision L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 4 of 7 4. The special conditions and circumstances prompting the variance • request do not result from the actions of the applicant. 5. The variance as granted represents the least amount of deviation from the prescribed regulations necessary to accomplish the purpose for which the variance is sought and which is consistent with the stated intent of this code. 6. The variance request is not inconsistent with any other adopted City plan or policy, including the Zoning Code, Walk and Roll Plan and/or Shoreline Master Program. 7. Granting of the variance shall result in greater convenience to the public in ident5ing the business location for which a Sign Code variance is sought. • Conclusions 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this application pursuant to TMC 19.28.010. All of the criteria set forth in TMC 19.28.030 must be met in order to grant a variance. 2. The only application before the Hearing Examiner is a request for a variance from the six-foot height limit. The proposed sign's conformance with other Code provisions is not before the Examiner. The City of course retains its authority to enforce applicable Codes to signs on the property,including any which were installed without a permit. 3. The first criterion is that the variance as approved will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the intent of the Sign Code. The Code allocates signage to properties based on the total amount of linear street frontage,and in this case, the property is permitted to have one freestanding sign. The evidence in the record indicates that the additional height would allow for a sign that can be seen above the existing City-installed wall at this location,and additional height will also address line of sight requirements for Fire Department vehicles. 4. It should be noted that, were the variance to be granted with no time limit, the applicant would receive a benefit not granted to other property owners who would be required to bring their signs into compliance with the Code after the grace period. However,the Department's recommended condition to limit the duration of the variance is a reasonable limitation that will avoid a special privilege being granted to the proposal. 5. The second criterion is whether, because of special circumstances related to certain property characteristics or its surroundings, a variance is necessary in order to provide the property with the same rights and privileges permitted to other properties in Hearing Examiner Decision L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 5 of 7 the zone and vicinity. The property is adjacent to a wall that the City placed in the right- of-way, and the wall would obscure the visibility of a sign placed behind the wall. It appears from the evidence presented at hearing that this is the only practicable location on the property for a sign that will be plainly visible to the motorists along both streets, given the property's size and shape and the location of existing street access points. Thus,the criterion appears to be met. 6. The next consideration is whether granting the variance for height would be " materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the zone. As conditioned to maintain adequate elevation to preserve a line of sight,the proposal would not impair sight lines for Fire Department vehicles. The time limit on the variance will help to ensure that the presence of this sign is not detrimental to the transition to a pedestrian-oriented environment along Tukwila International Boulevard. The variance as conditioned would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and zone. 7. The fourth criterion is whether the special conditions and circumstances prompting the variance request were the result of the applicant's actions. In this case, one special condition is the presence of the wall in the street right-of-way,which was not constructed by the applicant. The location and size of access points to the property, which limit options for sign placement and visibility, were not the result of the applicant's actions. The criterion is therefore met. 8. The next consideration is whether the requested variance would represent the least amount of deviation from the Code that is needed to accomplish the purpose for which the variance is sought. The sign would be 17 feet tall, 11 feet higher than the Code height limit. As conditioned,the sign would meet Code standards as to sign area and setbacks. The applicant essentially seeks a freestanding sign which is displays the brand and prices of gasoline and is tall enough to be visible to passing motorists on both streets. The requested additional height would serve this purpose, and the time limit on the variance would help to ensure that the relief granted is the least amount of deviation necessary to achieve the purpose of the taller sign. The criterion was shown to be met. 9. The sixth criterion is whether the variance would be inconsistent with other adopted City plans or policies. The City's Comprehensive Plan and the 2010 amendments to the Sign Code call for transitioning the zone and area to a more pedestrian-oriented environment,and for removal of the kind of freestanding sign sought here. The existing environment at this location, however, is still auto-oriented, and the - variance as conditioned would allow for a reasonable transition period consistent with City plans and policies. 10. The last criterion is whether the variance would result in greater convenience to the public in identifying the business location for which the variance is sought. The additional height would allow motorists along both adjoining streets to more easily see Hearing Examiner Decision L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 6 of 7 the brand and prices of gasoline available at this station. The increased height would therefore result in greater convenience to the segment of the public which is expected to utilize the service of the gas station. 11. As conditioned,the proposal would meet all of the variance criteria. The variance should therefore be granted. Decision The requested variance is hereby granted with the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a sign permit,the applicant shall remove all existing freestanding signs on the subject property. 2. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, the applicant shall obtain a permit for the Boost Mobile sign. If the Boost Mobile sign is too large to comply with the City's sign code requirements,the sign shall be removed. • 3. As part of the sign permit application, the applicant shall provide scaled plans prepared by a licensed engineer or architect that show the precise design, height and location of the freestanding sign. The engineer's or architect's stamp must be on the drawings and the plans shall be drawn to scale. The sign must maintain a minimum sight clearance from grade to bottom of sign cabinet of eight feet. 4. The sign shall not exceed 17 feet in height. The proposal must meet all other applicable code requirements,including maximum message area. 5. The variance approval is valid until September 1,2022. Until September 1,2022,the sign may have refaces and copy changes,provided permits are issued by the City pursuant to TMC 19.12.020. No other changes may be made to the sign,including its structure and location, unless permitted or approved by the City pursuant to applicable Code provisions. 6. After September 1, 2022, the sign is permitted to remain "AS-IS." Relocation,re-erection,alteration,replacement or any other changes to the sign, including its structure or sign panel/face/copy, will require that the sign be brought into compliance with all standards of the City's Sign Code, unless the City approves or permits such changes pursuant to applicable Code provisions. 7. If the property ceases to be used as a gas station, as determined by the Director,the freestanding sign shall be removed. Hearing Examiner Decision L11-057 Apena Investments Sign Variance Page 7 of 7 8. As specified in TMC'19.36.040.C.2, the freestanding sign shall be removed in the event of any activity on the site which triggers design review. 9. The city shall record the Notice of Decision with the King County Records Office. The applicant shall reimburse the City for all incurred recording fees assessed by King County. Reimbursement of the recording fees shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of the required sign permit. Note: Sign and electrical permits are required for installation of the sign,and the DCD Building Division may require structure review of the proposed sign. Entered this 18t day of September,2012. Anne Watanabe Hearing Examiner Concerning Further Review TMC 19.28.010 provides that: "Variance decisions shall be made by the Hearing Examiner at an open record public hearing and any appeals shall be made to King County Superior Court."