Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit 77-23-AUI - BENAROYA - PARKWAY PLAZA SIGN APPEAL
77-23-aui southcenter parkway plaza sign benaroya PLANNING PARKS S RECREATION BUILDING 21 December 1977 TO: Mayor Bauch FROM: Kjell Stoknes SUBJECT: Benaroya Sign Lawsuit CITY of TUKWILA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Attached is a chronological list of events leading to the above mentioned lawsuit. Events prior to 15 December 1976 are in the attached letter from Gary Crutchfield to Ken Long. Benaroya has not ever approached us with a master sign proposal for Parkway Plaza East. They have always been incremental sign requests. I would like to arrange a meeting with Ken Long et al and discuss a master plan we can both support to the Planning Commission that would alleviate the lawsuit. KS /ch Attachment 6230 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 242 -2177 MEMORANDUM r CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS BENAROYA SIGN DENIAL O.C.D.: 12/19/77 DATE ACTION O./15174. Request for allowed signing on Parkway Plaza made? 12/21/76 Interpretation by Building Official that all of Parkway Plaza from American Home Furnishings to Eucaliptus Records is one building per the Uniform Building Code. (Two small separate structures not discussed.) 12/23/76 Interpretation by Mr. Crutchfield that only one freestanding sign is allowed for Parkway Plaza. 1/19/77 Parkway Plaza defined as two buildings for sign code only. ? Date permit applied for on second Parkway Plaza sign. 1/31/77 Date second Parkway Plaza sign issued (Permit #1121). 4/14/77 Application made by Ken Long of Benaroya Company for an additional free standing sign (3rd sign). 4/28/77 Matter brought before the Planning Commission per TMC 19.32.140 (A). Sign request was denied. 5/10/77 Applicant was sent certified letter notifying him of the Planning Commission's denial of their additional sign request (3rd Parkway Plaza sign). 6/ 3/77 Formal denial of sign made by Building Official. (As a result of Planning Commission denial). 6/10/77 Interpretation made by Mr. Crutchfield of 1IIQr77 appealed to Board of Adjustment. 7/ 1/77 Memo from Building Official stating his concurrance with sign code actions made by Mr. Crutchfield. 7/ 6/77 Board of Adjustment denies appeal request and supports interpretation made by staff. 7/ 7/77 Letter of denial sent out with appeal procedure. 8/11/77 Matter appealed to court by Benaroya Company. I, CERTIFICATIO)M Tukwila, Washington t"o hereby certify that the attached docu- ments are true and correct copies of the originals as may be found on file at the Office of Community Development, Planning Division, 6230 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, 98188. On this day personally appeared before me , Assistant Planner for the City of to me known to be the individual described in and Mvho executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Given under my hand and official seal this day of , 19 77 . 60-1, Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, residing at ' TO: FROM. CR SUBJECT: OFCCE MEMO CITY or TUKWILA jaeivi Pj / *I- ta/Wil 14.1704 *if" hifr) y/21- ID 6 / 6 eV" CM-a*/ gitt7 divop litu um/aid/ 6hf/f. 44tt- torfAl * 1 /A1.4-4 /6.mkr a IV 4 6/C. CERTIFICATION Assistant Planner for the City of Tukwila, Washi',ton .o hereby y that the attached documents are true and correct copies of the originals as may be found 'on file at the Office of Community Development, Planning Division, 6230 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washing- ton, 98188. On this day personally appeared before me CLc, , to me known to be the individual described in and who a ecuted the wit in and fore- going instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and volun- tary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Given under my hand and official seal this a:7` day of .L , 19 77 Notary Public in and for the start of Washing- ton, residing at 4)u14,14 I f 5L \1V 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Ti;,::;;LA ft y CA • C 0 Writ of Certiorari - 1 • 77 Aug 11 p 1 1:56 SUPERIOR COURT CLERK SEATTLE, LA. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY BENAROYA COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) No. 832524 vs. ) ) WRIT OF. CERTIORARI CITY OF TUKWILA and ) AL PIPER, ) ) -Defendants. ) ) Plaintiff's Complaint and Petition for Writ 'of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus having been considered, and good cause appearing therefore, the defendant City of Tukwila is hereby ORDERED to certify and return to this court certified copies of its zoning ordinance and Sign Code and any and all subsequent amendments thereto which relate to that. certain real property in the City of Tukwila commonly known as Parkway Plaza; certified copies of any and all records, minutes, trans- cripts reports, letters, exhibits, and any other documents of any kind submitted to or issued by a City agency, agent,• employee, or elected official of the City of Tukwila, including the Board of Adjustment and the' Planning Commission, relating to Jack A. Benaroya Company's application for a permit for a free- standing sign in Parkway Plaza, filed with the City on or about April 4, 1977; and certified copies of any and all other sign permits issued to date by the City of Tukwila pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code section 19.32.140(a), together with any and all records,-minutes, transcripts, reports, letters, exhibits, and any other documents of any kind sub- mitted to or issued by a City agency, agent, employee, or • HILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCR05S, CLARK MARTIN, P.S. ATTOnnEY3 ICa CLtu14a1% !lT RT •i.1,1•7L•• 1+.04 . •z,..; i1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 • 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 . 31 elected official of the other sign permits issued by the defendant City, including any and all administrative or official constructions of Tukwil Munici Code section 19.32.140 ertaining to the allowancnd non - allowance of free - standing signs. It•is further • ORDERED, ADJUDGED shall certify and retur cAlt on the 4) day of 5 court may review the in Official and the Board that plaintiff is not e sign, and annul and .rev if. the court finds that arbitrary . and capriciou with past interpretatio by any competent proof the applicable provisions of the Tukwila Municipal Code; and in order that the court proceedings or any proc edings' conducted not according to. the course of the commo law. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED', of all said records which•are returned to this court be • delivered to plaintiff's attorney at the time of the return of said records to this court.• It is further ORDERED', ADJUDGED process, service upon the Clerk of the City of Tukwila shall constitute service upon officers and agents, either elective or appointive. DATED this /f day of August, 1977. ROBERT. E Dixon Writ of Certiorari - 2 City of Tukwila, relating to such AND DECREED that the City of Tukwila such records to this court at 9:00 A.M. µAL , 1977, in order that the erpretation and decision of the Building f Adjustment of the City of Tukwila, titled to an additional free - standing rse said interpretation and decision, such interpretation and decision are clearly erroneous, not in accordance s of the same Code, or not supported f facts necessary to be proved under may correct any erroneous or void AND DECREED that true -and correct copies AND DECREED.that following initial the City of Tukwila and all its COURL..COMrtiiSS1b ER HILLIS. PHILLIPS, CAIRNCROSS. s CLARK Et MARTIN. P.S. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 402 COLUM3IA s -nett • IATrtr •.to+ 4154141 1 2 3 4 5 6, 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Presented by: HILLIS, PHILLIPS, CAIRNCROSS, CLARK.& MARTIN, P.S. jU ichard R. Wilson .By Attorneys for Plaintiff Writ of Certiorari - 3 HILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCROSS. CLARK Q MARTIN. P.S. ATTO3NZY3 AT LAW 407 COLD 4IIA ITROIT •IATrLL lova. ., • 61 8 ,l 9 7 12 131 14 11 15 4' 16 11 23 1 1 24 25 26 I' 27 , 28 . 29 30 31 32 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF.•WASIHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, ) a Washington corporation, ) ']:11 .^ y.: q•,.• C].. Ee :rvue. •1.) fc•n'i Notice of Appearance TO: JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, plaintiff ) Plaintiff, ) No. 832 524 ) vs. ) ) CITY OF TUKWILA, a municipal ) NOTICE OF APPEARANCE corporation, ) ) Defendant. ) ) AND TO: JEROIIE L. HILLIS of Hillis, Phillips, Cairncross, Clark & Martin, attorneys for plaintiff YOU, AND EACH OF YOU, will please take notice that the defendant CITY OF TUKWILA hereby enters its appearance in the above matter by and through the undersigned attorneys, and requests 20P that all future pleadings and papers, except original process, be 21 served upon said attorneys at the address below stated. • ; 221 1 DATED: August 5, 1977. LeSOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG Lawrence E. Hard Attorneys for Defendant LESOURO. PATCEN. FLEMING & HARTUNG ATTOR4CY9 AT LAW '700 SEATTLE 70w ER SEATTLE. WAs/IRIGTOM P91O1 •24.t040 • 4 LeSOUP,D, PM lug, f 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 . 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, a Wash- ) ington corporation, ) ) Plaintiff, ) NO. vs. ) ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE CITY OF TUKWILA, a municipal ) corporation, ) ) Defendant. ) ) The undersigned states that he is the City Attorney for defendant City of Tukwila and that he is authorized to accept'serdice of plaintiff's Complaint, Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Writ of Mandamus and Declaratory Judgment on behalf of all the above named defendants and that he does hereby accept service of said pleading. DATED this S i .day of August,. 1977. Acceptance of Service y' •, y�r 1 1J ! Cu.. 6& avue. 7 i3 Fol:.• !.!!. 51? • • LE S URD, PATTEN, FL i¢ING HARTUNG J By J4/J� - Lawrence E. Har HILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCROSS. CLARK Q MARTIN. P.S. ATToRN°_Y5 AT LAY* 4O. COLUr3i4 R AZT •Z rrt.e lt.I. •37•t7.. • • RV.RIEHTE Mil.; 5 1977 te�c:. F •, PAt 1 Ir4, [jcr & N.A.u1EULG. Superior Court of Washington for KING JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, a Washington • corporation., Tukwila, SU . MO;. 'rt..n•... ^n . vs. CITY OF TUKWILA, a municipal corporate _L PIPER, Building Official of the City of __. V .. Fc•r::3. :? Plaintiff No. on and Defendant__ • L. (till or Plaintiff 403 Columbia Street Seattle, Washington 98104 County SUMMONS THE STATE OF WASHINGTON to the said: CITY OF TUKWILA and AL PIPER YOU, AND EAU! OF YOU. .IRE HEREBY SUMMONED to appear within twenty days after service of this • summons, exclusive of the day of service, if served within the State of Washington (or within sixty days after service, exclusive of the day of service, if served out of the Stare of Washington) and defend the above entitled action in the . court aforesaid; and answer the Complaint of the Plaintiff and serve a copy of your Answer upon the undersigned at the place below stated; and in case of your failure so to do, judgment will be rendered against you, according to the demand of the Complaint, which will be or has been filed with the clerk of said court, a copy of which is herewith served upon you. fire and P.O. Address: HILLIS, PHILLIPS, CAIRNCROSS, • — CLAIUL&_ NARTI N , . � .S 1 T 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 All LI 5 071 ' 2, ;'.rte: P.a. • ... ••• .,•••••-- IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, a Washington) corporation, ) ) Plaintiff, ) NO. vs. ") ) COMPLAINT AND PETITION CITY OF TUKWILA, a municipal corpora- ) FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI tion and AL PIPER, Building Official ) AND WRIT OF MANDAMUS of the City of Tukwila, ) ) Defendants. ) ) COMES NOW the plaintiff herein and respectfully petitions the court for a Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus and alleges as' follows:' Plaintiff is duly incorporated in the State of Washington in good sanding has paid all license fees due the State of Washington. Plaintiff owns in the City of Tukwila, commonly known as Parkway Plaza (herein- after "subject property "). II. The defendant City of Tukwila is a municipal corporation organized pursuant to the laws of the-State of Washington within the County of King and is an Optional Municipal Code City. Defendant Al Piper is the duly appointed Building Official for the City of Tukwila and is the chief administrative official of the City Building Department. • I. f certain real property III. Section 19.32.140(a) of the City of Tukwila Municipal Code provides in part as follows: Complaint - 1 HILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCROSS. CLARK & MARTIN. P.S. ATT O4.•1F,Y3 AT LAY./ 110) CO_u4.1..l4 117a[6T 11r-.TT6C $7194 11/).47•• • 1 2 3 4 Pursuant to this provision of the Tukwila Municipal Code, plaintiff. 5 herein applied for a sign permit to be located on its property. 6 The application was filed on or about April 4, 1977.. 7 IV. 8 The City of Tukwila Building Department formally 9 notifed plaintiff'of the denial of this permit application on 10 June 3, 1977. On June 10, 1977, plaintiff timely filed a written 11 appeal of the Building Official's decision with the City Board 12 of Adjustment, in accordance with Section 19.32.060 of the 13 Tukwila Municipal Code. 14 . v. 15 On July 6, 1977, the Board of Adjustment of the City 16 of Tukwila considered plaintiff's appeal and denied the appeal 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 One free - standing sign per building shall. - be allowed, except when buildings are supportive to the principal activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principal use, unless specifically permitted by the planning commission. sustaining the denial by the City and Tukwila Building'Official 'for the sign permit. The City of Tukwila Board of Adjustment, during the course of the hearing denying this sign permit, stated that its reason for denial was that there was no necessity for another sign on plaintiff's property. allowed by the Tukwila Municipal Code. Complaint - 2 VI. Plaintiff has at least four separate buildings on the subject property. The City of Tukwila has previously issued three sign permits, the last permit having been issued in January, 1977. The applicable yrovision of the Sign Code for Tukwila as set forth in paragraph,11 of this Complaint allows one sign per building and therefore plaintiff's request for another sign is specifically 1 1 NILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCROSS. CLARK Lk MARTIN. P.S. YrOMNIZY3 AT LAW .,. rquurv► sr•y[f • TA TTI• ••.e• 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 . • VII. On April 28, 1977 the City of Tukwila Planning Commission denied the proposed sign "on the basis the proposed sign is duplicative and the two smaller buildings in front of major buildings are supportive to the principal activity." VIII. • The City of Tukwila's interpretation of the Sign Code as applied to plaintiff's request for a sign permit in. April of 1977 and the City's refusal to issue a sign permit is arbitrary and capricious and clearly erroneous, not in accordance with past interpretations of the same Code, nor supported by T 12 any competent proof of facts necessary to be proved under the 13 applicable provisions of the Tukwila Municipal Code. 14 Ix. 15 16 employees should be ordered by a Writ of Mandamus to issue a Defendant City of Tukwila, its officials, agents and 17 sign permit in accordance with the provisions of the City of 18 Tukwila Sign Ordinance. 19 x. 20 Plaintiff has exhausted its administrative remedies and 21 has no plain, speedy or adequate remedy at law. That it is 22 necessary to have reproduced all of the records of the City of 23 Tukwila and the Tukwila Board of Adjustment which relate to the 24 proceedings above described in order that plaintiff can fully 20 understand and set forth its rights and remedies in this situation. 26 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment as follows: 27 1. That this court issue a Writ of Certiorari directed 28 to the City of Tukwila requiring said City to certify and return 29 forthwith to this court certified copies of its zoning ordinance 30 and Sign Code and any and all subsequent amendments thereto which �: L'S ai:U L pS r',lvsp.�pn7c CLARK t: MARTIN. P.S. Arr. ?NgV.IA: to r.. towuei• .r.•aa 1 31 relate to the subject property and the Sign Code; any and all Crrn:1a5nt - 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 record, minutes, transcripts, letters, and any other documents of any kind to or from any City official or agent, relating to Jack A. Benaroya Company's application for a permit for a free- standing sign. 2. That upon return of the record as aforesaid, this court review the interpretation and decision of the Building Official and the Board of Adjustment that plaintiff is not entitled to an additional free - standing sign, and anull and reverse said interpretation and decision. 3. That the court issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding defendant City to issue to plaintiff a sign permit in accordance with the provisions of the City of Tukwila Sign Code. 4. That the court grant such other and further relief as it may in the p _mises deem proper. DATED this 1 5 day of August, 1977. • STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) deposes and says: Complaint - 4 ome L. Hillis HILLI, PHILLIPS, CAIRNCROSS, CLARK & MARTIN, P.S. , being first duly sworn on oath, That he is an authorized agent of JACK A. BENAROYA COMPANY, the plaintiff in the above and foregoing Complaint; that he has read the foregoing Com int, knows the contents thereof and believes the same to • itrue. N TAR PUBLIC in and for the of Washington, residing at • HILLIS. PHILLIPS. CAIRNCROSS. CLAP Q MAR ri m. P.S. ATTCP`.EY5 AT LA'S ICI C7LUU1.1♦ ] t4LLT •IATTLI. 31104 •7) -t` f 7 July 1977 AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT PRELUVARy DRAFT # SUBJECT TO REVISION 8:00 P.M. APPEAL: Freestanding Sign at Parkway Plaza The Benaroya Company, through attorney Jerome Hillis of the firm Hillis, Phillips, Cairncross, Clark & Marting, has appealed the decision of the Building Official in denying a sign permit application for the erection of a freestanding sign at the Parkway Plaza development on Southcenter Parkway. The appeal was filed in accordance with Section 19.12.060 of the Sign Code and, rather than conduct a public hearing, the Board should conduct a review of all information and testimony in a manner similar to a public hearing and decide the appeal based on the information and testimony received. FINDINGS: 1. The Jafco building, constructed in 1972, became part of the Parkway Plaza building when the latter was constructed in 1974 constitute Phase I. (SEE, Exhibit "A ") 2. Construction of the Parkway Plaza building included two smaller individual buildings situated between the principal building and Southcenter Parkway. (SEE, Exhibit 'A, ") 3. Construction of the Parkway Plaza (North) building (Phase II) was accom- plished in 1976. (SEE, Exhibit "A ") 4. The existing Parkway Plaza sign south of Jafco was permitted as the freestanding sign for the principal building in 19 --:/J vaubev 1913, 5. The existing Parkwa- Plaza sign north of Jafco was permitted in 1977 for the north building in accordance with the interpretation of the term "building ". Board of Adjustment Staff Report Page 2 7 July 1977 6. Section 19.32.140 (A) states... "One freestanding sign per building shall be allowed, except when buildings are supportive to the principal activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principal use, unless specifically permitted by the Planning Commission." 7. Since ther tem "building" is not defined within the Sign Code and the definition contained in the Zoning Code does not complement the Sign Code, an administrative interpretation was made in January 1977 which defined building, as used in the Sign Code, to mean "an individual structure physically and visually separate from any other structure." (SEE, Exhibit "B ") 8. As a result of that interpeation, Section 19.32.140 (A) was refined to effectively state that any individual structure which is physically and visually separate from any other structure qualifies for a freestanding sign UNLESS the particular individual building is supporgive to the principal activity of a business. In the case of a supportive building, it shall not qualify for a freestanding sign UNLESS a freestanding sign is specifically permitted by the Planning Commission. 9. The Benaroya Company filed an application, dated 4 April 1977, for a per- mit to install another Parkway Plaza sign as the freestanding sign permitted by one of the two small individual buildings situated between the principal building and Southcenter Parkway. (SEE, Exhibit "G ", Applicatin for Sign Permit.) 10. At the time of application, staff informed the applicant that the responsible administrative officers considered the two smaller buildings, although individual and separate from other buildings, are supportive to the principal activity, specifically the Parkway Plaza retail complex, and therfore refused to issue a permit for such. 11. As provided for in Section 19.32.140 (A), the applicant requested the Plan- ning Commission consider specific authorization of the sign. The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting conducted 28 April 1977, deneid specific authorization becuase it was considered duplicative signing. (SEE, Exhibit "p ", Planning Commission Minutes, 28 April 1977.) 12. The applicant was formally notified of staff denial of the permit application on 3 June 1977. £E i Exkii0ir "E4) Board of Adjustment Staff Report Page 3 7 July 1977 13. Mr. Hillis, representing the applicant, properly filed written appeal of the Building Official's decision in accordance with Section 19.12.060 (TMC). (SEE, Exhibit "F ", Letter of Appeal.) 14. The letter of appeal extracts from Section 19.32.140 (A) only a portion of the freestanding sign restriction, specifically "one freestanding sign per building shall be allowed ". The remainder of that restriction, as explaine in Finding 8, is not alluded to. 15. The letter of appeal also states the existence of at least four (4) separate buildings in the complex and asserts that each qualifies for a freestanding sign. 16. The letter of appeal refers to a previous administrative interpretation as the basis for permission of sign installatin, specifically the interpreta- tion explained in Exhibit "B ". CONCLUSIONS: 1. The determination of "supportive" is obviously difficult in many instances. In this particular case however, the copy indicated on be proposed sign is not only duplicative of the existing Parkway Plaza sign but conforms the Staff's determination that the principal use of the property is a retail complex named Parkway Plaza and all the buildings within that project area are a part of that complex. 2. The administrative interpretation of the term "building" is considered accurate with respect to the purpose of the Sing Code. Where the two smaller buildings in Phase I deemed not to be supportive, they would thus qualify for a freestanding sign. Such freestnading sign, however, must contain copy relative to that particular building as regulated in Section 19.32.140 (B). Specifically, were the two smaller buildings to qualify for freestanding signs, such signs must identify the particular tenant and could not identify Parkway Plaza. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board consider the inexact term "supportive" as it relates to the two smaller buildings and, should they be deemed to be supportive to the pricipal activity, susteain the administrative denial based on the information Board of Adjustment Staff Report and testimony received during this review hearing. Page 4 7 July 1977. Should the Board find the two smaller buildings not "supportive" to the principal activity, Staff recommends the Board declare such and order the Building Official to issue a Sign Permit if the application conforms to all other restrictions and regulations of Title 19 (TMC). M PARKS L RECREATION PLANNING Mr. Jerome Hillis 403 Columbia Street Seattle WN Dear Mr. Hillis: cal CITY of `TUKWILA OFFICE of COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT cc: Ken Long, Benaroya Company Mayor Bauch Div. OCD Bldg. Office Chrm. Bd. �f Adj. July 7, 1977 Sincerely, Gary Crutchfield. Assistant Planner 6230 Southcenter Boulevard ■ Tukwila, Washington 98188 N (206) 292 -2177 The Tukwila Board of Adjustment, at its regular July meeting conducted 6 July 1977, heard your appeal, in behalf of the Benaroya Company, of the administrative denial of a sign permit. The Board, upon due consideration of all testimony received at the re- view hearing, unanimously voted to deny the appeal and sustain the ad- ministrative denial of the permit. The Board's decision is final and conclusive unless an appeal is properly filed with the Superior Court of King County within thirty (30) days of the Board's decision, specifically 6 July 1977. • MTV' of TUK4ijfELA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF PUJUS1T1ET'ff Minutes of the Meeting, 6 July 1977 The regular July meeting of the Tukwila Board of Adjustment was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by chairperson Altmayer with Board members James and Goe present. Gary Crutchfield represented the Planning Division. Chairperson Altmayer, introducing Mr. Richard Goe as a newly- appointed Board member, explained Mr. Goe is replacing Mrs. Crain as she has re- signed her Board position to become a member of the expanded Park Commis- sion. Directed that a letter of appreciation be prepared for Mrs. Crain. Chairperson Altmayer noted that only two of the Board members present at this meeting were present at the regular June meeting. Motion by Mr. James, seconded by Mr. Goe and carried to table approval of the 2 June 1977 minutes until such time as a majority of the Board members present at the 2 June meeting are present. Chairperson Altmayer asked if any response had been received from the Mayor regarding the Board's suggestion regarding underground utilities. Mr. Crutchfield explained he had recently been directed to provide the Mayor with a detailed report by the end of July. NEW BUSINESS A AL: Denial of Sign Permit (Parkway Plaza) Mr. Crutchfield introduced this agenda item explaining the nature of the appeal. Mr. Al Pieper, Building Official, stated that as a matter of record all interpretations and statements made by Mr. Crutchfield with respect to the Sign Code are made with Mr. Pieper's full knowledge and approval. Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report prepared for this appeal. Mr. Jerome Hillis, attorney representing the applicant, explained the need for reasonable interpretation of the Code within itself. Referring to Section 19.32.140 Commercial Use Areas, Mr. Hillis explained that the 6230 Southcenter. Boulevard a Tukwila, Washington 98189 a (206) 242 -2177 Board of Adjustor( Minutes Page 2 6 July 1977 administrative view of 'retail uses' in the generic sense is ludicrous. Referring to Section 19.32.150 Regional Shopping Centers, Mr. Hillis noted that buildings on the perimeter of a shopping center are authorized indi- vidual freestanding signs. Explained the term'supportive' must only apply to situations in which, as an example, a Penney's retail store might have a Penney's automobile service station next to the store. In this case, the service station is supportive to the principal activity and only one freestanding sign is authorized for the two buildings. Referring to the administrative interpretation which defined the term 'building' as used in the Sign Code, Mr. Hillis emphasized the idea that as long as a building is separate it qualifies for a freestanding sign. This is the only reasonable criteria. Also explained the length of the project is such that an additional Parkway Plaza sign is essential to the viability of the complex. Mr. Goe asked the purpose of the proposed sign. Mr. Hillis reiterated the extreme length of the complex has led to the southern most tenants of Phase I needing identification as part of Park- way Plaza. Added that an applicant need not justify the need for a sign but merely qualify under the Sign Code restrictions. Chairperson Altmayer asked if Phase I and II are physically connected and why Phase II was authorized a sign. Mr. Crutchfield stated they are physically and visually separate build- ings. Explained the determination by staff in January that Phase II was a physically and visually separate building which was not supportive to Phase I and therefore was authorized a freestanding sign. Mr. Ken Long, representing the applicant, explained the phases of construc- tion up to the present development. Mr. Goe asked if buildings lE and 1F are separate. Mr. Hillis stated they probably are but that it is immaterial at this point. Mr. Crutchfield noted the two building pads are separated by a breeze- way but a common canopy gives the visual effect of one building. Mr. Long stated he could agree with Mr. Crutchfield's impression of that particular building but reiterated its qualification for a freestanding sign. Mr. James agreed with Mr. Hillis in that the Board must interpret the words of the Code and not whether the Board objects to the sign. Phase I was constructed all at once with the exception of the Jafco building and One Parkway Plaza sign was allowed for that complex. It is amply clear at least to himself that all of the buildings in Phase I are one unit and the sign is centered such as to emphasize that. Phase I, as Board of Adjustor .. Minutes Gary Crutchfield Secretary Page 3 6 July 1977 Parkway plaza, constitutes the principal activity and the Sancwich Shop and other tenants of the two smaller buildings are a part of that complex. Therefore, Mr. James moved that the variance be denied. Motion seconded by Mr. Goe. Mn Crutchfield pointed out the matter at hand is an appeal not a variance. Mr. James and Mr. Goe acknowledged the correction to the motion. Motion carried. Mr. James informed Mr. Crutchfield of several Sleepworld trucks parked adjacent to and perpendicular to Southcenter Parkway in what appears to be a definite attempt to advertise. Noted this is in direct conflict with the Sign Code and asked if that can be enforced. Mr. Crutchfield and Mr. Pieper explained several factors including man- power relative to Sign Code enforcement. Agreed to provide a report on such at the next regular meeting. Motion by Mr. Goe, seconded by Mr. James and carried to adjourn the meeting. Chairperson Altmayer adjourned the regular July meeting at 8:50 P. M. TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CITY OF TUKVILA pLANNINC DIVISION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT 6 July 1977 8:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM V A : APPEAL: Freestanding Sign at Parkway Plaza The Benaroya Company, through attorney Jerome Hillis of the firm Hillis, Phillips, Cairncross, Clark & Martin, has appealed the decision of the Building Official in denying a sign permit application for the erection of a freestanding sign at the Parkway Plaza development on Southcenter Parkway. The appeal was filed in accordance with Section 19.12.060 of the Sign Code and, rather than conduct a public hearing, the Board should conduct a review of all information and testimony in a manner similar to a public hearing and decide the appeal based on the information and testi- mony received. FINDINGS: 1. The Jafco building, constructed in 1972, became part of the Parkway Plaza building when the latter was constructed in 1973. The result constituted Phase I. (SEE, Exhibit "A ") 2. Construction of the Parkway Plaza building included two smaller indivi- dual buildings situated between the principal building and Southcenter Parkway. (SEE, Exhibit "A ") 3. Construction of the Parkway Plaza north building (Phase II) was accom- plished in 1976. (SEE, Exhibit "A ") 4. The existing Parkway Plaza sign south of Jafco was permitted as the freestanding sign for the principal building in November 1973. 5. The existing Parkway Plaza sign north of Jafco was permitted in 1977 for the north building in accordance with the interpretation of the term "building ". 6. Section 19.32.140 (A) states... "One freestanding sign per building shall be allowed, except when buildings are supportive to the principal activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principal use, unless specifically permitted by the Planning Commission." 7. Since the term "building" is not defined within the Sign Code and the definition contained in the Zoning Code does not complement the Sign Code, an administrative interpretation was made in January 1977 which defined building, as used in the Sign Code, to mean "an individual structure physically and visually separate from any other structure." (SEE, Exhibit "B ") Board of Adjustment Staff Report Page 2 6 July 1977 8. As a result of that interpretation, Section 19.32.140 (A) was refined to effectively state that any individual structure which is physically and visually separate from any other structure qualifies for a free- standing sign UNLESS the particular individual building is supportive to the principal activity of a business. In the case of a supportive building, it shall not qualify for a freestanding sign UNLESS a free- standing sign is specifically permitted by the Planning Commission. 9. The Benaroya Company filed an application, dated 4 April 1977, for a permit to install another "Parkway Plaza" sign as one of the two free- standing signs permitted by virtue of the two small individual buildings situated between the principal building and Southcenter Parkway. (SEE, Exhibit "C ", Application for Sign Permit.) 10. At the time of application, staff informed the applicant that the responsible administrative officers considered the two smaller build- ings, although individual and separate from other buildings, are sup- portive to the principal activity, specifically the Parkway Plaza retail complex, and therefore refused to issue a permit for such. 11. As provided for in Section 19.32.140 (A), the applicant requested the Planning Commission consider specific authorization of the sign. The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting conducted 28 April 1977, denied specific authorization because it was considered duplicative signing. (SEE, Exhibit "D ", Planning Commission Minutes, 28 April 1977.) 12. The applicant was formally notified of staff denial of the permit appli- cation on 3 June 1977. (SEE, Exhbit "E ".). 13. Mr. Hillis, representing the applicant, properly filed written appeal of the Building Official's decision in accordance with Section 19.12.060 (TMC). (SEE, Exhibit "F ", Letter of Appeal.) 14. The letter of appeal states the existence of at least four (4) • separate buildings in the complex and asserts that each qualifies for a freestanding sign. 15. The letter of appeal refers to a previous administrative interpretation as the basis for permission of sign installation, specifically the inter- pretation explained in Exhibit "B ". 16. The letter of appeal extracts from Section 19.32.140 (A) only a portion of the freestanding sign restriction, specifically "one freestanding sign per building shall be allowed ". The remainder of that restriction, as explained in Finding 8, is not alluded to. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The two small buildings located in the midst of the parking area do con- form to the definition of "building" as explained in Exhibit "B" and as asserted by the appellant. Board of Adjustment Staff Report Page 3 6 July 1977 2. The appellant asserts that "one freestanding sign per building shall be allowed. ", but ignores the balance of that particular provision. Specifically, that provision authorizes one freestanding sign for every principal building. 3. The determination of "supportive" is obviously difficult in many instances. In this particular case, however, the copy indicated on the proposed sign (Exhibit "C ") serves to confirm the determination by Staff that the principal use of the property is a retail complex named Parkway Plaza and all of the buildings within that project area are supportive to that principal activity. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board consider the term "supportive" as it relates to the Parkway Plaza complex and, more specifically, the two smaller buildings and sustain the administrative denial based on the information provided in this Staff Report. .\\ \\\ \ t■ • _..., • ta „ , \ • /11/n77/:/r4"// \ \ 'Tow so a 1 ••■••10.11010 2 " 410,w.x. ^ \ fl 6••••.s.e..,...111•0110.16=14.0.••••••■•1■ILL40 •7■• .,..-V?:47.7."..177.17.:'.r_::...T.5.1:141.1,2•41.::,=ACASItot,....r.sa.f.,....1- • - • Y L- r•f••••• .t • ". ,1 -.7% • 64: - 1• Ivey:11s = = . • : , : • • • 11 rxwv,AT A • f f PL l;lIBO PAilgti 6 RCCREATloll 19 January 1977 T0: FILE FROM: Gary Crutchfield SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT sistant Planner INTERPRETATION: DEFINITION OF BUILDING - TITLE 19 Section 19.32.140 restricts freestanding signs to "one free - standing sign per building ". With the construction of Parkway Plaza North, a determination was necessi- tated as to it qualifying for a freestanding sign. According to the UBC classification system, the Building Department classified it as a part of the Parkway Plaza building which included Jafco and Parkway Plaza South. However, the UBC classification of buildings on an individual basis was determined an inappropriate application to the Sign Code. The definition of "building" contained in the Zoning Code included the description "When separated by division walls without openings each portion so separated shall be considered a separate building ". This also was . determined inappropriate in consideration of the distinction within the .Sign Code between multi- tenant and single- tenant buildings and, moreover, the stated purpose of Sign Code. Hence, a definition of the term "building ", as used within the Sign Code, was determined necessary. To complement the purpose of the Sign Code with- in its intent, the following definition was created for use only within Title 19: "Building" shall mean.an individual structure • physically and visually separate from any other structure. As a result, the restriction of 19.32.140 regarding free- standing signs was clarified to effectively read "One free - standing sign per physically and visually separate building shall be allowed,... ". GC /cw cN t1T `�� plan showing location parkway plaza sign Planning Commission Page 4 28 April 1977 Minutes Discussion followed regarding the application of setbacks on flagpoles. Motion by Mr. Richards and seconded by Mr. Bowen to approve the proposed sign and that the flagpoles not exceed the height limit of the zone. Mr. Crutchfield noted the height limit may reach 300 feet per Chapter 18.60 (TMC). Motion by Mrs. Avery, seconded by Mr. Richards and carried to amend the motion in order to specifically limit the height of flagpoles to 35 feet. Motion, as amended, carried. Parkway Plaza: Freestanding Sign Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report, on this item and explained location and copy of two existing freestanding signs identifying Parkway Plaza. Commission discussed nature of the property use, the character of buildings, and the relationship of signs to the activity being identified. Motion by Mr. Richards and seconded by Mr. Sowinski to deny the proposed sign on the basis the proposed sign is duplicative and the two smaller buildings in front of major building are supportive to the principal activity. Considerable discussion ensued with Mrs. Avery asking why the applicant feels another sign is needed. Mr. Ken Long, architect for Benaroya Company, explained the length of frontage causes problem to adequate identification and he feels the two smaller buildings are not supportive to the principal activity. Motion carried. Mr. Crutchfield introduced a site plan and distributed a Staff Report for Southcenter.South Project ;362. Mr. Richards noted it was not on the agenda. Mr. Crutchfield explained that although the applicant had been informed of the application deadline, the plans were not received until 19 April (8 days beyond the deadline). The Planning Division subsequently received an administrative order to submit the plan and Staff Report at the meeting. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the procedures established in the Planning Commission By -Laws and the authority of the administration to abrogate same. General concensus of the Commission that the applicant was well aware of the review requirements and the procedure and associated time requirements in light of his many years of operation in the City. Also noted established proce- dures are applied to everyone and not in a discriminatory manner. EXHIRl i 'D" PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING BUILDING 3 June 1977 AP /cw Enclosures Jack A. Benaroya Company 5950 - 6th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 • ATTN: Ken Long CITY of TUKW LA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Long: As you may recall, your application for sign permit, dated 4 April 1977, • to authorize erection of a freestanding sign at Parkway Plaza was discussed among ourselves and Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Planner. That discussion indicated the Staff's position with respect to the application was to the effect that the proposed sign was in excess of the number allowed by Section 19.32.140 (A) insofar as it would identify the buildings which constitute the Parkway Plaza project. As a result of that discussion, you requested the Planning Commission consider specific authorization of such sign as provided for in same Section 19.32.140 (A). The Planning Commission decision was forwarded in writing to you. by Mr. Crutchfield on 10 May.1977. It has since been brought to my attention that the original application had not been formally (in writing) denied. Hence, this correspondence shall con- stitute formal denial of the sign permit application due to the fact the pro- posed sign would identify the principal use which is already identified by a permitted freestanding sign. You have the right appeal per Section 19.12.060 of the Tukwila Municipal Code' (TMC). The TMC sections referred to above are attached for your convenience. Please call if you have any questions. TUKWILA BUILDING DEPARTMENT ' .E t% • Al Pieper Building Official 6230 Southcenter Boulevard u Tukwila, Washington 98188 In (206) 242-2177 SUSAN R.AGID PETER L. BUCK H. RAYMOND CAIRNCROSS MARK S. CLARK J£ROME L. HILLIS GEORGE W. MARTIN.JR. LOUIS D. PETERSON JOHN E. PHILLIPS STEVAN D. PHILLIPS RICHARD R. WILSON Gentlemen: LAW OFFICES OF HILLIS, PHILLIPS, CAIRNCROSS, CLARK & MARTIN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION 403 COLUMBIA STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 Tukwila Board of Adjustment City of Tukwila 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 June 10, 1977 Re: Application of the Jack A. Benaroya Company For A Free Standing Sign 623 -1745 AREA CODE 205 On behalf of our client, the Jack A. Benaroya Company, we respectfully appeal the decision of the Tukwila building official rejecting the Benaroya Company's applica- tion for a sign permit. Notice of rejection is contained in a letter from the City of Tukwila to the Jack A. Benaroya Company dated June. 3, 1977. A copy of that letter is attached. We would also request that the actual application of the permit be incorporated in this appeal. Section 19.32.140 of the Tukwila Zoning and Signing Code provides that: "one free standing sign per building shall be allowed. . ." The Benaroya Company has requested one free standing sign and have at least four separate buildings in this complex which is more than the number of signs for this area. We understand that the City's staff has interpreted the above referenced section to mean that if all of the buildings are a part of one development, then only one sign is allowed. That interpretation, however, goes beyond the language of the above referenced section and can- not be sustained upon any reasonable reading of the above section. It very well may be that the City administrative staff wishes to change the Sign Code, but at the present time the Sign Code would not prohibit the Benaroya Company's request for a separate free standing sign. We might agree with the staff's position if there was one retail use and part of that use was in a separate building, such as a Penney's department store and Penney's automobile store. That situation, however, does not exist in the area under appeal. In the present situation, each of the uses are entirely separate from each other; each are F" to • Tukwila Board of Adjustment June 10, 1977 Page Two separate businesses; each of the uses generate separate traf- fic for separate purposes and none of the uses are related to each other, other than as general retail uses. In fact, there are uses in the complex different from retail. Conse- quently the City administrative staff's interpretation of the above section must fail. The City staff, upon prior review of an identical situation, granted the sign and we believe the prior inter- pretation is correct and we urge the Board of Adjustment to grant this sign'permit. The sign requested would be a low sign which should assist the traffic situation in this area and be of an over- all benefit to the entire development of the Southcenter area. We would appreciate receiving notice of the public . hearing which will be set to hear this appeal. If we can provide additional information, please let us know. JLH /dh Enclosure cc: Jack A. Benaroya Company Very truly our Jerome t. Hillis t II. 6 July 1977 . CALL TO ORDER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF NEW BOARD MEMBERS Reid Johanson Richard Goe III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 2 June 1977 IV. OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: A. APPEAL: Denial of Sign Permit VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT has fixed the 6th day of July , 19 77 at 8:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of Tukwila City Hall, 14475 - 59th Avenue • South, Tukwila, Washington as the time and place for its REGULAR JULY MEETING. Any and:all interested persons invited to attend. TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DISTRIBUTION: Published & Posted: City Hall & Annex Record Chronicle CITY OF TUKWILA. NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Gary Crutchfield Secretary Date: 29 June 1977 Date: 30 June & 3 July 1977 OFFICE MEMO CITY of TUKWILA TO: ANY INTERESTED PERSON FROM: . Al Pieper, Building Official SUBJECT: SIGN CODE AP /cw 1 July 1977 The Tukwila Municipal Code Section 19.36.020 places the responsi- bility for enforcement of Title 19 which is the Sign Code on the Building Director. Any and all decisions, interpretations, reviews, etc., made by Mr. Crutchfield are made with the full knowledge and approval of the Building Department. Any and all actions, statements or other functions by Mr. Crutchfield relative to the Sign Code are the same as if actually made by the Building Official. PARKS t. RECREATION 7 June 1977 Mr. Jerry Hillis 403 Columbia Street Seattle, Washington 98104 Dear Mr. Hillis: Please find attached a copy of the letter of admin- istrative denial of the Parkway Plaza sign permit application made by the Benaroya Company. Feel free to contact me at your convenience should you desire to discuss this matter. Sincerely, Gary Crutcrh field `- Assistant Planner GC /cw Attachment CITY of TUKWILA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6230 Southcenter Boulevard n Tukwila, Washington 98188 is (206) 242 =2177 PARKS A RECREATION PLANNING 3 June 1977 r COTY of TUKW8LA OFFICE or COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Jack A. Benaroya Company 5950 - 6th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 ATTN: Ken Long Mr. Long: As you may recall, your application for sign permit, dated 4 April 1977, to authorize erection of a freestanding sign at Parkway Plaza was discussed among ourselves and Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Planner. That discussion indicated the Staff's position with respect to the application was to the effect that the proposed sign was in excess of the number allowed by Section 19.32.140 (A) insofar as it would identify the buildings which constitute the Parkway Plaza project. As a result of that discussion, you requested the Planning. Commission consider specific authorization of such sign as provided for in same Section 19.32.140 (A). The Planning Commission decision was forwarded in writing to you by Mr. Crutchfield on 10 May 1977. It has since been brought to my attention that the original application had not been formally (in writing) denied. Hence, this correspondence shall con- stitute formal denial of the sign permit application due to the fact the pro- posed sign would identify the principal use which is already identified by a permitted freestanding sign. You have the right of appeal per Section 19.12.060 of the Tukwila Municipal Code' (TMC). The TMC sections referred to above are attached for your convenience. Please call if you have any questions. AP /cw Enclosures TUKWILA BUILDING DEPARTMENT 41.-q Al Piepe Building Official 6230 Southcentor boulevard u Tukwila, Washington 98188 n (206) 242 -2177 SENT TO Ken Long Benaroya Company . 00 � N 10 May 1977 >p M23 STREET AND NO. 5950 - 6th Ave. So. P.O. STATE AND ZIP CODE Seattle, WA 98108 OPTIONAL SERVICES FOR ADDITIONAL FEES RETURN 1. Shows to whom and date delivered RECEIPT With delivery to addressee only R RECEIPTS 2. Shows to whom, date and where delivered With delivery to addressee only DELIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLY 15s 650 350 850 50d SPECIAL DELIVERY (extra fee required) LC) t r O z RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL -30e (plus postage) r� r orm 3800 Nov.1971 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— NOT • FOR 'INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See other side) • * OPO, 1970 O•ae7•Iee 10 May 1977 Mr. Ken Long Benaroya Company 5950 - 6th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 Dear Ken: Gary Crutchfield Assistant Planner GC /cw cc: Dir, OCD Bldg Off CITY ©r 1 "LE / EL, A OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Tukwila Planning Commission, at its regular meeting conducted 28 April 1977, reviewed the proposed freestanding sign for Parkway Plaza located along the east side of Southcenter Parkway. As you know, this office had considered the sign to be duplicative and that the Planning Commission may authorize such under Section 19.32.140 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). The Commission, upon due consideration of all available information, denied the proposed sign on the basis it is duplicative and the two smaller buildings in front of the major building are supportive to the principal activity. Three alternatives remain open to you should you wish to pursue the matter. 1. Remove the existing freestanding sign in conjunction with installa- tion of proposed sign. 2. Apply for a variance from Section 19.32.140 (TMC). 3. Appeal the Commission's decision to the Board of Adjustment within thirty (30) days from date of receipt of this letter. Should you have any questins regarding this matter please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, 6230 :._...h.. %:ntor. F:wule:•rrd sr :cr:x ?: ...shin.tnn 931.3 a (30.;) r4? -2177 Planning Commission Minutes Motion carried. Page 4 28 April 1977 Discussion followed regarding the application of setbacks on flagpoles. Motion by Mr. Richards and seconded by Mr. Bowen to approve the proposed sign and that the flagpoles not exceed the height limit of the zone. Mr. Crutchfield noted the height limit may reach 300 feet per Chapter 18.60 (TMC). Motion by Mrs. Avery, seconded by Mr. Richardsand carried to amend the motion in order to specifically limit the height of flagpoles to 35 feet. Motion, as amended, carried. arkway Plaza: Freestanding Sign Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report on this item and explained location and copy of two existing freestanding signs identifying Parkway Plaza. Commission discussed nature of the property use, the character of buildings, and the relationship of signs to the activity being identified. Motion by Mr. Richards and seconded by Mr. Sowinski to deny the proposed sign on the basis the proposed sign is duplicative and the two smaller buildings in front of major building are supportive to the principal activity. Considerable discussion ensued with Mrs. Avery asking why the applicant feels another sign is needed. Mr. Ken Long, architect for Benaroya Company, explained the length of frontage causes problem to adequate identification and he feels the two smaller buildings are not supportive to the principal activity. Mr. Crutchfield introduced a site plan and distributed a Staff Report for Southcenter South Project #362. Mr. Richards noted it was not on the agenda. Mr. Crutchfield explained that although the applicant had been informed of the application deadline, the plans were not received until 19 April (8 days beyond the deadline). The Planning Division subsequently received an administrative order to submit the plan and Staff Report at the meeting. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the procedures established in the Planning Commission By -Laws and the authority of the administration to abrogate same. General concensus of the Commission that the applicant was well aware of the review requirements and the procedure and associated time requirements in light of his many years of operation in the City. Also noted established proce- dures are applied to everyone and not in a discriminatory manner. OTHER BUSINESS Planning Commission Page 5 Minutes 28 April 1977 Motion by Mr. Hartong and seconded by Mrs. Avery to accept this site plan for review at the next regular meeting. Motion carried with Mr. Sowinski voting NO. Mr. Hartong requested a short recess. Chairman Kirsop recessed the meeting at 10:40 P.M. Chairman Kirsop reconvened the meeting at 10:45 .P.M. with same Commissioners present. NEW BUSINESS Recommendation for Land Use: Bradley Annexation Area Mr. Satterstrom read the Staff Report on this item explaining the Council had referred to the Planning Commission the question of zoning if annexation is approved. Commission discussed effect of "guaranteed zoning" prior to annexation of small parcels and generally agreed with the Staff Report. Motion by Mr. Richards, seconded by Mr. Bowen and carried to recommend to the City Council the Bradley property be converted to R -1 -12.0 upon annexation and that any future rezoning of the site be processed according to rezone procedures established for land within the City, specifically Chapter 18.84 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. Commission discussed the need for a policy guideline with respect to small annexations. Motion by Mrs. Avery, seconded by Mr. Richards and carried to recommend the City Council include the following policy in their pending Annexation Plan: For small or one - property annexation areas, zoning should be • converted from county zoning to the city classification most similar to that of the county classification and should take effect upon annexation. Subsequent rezoning may occur pursuant to procedures and requirements as established in Chapter 18.84 (TMC). Amendment to Title 18: Open Space Commission agreed to table this matter until the next regular meeting. Amendment to Chapter 18.32: BAR Deletion Discussion of intent and purpose of the BAR requirement. Also discussed bene- fit versus burden. 28 April 1977 AGENDA ITEM VI B CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Parkway Plaza - Freestanding Sign 8:00 P.M. The Benaroya Company has applied for a Sign Permit to install a third freestanding sign to identify the Parkway Plaza development located east of Southcenter Parkway. The applicant bases his request for permit on Section 19.32.140 (A) which authorizes "One freestanding sign per building..." and that the two small individual buildings located near Southcenter Parkway and in front of the main building therefore are each authorized a freestanding sign. Staff has refused issuance of the permit to allow Planning Commission con- sideration of the remainder of Section 19.32.140 (A) which provides that "...when buildings are supportive to the principle activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principle use... ". In essence, Staff considers the two small buildings in front of Parkway Plaza to be supportive to the principle use of the property; therefore, the one existing freestanding sign must be removed if the new freestanding sign is to be approved. Section 19.32.140 (A) also authorizes the Planning Commission to specifically authorize freestanding signs for buildings which are subordinate to the principle use. 28 April 1977 I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: III. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS IV. OLD BUSINESS: IX. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA VI. SIGNS: A. Carriage House: Freestanding Sign B. Parkway Plaza: Freestanding Sign V. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: A. Site Plan: Southcenter South Project #310 B. Site Plan: Warehouse on Andover Park West (Ivy) C. Landscape Plan: R. B. Furniture VII. NEW BUSINESS: A. Recommendation for Land Use: Bradley Annexation Area 8:00 P.M. VIII. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Discussion: Amendment to Title 18 to include specific open space requirements. B. Discussion: Amendment to Chapter 18.32 to delete Board of Architectural Review. 1 RETAKE PREVIOUS DOCUMENT .. 28 April 1977 AGENDA ITEM VI B CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Parkway Plaza - Freestanding Sign 8:00 P.M. The Benaroya Company has applied for a Sign Permit to install a third freestanding sign to identify the Parkway Plaza development located east of Southcenter Parkway. The applicant bases his request for permit on Section 19.32.140 (A) which authorizes "One freestanding sign per building..." and that the two small individual buildings located near Southcenter Parkway and in front of the main building therefore are each authorized a freestanding sign. Staff has refused issuance of the permit to allow Planning Commission con - sideration of the remainder of Section 19.32.140 (A) which provides that "...when buildings are supportive to the principle activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principle use... ". In essence, Staff considers the two small buildings in front of Parkway Plaza to be supportive to the principle use of the property; therefore, the one existing freestanding sign must be removed if the new freestanding sign is to be approved. Section 19.32.140 (A) also authorizes the Planning Commission to specifically authorize freestanding signs for buildings which are subordinate to the principle use. 28 April 1977 VIII. OTHER BUSINESS: IX. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA VI. SIGNS: A. Carriage House: Freestanding Sign B. Parkway Plaza: Freestanding Sign A. Discussion: Amendment to Title 18 to space requirements. B. Discussion: Amendment to Chapter 18. Architectural Review. I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: III. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS IV. OLD BUSINESS: V. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: A. Site Plan: Southcenter South Project #310 B. Site Plan: Warehouse on Andover Park West (Ivy) C. Landscape Plan: R. B. Furniture • VII. NEW BUSINESS: A. Recommendation for Land Use: Bradley Annexation Area 8:00 P.M. include specific open 32 to delete Board of BRADLEY ANNEXATION AREA Parkway Plaza: Sign Carriage House: Sign, Landscape Plan: R. B. Furniture CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION 28 April 1977 Warehouse on .Andover Park West (Ivy) Southcenter South Project #310 28 April 1977 AGENDA ITEM VI B CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Parkway Plaza - Freestanding Sign 8:00 P.M. The Benaroya Company has applied for a Sign Permit to install a third freestanding sign to identify the Parkway Plaza development located east of Southcenter Parkway. The applicant bases his request for permit on Section 19.32.140 (A) which authorizes "One freestanding sign per building..." and that the two small individual buildings located near Southcenter Parkway and in front of the main building therefore are each authorized a freestanding sign. Staff has refused issuance of the permit to allow Planning Commission con- sideration of the remainder of Section 19.32.140 (A) which provides that "...when buildings are supportive to the principle activity of a business where signs are allowed only for the principle use...". In essence, Staff considers the two small buildings in front of Parkway Plaza to be supportive . to the principle use of the property; therefore, the one existing freestanding sign must be .removed if the new freestanding sign is to be approved. Section 19.32.140 (A) also authorizes the Planning Commission to specifically authorize freestanding signs for buildings which are subordinate to the principle use. Jack A. Benaroya Company 5950 Sixth Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 762 4750 .I: April 21, 1977 \ Office of Community'Development City of Tukwila 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Gary Crutchfield' Assistant Planners Enclosed is a letter to Mr / R. Hoehl, Jr., President, Big Foot Restaurant, Inc.', t a signage for the pro- posed Burger King Restaurant.' kway Plaza. The informa- tion contained in the/letter 1 result of our meeting in early February, 1977: �! In our conversation on April 20, 1977, you indicated that you would not issue /a sign permit until construction of the build- ing has begun :Or at least until after a building permit has been issued./ This is of course is not a problem for us as long as I can obtain the information' from you as to what will be allowed as was the case for the Burger King signage and previously for the Carriage House. Ofik Kenneth D. Long Chief Architect cc: Mr. Robert Sandwick INDUSTRIAL PARKS /WAREHOUSES /OFFICE BUILDINGS /SHOPPING CENTERS AND SPECIALIZED MERCHANDISE MARTS. Jack A. Benaroya Company 5950 Sixth Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 762 4750 1 110 February 22, 1977 Mr. John R. Hoehl, Jr., President Big Foot Restaurant, Inc. 11020 Kent - Kangley Road, No. F -18 Kent, Washington 98031 In accordance with our discussion on February 7, 1977, I have:met with the Tukwila Planning Department regarding signage for the Burger King Restaurant at Parkway Plaza, Tukwila. For the free standing sign the code allows an area of 34.875 sq. ft. They were told that 6 x 6 sign is a standard size for Burger King and even though this,is slightly over in square footage, •. they will approve it. Please note that the free standing sign, according to their sign code, shall contain no ad- vertising copy; therefore;. the "Home of the Whopper ': is not allowed on the free- standing sign. Regarding the sign on the building, one sign is allowed with an area of 34.875 sq. ft. In this case, advertising copy "is allowed and therefore, Burger King, Home of the Whopper; \ is allowable by the sign code. How- ever, please note that this sign is\much smaller than the standard sign used by Burger King which I estimate \to be approximately 71.25 sq. ft. I was told that directional signs for traffic are generally allowed as required and therefore would recommend that you work this problem directly with Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Planner, Planning Division, for the City of Tukwila. If the limitation on size of sygnage as described above is acceptable to you, please sign one copy of this letter and return to me for our files. I have also checked with the Washington Natural G Company regarding extension of their gas main to the area of the Burter King site and have been told that they anticipate the extension of the main to this area within the next 4 to 6 weeks. m".1 Kenneth D. Long Chief Architect cc: Bob Sandwick Lonny Horowitz ACCEPTED AND AGREED'\T0: BIG i OT RESTAURANT, John R. Hoe Cf INDUSTRIAL PARKS /WAREHOUSES /OFFICE BUILDINGS/ 6HoPPING CENTERS AND SPECIALIZED MERCHANDISE MARTS. ( "/ PARKS Rc..'.nr.ATIOR 14 April 1977 T0: Fred FROM: Gary SUBJECT: FREESTANDING SIGNS: Parkway Plaza West GC /cw MEMORANDUM CITY of TUKWIL,A OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Application has been made for a sign permit to erect a freestanding sign to identify the Carriage House Furniture Store•in the Parkway Plaza West development. This constitutes the first application for freestanding signs in this develop- ment. In consideration of the Planning Commission's concern regarding same expressed during the past two site plan reviews for this development area. Question: Should the application be submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration with . respect to signing of the overall project area; or should the permit be issued since the Carriage House is an individual building and is authorized a freestanding sign regardless of the fact it is located within a larger project area? PLANNING PARKS & RECREATION BUILDING 23 December 1976 Dear Ken: C Mr. Kenneth Long Benaroya Company 5950 Sixth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 CITY of TUKWILA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT This letter is in response to your letter of 15 December 1976 which related your basis for requesting additional signing for all phases of the Parkway Plaza development located on Southcenter Parkway. Several important factors have come to light in my research of the matter in relation to the Tukwila Sign Code and they are outlined as follows. 1. Phase I, or Jafco, was constructed in 1972 and Permit #129 was issued on 28 August 1972 to erect a freestanding sign identifying the building as Jafco. 2. The Tukwila Sign Code was adopted by the City Council on 21 May 1973, well after erection of the freestanding Jafco sign. 3. Phase II, or Parkway Plaza South, was constructed in early 1973 under Building Permit #218. This construction Phase, together with Phase I, constituted one (1) building under the restrictions of the Uniform Building Code. 4. Section 19.32.140 (A) of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) restricts the number of freestanding signs to one (1) per building. Since the existing Jafco freestanding sign was authorized prior to the effective date of the Sign Code, it was classified as a legal nonconforming sign in accordance with Section 19.28.030 (TMC). Based on the legal nonconforming status of the Jafco sign and the fact it must conform to the Sign Code in 1980 (reference Section 19.28.030), Permit #345 was issued on 16 November 1973 which authorized erection of one (1) freestanding sign for the entire building (then consisting of Phase I and II) in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.32.140 (A). 6. Phase III, or Parkway Plaza North, was constructed during the summer of 1976 under Permit #995. The combined construction of Phase I, II, and III constitutes one (1) building under the provisions of the Uniform Building Code (SEE: Attached Memorandum dated 21 December 1976.) 6230 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98288 w (206) 242 -2177 Benaroya Company Sincerely, Gary Crutchfield Assistant Planner GC /cw Attachment: as cc: Kjell Stoknes, Dir, OCD Al Pieper, Bldg Off Mr. Kenneth Long Page 2 23 December 1976 In consideration of the factors described hereinabove and all aspects of the Sign Code, the only conclusion is that the entire Parkway Plaza building (composed of all three construction phases) is one (1) multi- tenant building and is authorized one (1) freestanding sign. The existing Jafco signs are legal nonconforming signs and may remain until the required conformance date established in Section 19.28.030 (TMC). The existing 'Parkway Plaza' free- standing sign, authorized under Permit #345 in accordance with the Sign Code, constitutes the one (1) authorized freestanding sign for the entire Parkway Plaza building. One alternative to the existing situation would involve moving the existing Parkway Plaza sign to a more advantageous location. A second alternative would be to make application to the Planning Commission for a Shared Directional Sign, in accordance with Section 19.32.020 (TMC), to identify what may be termed 'Parkway Plaza South', and another Shared Direc- tional Sign to identify what may be termed 'Parkway Plaza North'. The entirety of this letter constitutes my interpretation of the Sign Code as it applies to the Parkway Plaza development lying east of Southcenter Parkway. Should you have any further questions or desire to discuss the matter, please contact me at your convenience. PLANNING PARKS L RECREATION BUILOING TO: FROM: SUBJECT: For the purpose of determining authorized signing at the Parkway Plaza development east of Southcenter Parkway, I need your determination as to .whether or not the Jafco, Parkway Plaza South, and Parkway Plaza North, et al, constitute one, two, or three buildings under the Uniform Building Code. Piease reply at your earliest convenience. GC /cw REPLY: • Uniform Building Code Section 50 (c) Exception. and Section 506 (b) Unlimited . Area was 'the. criteria used to authorize the construction of the new building 15' from the existing building. Therefore, the entire Parkway Plaza building from American Home :Furniture on the south end . t� .Eucaliptus Records on the north is classified as one building. Any other classification would cause the - buildings to . be in violation of the code due to lack of 60' separation. ME AiO RANDUM CITY of TUKW LA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 21 December 1976 Al Pieper, Building Officer Gary Crutchfield.sistant Planner FREESTANDING SIGNS at PARKWAY PLAZA DEVELOPMENT • • C ;C ,ION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET Phase 4 Koll Business Center at Ninkler Blvd. _JT : P NER BLOCK Don Koll Northwest .■DRESS ?77 152n 4 :AM OF BUILDER Boyd Sign Co. - 0OR =SS 605 Third North, Seattle 98119 INSPECTION RECORD ^_$CRIPTION OF WORK: CALL FOR INSPECTION BEFORE WORK IS CONCEALED OR POURING CONCRETE PHONE 242 - 2177 SUBDIVISION I FINAL INSPECTION BEFORE OCCUPANCY C!TY OF CMIVILA B ILDID DEPART''' 1 t 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98067 Phone: (206) 242 -2177 APPLICANT BY .. • VOID IF WORK IS NOT COMMENCED IN 120 DAYS July 6, 1976 DATE ISSUED November 6, 1976 EXPIRAtION DAME BUILDING DIRECTOR Boyd Sign Co. BY PHONE PLAN CHECK FEE TOTAL FEE TYPE OF CONST. FIRE ZONE ST _ , sbipct fi:n p1acamPnt OI!TSTl1F of 1 foot utility cnrrislor along i/1.in41e..B_1vd PERMIT NUMBER N° 965 STATE LICENSE NOFIHM86rl SALES TAX NO. XC y PHONE 285 -1144 ESTIMATED VALUE OF COMPLETED WORK $ 1,000.00 PERMIT FEE $10.00 LATE PERMIT FEE S OCCUPANCY GROUP USE ZONE FIRE SPRINKLERS MAX. REQUIRED ❑Yes ❑No OCC. LOAD THIS PERMIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 10.00 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND INFORMATION FILED HEREWITH, THIS PERMIT IS GRANTED. •n. . .ni. • .t , J. 44.3 4 a . JV/ w. NalM'? AJ 1YV�+ 1'..!' 4: G.. T4 .T�1'fY�f /•OItA�:�'vG4,{I'Wy�. MIN: i /1�1L:.}pifM'N4NN/�1�vvw.M'.'.h tis. 14't,61_ Ll t>.,,, 'B ),/c{.. f/ - 7---(0-/o • NP L OF TEi1ANT W.d iS I "J �` CAN'T 4 ."* . ` • NATURE OF BUSINESS: THIS PE F :MIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -L'AY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUM: NG, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIS ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TtU�K VIILA . , ODES AND ORDINANCES . _...... APF'LtCI NT `1<a.: +s.�` �w.77 • [ c 1: 0 . ; .., 4 • LOCATION OF WORK / NUMBER E STREET v 4„.8 ' S S. 5 kAwiQ...174.e4Aft5, LOT 1BLOCK SUBDIVISION U: "1NER J #' frt° NtF) ADDRESS „I j N c P WI NAPE tJF BUILDER ADDRESS t7cps a PZ). A-ri 9611c) •� r DESCRIPTION OF WORK: 6230 SOUTHCENTEP. BLVD. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 93133 _ Phone: (206) 242 -2177 Z APPLICATION FOR BUTLDIUUG PERMIT DATE ISSUED EXPIRATION DATE n (( , ' � _Actoj c: t rJ V I C1.cP.r , A2vL,rt. ou T VC ".J PERMIT FEE TOTAL FEE TYPE OF CO N ST. PHONE STATE LICENSE SALES TAX NO NC578 _819Z, PHONE 1 144^ ESTIMATED VALUE OF WORK S l COO 'PLAN CHECK FEE LATE PERMIT FEE $ FIRE. ZONE FIRE_SPRINKLERS REQUIRED ❑Yes ❑No OCCUPANCY GROUP USE ZONE MAX. - OCC. LOAD • .. • ` .. ' --"~-'' _-`_~-`~ • --` .� . --� ' ... • .. .- .. la 717: rqiNiq' .t.i.li&it.r r_2S'..tfa7..:V .. : � - ����h • - � - ' _- -_ � \ � `� � "vv �� ' w ' � .� ._ -_ ' -_ - __ ' - . --_-�~'-.�,�-�'/�7\ � -- -' �'- - -- �--^ - ~ -- ' -' ./ n - ° ~ 7 .. ‘..:: A ::: - _ , CrY 7--.. N.T h q0 _ . --___' -_- --- ~ _- " - -..M11f ~�^'`~^f`�=�"�^-�p��°~-' ~ ' ~~~ ^ ~ ^ ~_.~^~ -________ __. _____ . -~ --_' '' -`-�_---.�-----`_____-- -��� . . ~ �� ?�� ,' �{ / - ` ~ - . • ' • ', '- -' --- -_- �------'------------ | ^ - --~- • • w L "Sr.r..,GYf'iWKiY.'ti • • S • "1 f r JC. � . c t.4: c+ . .+mod • • 'DRESS 1003 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 PHONE 575 -0310 AME OF BUILDER Messenger Sign Co. STATE LICENSE NOD 131 923-76 SALES TAX NO. C-578-023-713 DDRESS 1167 Mercer Seattle, Washington PHONE 623 -4525 INSPECTION RECORD - TINGS COMMENCED " jA'r;�i jj]� � IS •ice/ yl s1bW' O \ii VOID IF WORK IS IN 120 1/22/76 G If NOT DAYS ESTIMATED VALUE C OMPLETED WORK $ 650.00 1UNOATIO I PERMIT FEE $ 19.50 RA,lI ?JG PLAN CHECK FEE $ LATE PERMIT FEE S TOTAL 19.50 .FEE TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP DME ISSUED 5/22/76 FIRE ZONE USE ZONE ExPiRafOra D.IE INAL FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED MAX. OCC. LOAD ❑Yes II No .:. ... .......— - .._... -._ • :C-ATI•.)N OF WORK / NUMBER 24 STREET DT fi N E R I3LOCK ESCRIPTIO:N OF WORK: BU1LDI 113 fEPA fl .1 . 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98067 Phone: (206) 242 -2177 1003 Andover Park East SUBDIVISION Cabot, Cabot & Forbes CALL FOR INSPECTION BEFORE WORK IS CONCEALED OR POURING CONCRETE PHONE 242-2177 FINIAL INSPECTION BEFORE OCCUPANCY SIGN - "BUSINESS CENTER" THIS PERMIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 4 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. APPLICANT BY 2 (,-/ BUILDING DIRECTOR i•i;A /r : SUBJECT TO- COMPLIANCE /ITH THE ORDINANCES OF THE IT OF TUKWILA AND INFORMATIONeILED HEJ WITH, THIS PERMIT IS GRANTE PERMIT NUMBER NO 857 ADDRESS t 66 3 /A- ri - b (Jo Win` 4 o PHONE 5 - 1 5 -- 6 3( a �•.__. NAME OF BUILDER I_ SS /- /J et�. S /CS- � c L , STATE LICENSE NO. 1-•-) 1 � • ( S 3 — SALES TAX NO. � ?�- OZ3 ADDRESS n C` n PHONE c 3- Le i---1. _s - . R CEIVF. CITY Of= Ti_Po en: a ri 9 1976 UU:LViNG DEFT. ' • . ESTIMATED VALUE ^ G V OF 6 ' COMPLETED WORK $ c`' .r APPLICATION J� n ----ter . PERMIT FEE $/! FOR ..PLAN CHECK FEE S BUILDING PERMIT LATE PERMIT FEE S • r - 4 TOTAL FEE S _ TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP ' DATE 155uED FIRE ZONE USE • ZONE EXP1RAHON DAIS ' FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED MAX. OCC. LOAD M Yes ■ No ow ER ;ION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET B OG 3 BLOCK :PTION OF WORK: • F r S i N CITY `. ;'U .W1L ; IWWL WW iG 1EP kEr SUBDIVISION CO ef M Iri r..ri. 6230 Southcenter blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98037 Phone: (206) 242-2177 e �` i. ) U.+. 6:1-712.„, i ✓ ! / V 4,s sko,v,..-___ . THIS PERMIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SF_PARATEPERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKVJILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. • \ APPLICANT • ( ! ow ER ;ION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET B OG 3 BLOCK :PTION OF WORK: • F r S i N CITY `. ;'U .W1L ; IWWL WW iG 1EP kEr SUBDIVISION CO ef M Iri r..ri. 6230 Southcenter blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98037 Phone: (206) 242-2177 e �` i. ) U.+. 1' • JS 9 it • Zz 7 r - .1 1 0. N d -1,01c1 rvilogvd. Irvicnitig • • T - Id 9 . 3- tott '31AOQNsa -9r4r rva f 9 1 5) -9N v,/cf - -4)Nrolin • ft • 13'' colt)S ri ;Q. c I I. •••■••••11 1 M 0 . 6 . 2.1.4 • ••••••••• •••••■••••••...... • • • aODPSSS 550 Industry Drive Tukwila, Wash. 98188 PHONE 244 -5765 JAMEE OF BUILDER Don Koll Northwest STATE LICENSE N0. 223-01-14128 SALES TAX NO. C- 600-087-861 AcDR_SS 550 Industry Drive _ Tukwila, Wash. 98188 PHONE 244 -5765 — INSPECTION RECORD r^, r7(i5 BUMMING P Li LI Ai II 7 VOID IF WORK IS NOT COMMENCED IN 120 DAYS 7/2/75 ESTIMATED VALUE . COMPLETED WORK $ 2,500.00 -:?'rl ESDINOATION PERMIT FEE $ 33.90 f;"t�ING PLAN CHECK FEE ' $ . LATE PERMIT FEE $ TOTAL FEE $ 33.90 TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP DATE ISSUED 11/2/75 FIRE ZONE USE ZONE EXPIRATION DATE ''IN AL FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED MAX. OCC. LOAD ❑Yes MI No +. . . r:.(;N OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET ISLOCK DESCRIPTION OF WORK: 500 Strander Blvd. Koll - Wells PHONE 242-2177 FINAL INSPECTION BEFORE OCCUPANCY CITY Y O -' ILA BU LD N3 DEPART 77 I SUBDIVISION 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98067 Phone: (206) 242 -2177 Directory Sign per Drawings Total Sign Area: 226 sq. ft. THIS PERMIT DO=S NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUP,IBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OF? AIR CONDITIONING. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WOR!< IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. s—T i I ' T t'L CALL FOci INSPECTION BEFORE WORK IS CONCEALED OR POURING CONCRETE SUBJECT T con,leL- AN THE ORDINANCE OFT CITY OF T INFORMA ION (FILED HER NITH, THIS PERMIT IS G APPLICANT BY BY BUILDING DIRECTOR - 4. ' t(1�''�t PERMIT NUMBER Nu 792 DRE>; _ f c �C�l y� / .l // /) �r . }�) Y �'.1 PHONE �y /�JJ _ /) / j 9 1- f / c �/ Gr" 5 Wz OF BULL iie T '// /" / ..7 '- VV V • ' • • STATE LICENSE NO. — / SALES TAX NO. i i 6 ' o• 7 5",t2 PHONE /" ?- l ` S r 7Z• -3 ,/, DRESS _ • 5 - • . • • • • ! tl TI ; f <I • • APPLICATION C • FOR • • BUILDING PERMIT • - .�._ . { ESTIMATED VALUE a -e, COMPLETED WORKS Z5 e 2 : PERMIT FEE S .-� "73 ' •PLA CHECK FEE $ • ' • LATE PERMIT FEE i • , � 41?) t TOTAL FEE S , ' - ._ _.... 1 TYPE OF { CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP DATE ISSUED i FIRE ZONE USE • ZONE } EXPIRATION DATE FIRE SPRINKLERS REQUIRED MAX. OCC. LOAD • ill Yes ❑No TION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET 3LGCK fir*! - . _ - - • - Naa t - /i4 SCRIP'TION OF WORK: • .?s' +w....• ;an • ;i1.ts,i..nr ei.r ■•.∎2.1 wl ..0∎K•14•e ' 1 is¢ r..+:.� -- .(^ �:r..: •. •- ta.:.: ___,_____J__ • ■∎• ■..•■.:4'.n..+.^i ' i ;:+w •: :•._J___. -, CITY tti i 6[111.21116 DEPART, Si 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 93067 Phone: (206) 242 -2177 SUBDIVISION c% r'^. L l -(e /;� • 1 ; (Lk Va gL) 1 THIS PERMIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PURL/C RIGHT -OF -WA OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. - SEPARA PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. 1 APPLICArrr • • _L'"->" -7Y 75" • • • • • • • • 7' prior. se pill Vel '7 031v py; eviW • • • (d ` 14 1 .' , 1 J 1e } 1 • • 1 4,,1ry7d boyd sign company koll distribution center ■ Lt.'• tJ • bbit • GOZ •'uM' °f3coS is zVA pa,£ SOS ?imo mars GADS . 1I .2CUO . _:_..._ ... .0 7__'fitC1 r. • --1 :7 041 C)&11 l A ..X . _ ' �.F' -7CV 1 T1_ I . __._.. ` 1 1 'QM 15-Z o f x i • �� ( .•• 1M013C) a3CK; -2 3)13 .i0 c]N1gN3.1.- • oix /• `r _N •\I1`311\. ` - - . . C11:1G.aG1 - • - • . N :3QG - �NO .4 • \ 1 i II I ITTIE1 t ' • .= • 11-15-Au UOVIT 2 FUR If 11-U-A(XE SLiThCMT PY 3 yYi,4:,j�li'c`o-� +i � ,,;i'i4lJr:• �. - 'zy p,bdzyMA%i PLkZA 5(64 ?k Ro'M a:Ww.0 ,1,1'A cb x — - t: 41' '4 A I I E1FL"(trJGeJ- coNPUrr it PLAN .. $HOW INIS LOCATION or.' I I q O ..:,CONDUIT: Is 1 . L • G- XTcNC2 (DNPUIT I AEOVE 'Tar aF~coNG• • IG l=0 --SETS of �8 8' MATH ALTS - - -` 1/ 1I K 4 11 Xal ( It. E hVvEN SIGIN - -NP GONG. CASE. • • 5 ..ME to . GVJ - - rE ?oii /EL n' 1 GEWAL-K OC EIL LE 9E ....1011411) 1 • D ELEVATION - -- I ll = I L o l1 'os 3 (4: • ,CORNEA _. SECTION, ` ciel 3 1 1 0 it • 0 m.o..1 2 3 4 5 6 7 az oz cz zz iz oe St 91 a vt c • et zt a O � n w I dlul�uuu uU(ultu(IuuuullUllll4IAu glflgllpulllUUlUluu(11II 1onilll4;111l . '1 35 45 1 1 I THE J 21 ) • f • 'SOOT, •TN AVENUE SOUTH.. • • II II AGH. ►5aLTs 11 G PG(,� cos. W.Gl6e-- • +h4 art @.i2L D,G. E.w. . 4 ... 1 e® e 6a t\ "E '_ r;W. 2 1* y@ 12 o•c. in SECTION Le . 1 °= I!� WASHINGTON •S.,O• IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO : ;;:, THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT 2. tr 11- 23 -AUC JACK A. BENAROYA ('OMPAN.Y GENERAL CONTRACTORS ... DIVILOPER■ OF INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL EUILDING• FOR SALE OR LEASE I IO.1: 7.1 -47UO t�4 ✓BLE =P GCP s i6tN `/ I 4*G I{ LICIHT>~? LEI I SRS. sIG �-H 2 r i- RAWINGIS 'Hf4LL EE suFM ) tE To is TuKwIA � 4 11 Go`lS7fzUG 1 AN �r�GTI o�``' OF SIC.aN, SIc�N cGt7E NFc?Iv1A,TION AfzEp G1= PAt� ALL; r3L1L�IN� ! F .. = wsrF o G1��N AL!2we - '1 7s,-� 'ACT - UAL 51 (1M.aGh -F i C CQ GK - tG ,• DATE