HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 75-26-UI - INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER - INTERPRETATION OF USE APPEALMF 75-26-UI
13123 48TH AVENUE SOUTH
INTERNATIONAL HARVEST APPEAL
INTERPRETATION OF USE APPEAL
JOHN YEMEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN 0. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
MATTHEW T. BOYLE
FORD Q. ELVIDGE, C.B.[.
OF COUNSEL
Planning Department
City of Tukwila
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Re:
Dear Gary:
RJT:ms
Enclosures
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN' & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE & COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
March 8, 1977
Attention: Gary Crutchfield
Tukwila Signs /International Harvester
Your very truly, •
oe 0.1-
RIC RD J. HO "E
823.2389
AREA CODE 206
Enclosed you will find a copy of the legal description
of. International Harvester's property, together with sketch
which will show the property in question.
That portion of Stephen Foster Donation Claim No. 38, and of
the C. C. Lewis Donation Claim No. 37, in Sections 10, 11, 14 and
15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County,
Washington, more particularly described as follows: Commencing
at a point which bears north 40 °01'05" west a distance of
920.15 feet from a monument at the P.I. of a curve on the center
line of the Duwamish Renton Junction Road; said P.I. being ap-
proximately 1000 feet east 20 feet south of quarter corner be-
tween Sections 14 and 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.,
in King County, Washington; thence north 49 °24' west on a line
150.00 feet distant from and parallel with the center line of
the said Duwamish Renton Junction Road, a distance of 835.00
feet to a point which bears north 81 °44'15" east a distance of
199.17 feet from the monument at the end of a curve on the
center line of the said Duwamish Renton Junction Road, said
end of a curve being approximately'1200 feet north and 440 feet
west of quarter corner between said Sections 14 and 15; thence
north 49 °24' west a distance of 16.00 feet; thence north 40 °36'
east a distance of 682.10 feet; thence north 40 °•24' (49 °24' ?)
west a distance of 310.21 feet to the true point of beginning of
this description; thence south 40 °36' west a distance of 552.10
feet; thence north 49 °24' west 52.08 feet; thence south 40 °36' west
150 feet to the_ northeaster) margin of the right
Puget Sound Electric, Railway; thence north 49.2 „...
_weat_A ..uxiq,, said
m . of the right-o !
f -w a istance of_ 30 00 feet; thece north
40°25' (40 °36' ?)east a distance of 150 feet; t n
hence north
west 172.00 feet; thence north '0 °36' east 552.10 feet; thence
south 49 °24' east 254.08 feet to the true point of beginning;
TOGETHER WITH that portion of Steven Foster and C.C.Lewis Donation
Claims in Sections 14 and 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.,
in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a point which bears north 40 °1'5” west a distance of
920.15 feet from a monument 'Hub' at the P.I. of a curve on the
center line of the Duwamish Renton Junction Road, now paved, said
P.I., being approximately 1,000 feet east and 20 feet south of
quarter corner between Sections 14 and 15, Township 23 North,
Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; thence north
49 °24' west on a line 150.00 feet distant from and parallel with
the center line of the said Duwami.'sh Renton Junction Road, a distance
of 835.00 feet to a point which bears north.81 °44'15" east a dis-
tance of 199.17 feet from a monument 'Hub' at the end of a curve
on the centerline of said Duwamish Renton Junction Road, said end
of a curve being approximately 1,200 feet north and 445 feet west
of quarter corner between sections 14 and 15; thence south 40 °36' west
a distance of 20.00 feet to northeasterly margin of Puget Sound
Electric Railway Right -of -Way; thence north 49 °24' west along
said margin of said Right -of -Way a. distance of .16..00 feet to the
true point of beginning;. thence north 49 °24' west along said margin
of said Right -of -Way a distance of 310.21 feet; thence north
40 °36' east a distance of 450 feet; thence south 49 °24' east a
distance of 310.21 feet; thence south 49 °36' (40 °36' Actual ?) west
a distance of 450 feet. to point of beginning;
EXCEPT that portion of the above described property lying south-
westerly of a line parallel with and 150 feet northeasterly of the
northeasterly line of City Light Right -of -Way adjacent to south-
westerly boundary of said property;
EXCEPT that portion conveyed to City of Tukwila for road by Deed
recorded under Auditor's File No. 6707994.
1,e. ,,�.- ..2,,.d.-,a - u.. iwkx44wha.- Aug..
•t
31
21
3
3
d
1
n
3
1
4
t
NIIOUND1.1,27 PIT▪ C
0
0
SCT .t1 ►tem
N40'36 E f ▪ SO.CO
0
0
N
r -
N
1
.O'
_ z _
J W
Ci
u4'
w 4
ral
SO' -
h.40'S6 c { S0o
CT J1: s.,E
2.00.00 -
r
.74
N
Ilia
to
SET 1/2 .'oC
N •:O" 96 E:v •
C• GINK C<NGC ON P
SITE AREA
131,111 SQ.FT.
-•SCT t,a •.PC
NoTc: !Tl•P .E E_CO
-y£T .1 a cE SET .1 - p[
1:
SET PK. `. f
.. =E =a n...-
.a TH f•.'EN JE S.
LAK) SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
TNIS tau CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE EY ME OR UNDER MY
ORECTION IN ccNFCRMIJ a •ITN THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SURVEY
REG'JtOtNO ACT AT TILE REQUEST OR ` v1N ^-SP1 .1922..
CERTtF•CATE 140.
RECORDER'S CERTiFI &T[
FLED FOR RECORD Ties SGT D/ 1! AT _ IN
=ON 0, S„RVETS. P.(,t _ AT Int REQUEST OF
7409230426
N4 310 E
o
UW
ta
ga
Nos
e
N
P
Z
1
•.5ET
.. S -,.f.
a1LY$I0N3.
Wet Rm.Noees
• ..S
2
.- y- .
.: `••!
•:E •.. C
/.1 p.....4.1.
J\
1'1 . r •• . ,
_
HAP SONQ COLLIER b w.AOE LWV1'.4.ST
. •
ASSOCIATES.0X
Ct.r5:.it••C, 4rKMLRA
Ztt/e/et(,Sw
--'
ufe
-.--
tiaER•D•MN f la C.
RGCC LAD DC.0 D
:.•.•e• Y C
-.1 .4: e• b
..
T... .
•••••:•1• 6-.....t.
k
•
POST 1CT IN
1
152.40 SET to." v
LESAL DESCP!P : !ON
That ;onion of Ste: -.^.en Foster Doratf:n Clef- So. 33. and :•
Donate:n C1.1T flo. 37. to Sections I:.:1. 14 atId 15. :•
Cast. i:." In Kine :e.nt: .asnin; :n. - -;rtt:c:er1
Cu:Tencing at a :hint nhitr _ears•:rte•. 31'3:' :ct e
feet fres a acnu-ent at tie !'.1. of a Carve on me : •:e-
Renton •'unctt;n Sold: said '.1. being l::roatr•te:• :30: •:
Cf quarter corner be:..ecn sections 14 an: 15. ':.r.:'t:
M.Y., In tzir9 Cc.nt,-•.::asntn; .:n; t-:en:e c;r::::, ..
distant fry and ;arallel .stn :he tenter lire c` :-e sat:
fico Read, a distance of E3S.53 'stet to a ;etc: -.•rtm :
a distance of 139.17 'stet frc^ the : e^.: It the stn:
line cf tre said D:.anish Penton :gin:tier.:•ad. sato c^
iratel•: 1:30 feet norm and 4:3 feet t+e;t of ::.'rte- r
14 std 15; tnerce n:rth 43.24' :.est a distance of 15.33 •t•
east a distance of CO2.10 feat; Monte r:rtt
310,21 feet t: the ;rue -otnt e' •••'^rt•; c' "'s : :rt•
40'36' rest \ distance cf 552.:0 :t: :recce •;rt-
thence south 40'35' est 150 feet :o t -e ntrentat:c•'' -r-
ef the Puget Sound Electric F.31:..a;: t',VCe n: :;'::• -
of the right -o' -.ay a cistlnce o' 13.53 'tett tr:e:t- •-r:-
• distance o• 150 feet; :nerce norm. 4.7•3:' .est 17:.00 '.•
east 557.13 feet; thence sr,v. 45':4' ca:::54.33 •stet to -
beginntng;
TO:ETHE° J:TN :oat :ortlon of Steven F::ter and C.C. lc.it
Sccticns 1; :no 15. Tovr.si;i: 33 5:rtn. :3";:
:ashin9t:n, r:re ;articularly ee:irtccd as.f:I I: t
Co. -mooing ata ;:int 1tfcl bears •:rtl 43'1.5' .et: . at
from a :in -Kent ,1,41:* at :-e ° f a :.r.e : .e :.••t•
Renton ::c::i:n read, tit.:a.el. said I.:- :e'•• . .
and 20, gfee: s>: :t
Nortear;e 4 East. .M. in '.Y- r•.et,• .a:•. : : .
en a line 150.53 fret•Cl2t3:tt fr: 'J :tn11:! :-•'•r .
said Walvis, cent:- ::tl:n Rt54. • :, t :e :• :': :
bears north 01'44'15' test 4 45tta-:e cf 1);.13 •et: •r .
the end of a ::r,. on ^e centerline ;• said::•a':i" •1••
said end 1.1.1 :a'n; r.:•:,tr.:l'! 1.::: 'sit ' :t •
r •eersfa::e:.cc' t.: 14 , :S:., :r t..
distance e' 23.33 f:et t: n:rt•.r.te•:, •I:;t• t' •• et ...
D.1 r,t•df- a, 3 t•cn•e nortn 43':1' :it •I: tai. •••;•• r
+ distance :f 3.03 "est t: :'t t'•: __.•_ :x• ...... . '
✓ est 'lend :414 Kar;i. of tato ;t'•:•3••.i
tart? 43'-4' left a dls:a':e e' 4L: '3e:• %.°1•:11
1: . 1•
e' e0d 2:1 stfne+i ::; f tt:ecr;:re ^sIif; . 43•:4' •43':4• 44:.11:, .441
EtlPI .{t ::r:l:1 e' tie :clt•aet V1.•1a Len'
•
7tr..:1ra111i .:Ut 1 a 1:1 t,.1 •••: u::•,1, 1' ¥l'u<t
lt;•: 51;Tt•c'••a a4:au•: t. is.t •{u 4•:, rt. `,1✓.
/l:: •T t`Il :Y t7 at c:r.• +1 54 :Icy at t...t•• 4' Keel 1
41:7141.
!if
R E:CD&:II
•.Ee•••• :••••a ..\F.Sit•14 lot
•34
8 June 1976
GC /cw
Edgar D. Bauch, Mayor
CITY or TUKWILA
Gary Crutch, field
Assistant Planner
cc: Bldg Off
Chmn, Bd of Adj
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD,
TUKWI LA, WASHINGTON 98067
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Richard J. Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
3rd Avenue & Columbia Street
Seattle, Washington 98104
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
The Tukwila Board of Adjustment, at its regular meeting conducted 3 June 1976,
reconsidered your appeal of the administrative interpretation of the word
"front" as used in .the Tukwila Sign Code. The reconsideration was conducted
pursuant to the judicial ruling in King County Superior Court Cause No. 807 802.
Based on the information that the thirty -foot wide access strip extending
easterly from Interurban Avenue to the International - Harvester building was,
in fact, not . an easement but property owned fee simple by the owner from whom
International- Harvester leases the property, the Board found such strip to .
constitute a yard which fronts on Interurban Avenue and the associated building
face therefore maintained the right to identification in conformance with Title
19, Sign Code, of the Tukwila Municipal Code.
The original application will be approved and a permit issued upon remittance .
of the appropriate permit fee.
Should you have any questions, please contact.me at 242 -2177.
Sincerel
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
STAFF REPORT
3 June 1976 8:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM IV A : APPEAL of Staff Interpretation (International- Harvester)
REQUEST: *Appeal of Staff Interpretation of Section 19.32.140
APPLICANT: International- Harvester
LOCATION: 13123 - 48th Avenue South
ZONING: M -1 (Light Industry)
*This review is a reconsideration as ordered by King County Superior Court
Cause No. 807 802.
FINDINGS:
1. International - Harvester has constructed a facility approximately 250
feet east of Interurban Avenue.
2. The property is accessible from and abuts 48th Avenue South and is
accessible from but does not abut Interurban Avenue via an easement
30 feet wide and 240 feet long.
3. Section 19.32.140 states in part "...(A) Signs on Faces of Buildings.
One sign is permitted for each street upon which the property fronts."
4. Staff interpreted the word "front" to essentially mean abut and, based
on that interpretation, denied International- Harvester a permit to
erect a sign on the west face of its building.
5. International- Harvester appealed the Staff's interpretation to the
Board of Adjustment in December 1975. The Board sustained the Staff
interpretation and International- Harvester appealed the Board's deci-
sion to King County Superior Court.
6. The court ruled that the Board reconsider the appeal and that the term
"fronts ", as used in the Sign Code, does not mean "abuts ".
7. The west face of the building is partially visible from Interurban
Avenue.
Board of Adjustment
Staff Report •
Page 2
3 June 1976
8. The south face of the building is totally visible from 48th Avenue
South.
9. The display of trucks is located between the south face of the building
and 48th Avenue South.
10. Section 18.06.770 defines yard as "...an unoccupied space open to the .
sky, on the same lot with a building or structure."
11. The yard associated with the west building face is separated and occu-
pied by the Texaco, Tuk -Inn and Union properties.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Since an access easement could be 10 feet long or 1000 feet long, mere
access to a street cannot alone constitute fronting on such street.
2. The right to erect a wall sign on a building face must be restricted
to those building faces whose associated yard fronts on a street.
3. Since the yard associated with the west building,face of 'International -
Harvester is separated and occupied by the Texaco, Tuk -Inn and Union
properties, the International- Harvester yard does not fronton Inter-
urban Avenue.
Based on the Findings and Conclusions stated in the Staff Report, Staff recom-
mends the Board find that the yard associated with the west building face does .
not front on Interurban Avenue and therefore does not meet the criteria set
forth in Section 19.32.140 (A).
•
•
•
•
•
• . t
L1
J
. • 4_
i
N
•
•
(4
i G.
t. V3.7: PLd•:/ : -'i: ::..0
fill 'I' l..:.31 p i:
r
LArt s:...e..1);1.4 3
-r - '-
T Tia3.A .-
w' • ®m r . •
• •
EXHIBIT "A'
AGENDA ITEM IV A
APPEAL - International- Harvester
0
T
•
J
•
2949 N.
•
:TC. TO BE MIDNIGHT
IRONZE
•
gwIMINOM
THIS DOOR TO
HAVE ELECT.
OPERATOR -
..-•
.• •
14
• •••.1■• /■•• •
•
MAROA AVE., FRESNO CALIFORN IA
.. •
I
• c•i
.1•■•••In• I.
•
••••••••
•
• • •to.
•
dijirligi qii lit 01 libit111
r
11 L 1 1 .il • • 3I a,_. ./ :......,:i7.1 .r..._1:::i:-
11..i• ? 3 1
' • .... .... 11.**°'. .... ,----
r-C: . -.: • •
Ss •tr.Z ff.
B").(8"X18" CONC.
• -BLOCK W/ SKIM COAT
•OF PLASTER ) .
11{ tri,1 1111 rzz
it. . tUi
"STRAN" - FINISHED "SA"
FASCIA SHEETS MIDNIGHT BRONZE -
SHEETS a CORNER/SIDE TRIM ONLY
FOR 4-CORNERS - ALL OTHER FLASHINGS,
—S•TRUCTURAL, ETC. - BY OTHERS
• -
`gU7CDCDIED ®GIOWE @Ciff:UlTGUDJOIr_ 000u KnO0
24 7-••••,-
1 •
"tt.:•••••-•-- t
'• -•••
•
'fiF
r r
A
.4
t E r
••
SCALE: 1/16"
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
WINDOWS W/ F8'.' HIGH
GLASS - WELD . PANELS
BELOW
SOLAR BRONZE GLASS
•. • .
• . • .
• . •
3 Wo
- 0"
. . .
•,•...t
• ' • •
••
MEMORANDUM
CITY of TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TO: All Members, Boa of Adjustment
FROM: Gary Crutchfield sistant Planner
SUBJECT:
COURT RULING - International- Harvester Appeal
Please read the attached letter from Mr. Larry Hard, City Attorney, which
describes the court's action and the effect on the Board of Adjustment. I
have underlined those portions of Mr. Hard's explanation which I feel are
pertinent for the Board's information.
Also please review the enclosed legal brief which explains the background
of the case to the newly- appointed members and which explains the city's
position in defense of the Board's ruling.
As noted in Mr. Hard's letter, the court ordered the Board to conduct a
reconsideration. That reconsideration has been scheduled for the Board's
regular meeting of 3 June 1976. You will receive your Staff Reports for
that meeting at the usual time.
GC /cw
DATE: 21 May 1976
F. A. LcSOURD
WOOLVIN PATTEN
DONALD D FLEMING
GEORGE M. HARTUNG,JR.
LEON C. MISTEREK
DWAYNE E. CO.'PLE
THOMAS O. McLAUGHLIN
PETER LcSOURD
JOHN F.COLGROVE
C. DEAN LITTLE
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 624 -1040
May 6, 1976
Mrs. Anne Altmayer
Chairman, Board of Adjustment
City of Tukwila
14475 - 59th Avenue South
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Re: International Harvester Company v. City of Tukwila
King •County 'Cause No; 807' 802 • • •
LAWRENCE E. HARD
RODNEY J.WALDBAUM
RICHARD P. MATTHEWS
WARREN T. CHAPMAN
D. WILLIAM TOONE.JR.
ROBERT L. PALMER
COUNSEL
STEPHEN F. CHADWICK
1894 -1973
Dear Mrs. Altmayer:
On April 27 and April 28, 1976,'a trial was held before
the Honorable Norman Ackley, Judge of the King County Superior
Courtin the above-captioned matter. As you are aware, Inter -.
national Harvester had appealed to the Superior Court from the
decision of the Board of Adjustment denying International
Harvester the right to place 'a sign on the side of its build-
ing which ran parallel to Interurban Avenue.
•
As you will see' from our trial brief, a copy of which is
..enclosed, the 'City took the 'position that.Section 19.32.140(A) •
allowed a sign on each' face of a building.whose associated
yard abutted a public right -of -way. In this instance, that
would have 'allowed only a sign on the. side Of the building
which 'faced 48th Avenue South.. International Harvester took
the position that they were also entitled to a sign on the..-
side which' faced Interurban Avenue 'and that there was no .
requirement for having abutting property. •
The court ruled that the entire matter should be resub-
mitted before the Board of Adjustment for further deliberations.
In making its ruling, the 'court specifically stated that it did
not reverse the 'decision of the Board of Adjustment. Rather,
the court indicated that it interpreted the provisions of Sec-
tion 19.32.140(A) to mean that "fronts" does not mean "abuts ".
The court pointed out that other provisions in the Tukwila sign
code do use the word "abuts" and, therefore, there must be a
Mrs. Anne Altmayer
May 6, 1976
Page Two
difference between the words "fronts" and "abuts" as set forth
in the ordinance. The court noted that a building can front
in more than one direction, and that it would not be a reason-
able interpretation of that ordinance to say that the Union 76,
the Texico and the Tuk -Inn operations did not "front" on Inter-
urban Avenue, because they do not actually "abut" the public
right -of -way.
The court felt that the Board of Adjustment did not use
the right criteria in deciding whether the International
Harvester building might also front on Interurban Avenue as
well as on 48th South. The court ruled that the Board
of Adjudgment should reconsider this matter, and look care-
fully at whether the facts indicate that the International
Harverster Company building is so situated with the placement
of windows, doors and other items so that it could be found
to also "front" on Interurban Avenue.
The court clearly indicated that the Board of Adjustment
might find that the building does not front on Interurban
Avenue and that it only fronts on 48th Avenue South. This
is a matter of fact which' is to be determined by the Board
of Adjustment.. The' court felt that International Harvester
should be allowed to present evidence for the Board of
Adjustment to substantiate its •osition that the.buildin•
fronts on Interurban Avenue, but that it is within the dis-
cretion of the.Board to decide that the preponderance of the
evidence 'shows that the building was intended to, and in
fact does,' only front on 48th 'Avenue South.
The 'decision was very unsatisfactory from the City's point
of view and I suspect, from the point of view of International
Harvester Company. We were not given any guidelines to assist
us in interpreting the statute in the future, including such •
fundamental questions as whether or not it is necessary to have
an easement or some access to a public right of way to consti-
tute fronting and other similar matters. It is some consola-
tion to us that the court did state that it felt the ordinance
was constitutional and that the language of this particular
part of the ordinance was reasonable and the proper exercise
of the City's police power.
In view of the nature of this action, and the costs asso-
ciated in appealing this decision, we have elected not to
pursue this matter any further. There may be an action filed
in the future which will warrant appealing such a decision.
Mrs. Anne Altura r
May 6, 1976
Page Three
If you have any questions about this matter, please do
not hesitate to call or write.
LEH:pa -
cc: Mayor Edgar D. Bauch
Kjell Stoknes, Planning Director
Very truly yours,
LeSOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING
& HARTUNG
Lawrence E. Hard
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER )
COMPANY, )
Plaintiff, ) No. 807 802
vs. )
CITY OF TUKWILA, ) DEFENDANT'S TRIAL BRIEF
Defendant. )
COMES NOW CITY OF TUKWILA, defendant herein, by and
through its attorneys, LeSOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG, and
respectfully submits this trial brief.
I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Plaintiff, INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY (hereinafter
referred to as "International ") owns and operates a large
commercial vehicle sales room and maintenance facility in the city
of Tukwila. It is located at 13123 - 48th Avenue South, and is
approximately 250 feet from the intersection of 48th Avenue South
and Interurban Avenue.
The property on which the building is located abuts on
48th Avenue South and is separated from Interurban Avenue by the
property of three other businesses, being Union 76 and Texaco
service stations and the Tuk -Inn Restaurant. Furthermore, the
property is separated from Interurban Avenue by a utility easement
for transmission lines.
The building on plaintiff's property faces 48th Avenue
South, has landscaping along that street and there are International
Harvester vehicles displayed for sales purposes in the parking area
between the building and 48th Avenue South.
Plaintiff does have an access easement from its property
Defendant's Trial Brief - 1.
FOR KING COUNTY
D ECEIVE
Ili APR 2 71976
CRY OF TUKWILA
LeSOURO, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 88101
824 -1040
i
to Interurban Avenue between the Tuk -Inn and the Union 76 service
station.
Plaintiff claims that Section 19.32.140 of the Tukwila
Municipal Code (hereinafter referred to as "TMC "), which permits
one sign "for each street upon which the property fronts ", allows a
sign not only for 48th Avenue South, but also for Interurban Avenue.
The City of Tukwila does not agree with that interpretation
of the Code.
II. FACTS
Prior to August 1, 1975, plaintiff filed an application
for a sign permit. The Planning Department of the City of Tukwila
denied the permit on the grounds that the property did not "front"
on Interurban Avenue. On November 20, 1975, the City of Tukwila
Planning Commission held a hearing at which International Harvester
was represented by counsel and denied the request for the sign
permit. On November 21, 1975, plaintiff appealed from the decision
of the Planning Commission. On December 4, 1975, the Board of
Adjustment of the City of Tukwila held a public hearing to hear the
appeal of plaintiff. Plaintiff was represented by counsel at that
meeting. On December 8, 1975, the Board of Adjustment sent written
notice to plaintiff that "the Board voted unanimously to sustain the
administrative interpretation of Section 19.32.140(A) to mean 'one
sign is permitted for each face of the building whose associated
yard abuts a public right of way.' Thus identification of the
International Harvester building is limited to that face whose
associated yard abuts 48th Avenue South." On December 15, 1975,
plaintiff appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment to the
City Council of the City of Tukwila. On January 5, 1976, at a
regular meeting of the Tukwila City Council, the appeal of
International Harvester was heard by the City Council. Plaintiff
was advised that its proper remedy was not an appeal to the City
Council, but rather it should have appealed directly to the Superior
Defendant's Trial Brief - 2.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
624 -1040
Court from the decision of the Board of Adjustment. TMC 19.12.060
provides, in part:
The decision of the board of adjustment shall be final
and conclusive unless the original applicant or an
adverse party makes application to the superior court
of King County for a writ of certiorari, a writ of
prohibition, or a writ of mandamus within thirty days
of the final decision by the board of adjustment.
On February 4, 1976, the plaintiff commenced this action
by filing an application for writ of certiorari and writ of mandamus
and by obtaining an order to show cause why the writ of certiorari
should not be granted. On February 26, 1976, the plaintiff obtained
an order requiring the City of Tukwila to prepare and certify a full
transcript of the records and proceedings of the City's action in
denying the plaintiff's application for a sign permit.
III: ISSUES
There are two questions before this Court:
A. Is plaintiff entitled to the extraordinary
relief of a writ of certiorari and writ of mandamus?
B. Is Interurban Avenue a "street upon which
[plaintiff's] property fronts" within the meaning of
Section 19.32.140(A) of the Tukwila Municipal Code, even
though the front of plaintiff's building does not face
Interurban Avenue and plaintiff's property is not
contiguous to it?
A. Plaintiff is not entitled to the extraordinary
relief of either a writ of certiorari or writ
of mandamus
The grounds for granting a writ of certiorari are set
forth in RCW 7.16.040:
A writ of review shall be granted by any court,
except a police or justice court, when an inferior
tribunal, board or officer, exercising judicial
functions, has exceeded the jurisdiction of such
tribunal, board or officer, or one acting illegally,
or to correct any erroneous or void proceeding, or
a proceeding not according to the course of the
Defendant's Trial Brief - 3.
IV. DISCUSSION
LESOURD. PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
624 -1040
common law, and there is no appeal, nor in the judgment
of the court, any plain, speedy and adequate remedy at
law.
None of the grounds for granting a writ of certiorari are
present here. The City of Tukwila Board of Adjustment at all times
acted within its jurisdiction and pursuant to its rules of
procedure as set forth in the Tukwila Municipal Code. In addition,
the plaintiff has not exhausted its administrative remedies. It has
the power to seek a variance from the provisions of the Tukwila
Municipal Code by following the procedures set forth in Section
19.12.080. A writ of certiorari will not lie, if there is a right
of appeal or other adequate remedy available to the plaintiff.
Sutter v. Sutter, 51 Wn.2d 354, 318 P.2d 324 (1957). There is no
right to a writ of certiorari when the administrative body acts
within its jurisdiction. Wilsey v. Cornwall, 40 Wash. 250, 82 Pac.
303 (1905).
The grounds for granting a writ of mandamus are set forth
in RCW 7.16.160:
It may be issued by any court, except justice's
or a police court, to any inferior tribunal, corpora-
tion, board or person, to compel the performance of an
act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting
from an office, trust or station, or to compel the
admission of a party to the use and enjoyment of a right
or office to which he is entitled, and from which he is
unlawfully precluded by such inferior tribunal, corporation,
board or person.
The Board of Adjustment of the City of Tukwila has not
taken any action which gives the plaintiff grounds for obtaining a
writ of mandamus. The actions taken by the Board of Adjustment of
the City of Tukwila were not mere ministerial acts, but rather
proper exercise of their discretionary powers pursuant to the
provisions of the Tukwila Municipal Code. The discretionary power
of administrative officers may not be controlled by writ of
mandamus. State ex rel, Pacific Bridge Company v. Washington Toll
Bridge Authority, 8 Wn.2d 337, 112 P.2d 135 (1941); Adams v. City
of Seattle, 31 Wn.2d 147, 195 P.2d 634 (1948).
Defendant's Trial Brief - 4.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING d HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
824 -1040
B. The provisions of Tukwila Municipal Code Section
19.32.140(A) prohibit the placement of a sign on
plaintiff's building facing Interurban Avenue.
One of the purposes of the Tukwila sign code is set forth
in TMC 19.04.020(1):
(1) To establish standards and guidelines for
the design, erection and installation of signs and
visual communication devices so that the streets of
Tukwila may appear orderly, and safety may be
increased by reduction of clutter and distraction;
The strictness of the code when read as a whole indicates
the importance the City Council places on this purposes. For example,
Section 19.32.050 sharply restricts the use of exposed neon tubing
and Section 19.28.010 flatly prohibits the use, inter alia, of
"All animated signs; "'. . . "Billboards;" . . . "Strings of pennants,
banners or streamers, festoons of lights, clusters of flags, wind
animated objects, balloons, and similar devices of a carnival nature
• ." Insofar as the language of Section 19.32.140 is concerned,
the dictionary provides two definitions which may be used to inter-
pret those provisions. Both definitions are consistent with the
remaining language of Section 19.32.140 and the purpose evident from
Section 19.04.020(1) and the remainder of the code. Neither
definition supports the position of the plaintiff in this case.
One definition of "front" is "to have or turn the face (in
a named direction); to face; as, the house fronts toward the east ".
Webster's New International Dictionary, at 1012 (2d ed. 1961). The
plaintiff apparently relies on this definition because, in focusing
on direction, it does not require contiguity. The direction this
definition refers to, however, is the direction the front of the
building faces. Since most buildings are generally considered to
have only one front, this definition is inconsistent with the whole
of Tukwila Municipal Code Section 19.32.140, which contemplates the
possibility of fronting upon more than one street. The code section
in question permits one sign "for each street upon which the property
fronts ", and the following sentence refers to "signs on each building
Defendant's Trial Brief - 5.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
824.1040
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
32
face ". Even if this interpretation were correct, it would not help
the plaintiff in this action, since the front of its building faces
in the direction of 48th Avenue South, not Interurban Avenue. The
only logical interpretation of the Tukwila sign code includes the
element of contiguity. A second definition of "front" is "land which
faces or abuts on a piece of water, a river, a road, etc.; frontage ",
and a definition of "frontage" is "extent of front, as of land along
a stream or a road ". Webster's New International Dictionary, at 1012
(2d ed. 1961). In the context of statutes, ordinances and charters
dealing with real property, courts have construed "front" and
"fronting" to require contiguity (e.g., Flynn v. Chiappari, 191 Cal.
139, 215 Pac. 682, 686 (1923) (assessment for improvements to street
against property "fronting" thereon); Carr v. Kingsbury, 111 Cal. Ap.
165, 295 Pac. 586, 588 (D.C. App. 1931) (prohibition against granting
prospecting permits on tidelands "fronting on incorporated city ");
Erisman v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, 61 N.J.L. 516, 45 A. 998,
999 (Sup. Ct. 1900) (assessment for improvements to road against
property "fronting or bordering" thereon; the two words synonymous);
see, also, 37 C.J.S. 1386 (1943), supp. (1975), and cases cited
therein). Only this interpretation would make the Tukwila ordinance
workable in a way which would carry out its purpose. If the ordinan
does not require contiguity, the "street upon which the property
fronts" necessarily must be the first street in the direction in
which the front of the building thereon faces no matter how distant.
In this case, for example, assuming that the front of the Interna-
tional Harvester building faced Interurban Avenue, rather than 48th
Avenue South, an interpretation not requiring contiguity would allow
a view from Interurban Avenue not only of the commercial signs for
the Texaco and Union 76 service stations and the Tuk -Inn Restaurant,
which are contiguous to Interurban Avenue, but the International
Harvester building and any other building even further removed from
Interurban Avenue whose front faced it. This is precisely the
Defendant's Trial Brief - 6.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING a HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
624 -1040
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
32
kind of "clutter and distraction" of commercial signs which the
Tukwila sign code was designed to prevent.
There is no logical standard besides the requirement of
contiguity to avoid this result. The plaintiff appears to propose
a requirement of an access easement to the street upon which the
building is said to front. This standard, however, has no
connection with the purpose of the sign code. Signs on buildings
behind other buildings contiguous to a street contribute equally
to the disorderly appearance of the street and the "clutter and
distraction" arising from an excess of commercial signs, whether
or not there are access easements to the street. The plaintiff also
appears to propose the requirement of visibility of the building
from the street on which it is said to front. This standard is no
standard at all. Businesses are unlikely to go to the expense of
erecting signs not visible from the street they face.
Plaintiff argues that there is some significance in the
City Council's use of the word "fronts ", rather than "abuts ". As
described above, one definition of "front" is "abut ". There is no
rule of statutory construction, and plaintiff cites none, prohibiting
a legislative body from the use of synonyms.
Plaintiff also appears to argue that the Union 76 and
Texaco service stations and the Tuk -Inn Restaurant are not wholly
contiguous to Interurban Avenue because of the transmission line
right of way between their buildings and Interurban Avenue.
Plaintiff makes the argument that if those businesses are allowed
signs for Interurban Avenue, the International Harvester building
should also be allowed a sign. The existence of a utility easement
is irrelevant. Property either is or is not contiguous to a street,
regardless of easements upon it.
Plaintiff relies primarily on Zbinden v. City of Seattle,
74 Wash. 1, 132 Pac. 637 (1913). That case held that a city charter
provision prohibiting the granting of any saloon license:
Defendant's Trial Brief - 7.
LESOURO, PATTEN. FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 0 8101
624 -1040
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
32
"which shall make the number of licensed places situated
on the same block of land and fronting on the same street
exceed two (including herein basements as well as other
premises" [74 Wash. 1, at 2]
prohibited the granting of a license for a saloon located in the rear
of a hotel lobby 80 feet from the hotel's street entrance where the
saloon entrance was visible from the hotel entrance from the street.
The primary purpose of the Seattle City Charter provision was to
regulate public morals by limiting the concentration of saloons and
only incidentally, if at all, to improve the City's appearance.
This is evident from the applicability of the provision to "basements
as well as other premises ". The language in the Zbinden opinion,
referring to the visibility of the saloon from the street, was
required by the use of the word "fronting ".
It is to be expected that the interpretation of the word
in this provision may be different from the interpretation of the
same word in the Tukwila sign code because of the differing purposes
of the two provisions. In Zbinden, supra, interpreting 'fronting"
loosely accomplied the purpose of limiting the concentration of
saloons. In Section 19.32.140 of the Tukwila Municipal Code,
interpreting "fronts" restrictively will accomplish the purpose of
enhancing the orderly appearance of Tukwila streets and reducing
the clutter and distraction of an excess of commercial signs.
Furthermore, the court in Zbinden, supra, appeared to recognize
that its interpretation went beyond the literal meaning of
"fronting ". It observed that granting the saloon permit "would be
in violation of the spirit of the charter provision ". Zbinden v.
Seattle, 74 Wash. 1, 3, 132 Pac. 637 (1913) (emphasis added).
Plaintiff also argues that the supposed safety hazard
caused by motorists unable to recognize the International Harvester
building without a sign facing Interurban Avenue would defeat the
purpose of the Tukwila sign code. Even assuming that such a hazard
would exist, it is not the kind of hazard that the Tukwila sign code
Defendant's Trial Brief - 8.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
624.1040
was designed to prevent. Section 19.04.020(1) refers to the safety
hazard caused by the "clutter and distraction" of too many signs,
not too few.
The staff of the Tukwila Board of Adjustment has taken the
following position with respect to the question before this Court:
The staff interpretation of Section 19.32.140(A) is
as follows:
One sign is permitted for each face of
the building whose associated yard abuts
a public right of way.
Interpretation of the word "front" to not mean "abut"
effectively circumvents the entire restriction in that
the determination as to how many signs are permitted
would be based on how many streets the facility had
• access easements to or, worse, how many streets from
which a portion of the building is visible.
The staff interpretation was made in consideration of
the intent of the restriction as well as the knowledge
of the Planning Commission's intent when the word
"front" was used in creating the Sign Code and the
City Attorney has indicated the validity of the staff
interpretation in Exhibit "IS ".
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Staff interpretation be sustained
by the Board of Adjustment.
The Board of Adjustment sustained this interpretation on
December 4, 1975 and so notified International Harvester Company on
December 8, 1975.
Absent a finding of the Board of Adjustment's action to be
arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or worse, this
Court must defer to the interpretation of the ordinance given by the
City of Tukwila Board of Adjustment. Hama Hama Co. v. Shorelines
Hearing Board, 85 Wn.2d 441, 536 P.2d 157 (1975); Anderson v.
O'Brien, 84 Wn.2d 64, 524 P.2d 390 (1974); Allen v. Employment
Security Department, 83 Wn.2d 145, 516 P.2d 1032 (1973); Ropo, Inc.
v. City of Seattle, 67 Wn.2d 574, 409 P.2d 148 (1965).
V. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it would be unsound policy for
this Court to place a judicial construction on Section 19.32.140(A)
Defendant's Trial Brief - 9.
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
624 -1040
of the Tukwila Municipal Code which strains its language and defeats
its purpose. Plaintiff may or may not have a valid point with
respect to the safety hazard it alleges. If it does, its appropriate
remedy is to present the point in an application for a variance, not
to petition this Court for an unwise construction of the ordinance.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 27th day of April, 1976.
Defendant's Trial Brief - 10.
LeSOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
Lawrence E. Hard
Of Attorneys for Defendant
City of Tukwila
LESOURD,PATTEN, FLEMING Q
ATTORNEYS AT LAW ,
1900 SEATTLE TOWER'
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 913101
624 -1040'
CITY of TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TO: All Members, Boa of Adjustment
FROM: Gary Crutchfield sistant Planner
SUBJECT:
COURT RULING - International- Harvester Appeal
GC /cw
c
MEMORANDUM
Please read the attached letter from Mr. Larry Hard, City Attorney, which
describes the court's action and the effect on the Board of Adjustment. I
have underlined those portions of Mr. Hard's explanation which I feel are
pertinent for the Board's information.
Also please review the enclosed legal brief which explains the background
of the case to the newly- appointed members and which explains the city's
position in defense of the Board's ruling.
As noted in Mr. Hard's letter, the court ordered the Board to conduct a
reconsideration. That reconsideration has been scheduled for the Board's
regular meeting of 3 June 1976. You will receive your Staff Reports for
that meeting at the usual time.
DATE: 21 May 1976
19,May 1976
Edgar D. Bauch, Mayor
CITY DF TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
Mr. Richard J. Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
3rd Avenue & Columbia Street
Seattle, Washington 98104
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
Please be advised that the Tukwila Board of Adjustment, pursuant to the ruling
of the Honorable Judge Norman Ackley in King County Superior Court Cause No.
807 802, will reconsider your appeal, in behalf of International- Harvester, to
obtain a permit from the City of Tukwila to erect a wall mounted sign on the
south face of the International- Harvester building located at 13123 - 48th
Avenue South in Tukwila.
The reconsideration will be conducted at 8:00 P.M., Thursday, 3 June 1976 in
the City Hall Council Chambers located at 14475 - 59th Avenue South, Tukwila.
It is in the best interest of your client to attend the meeting and present
any evidence you deem relevant to the appeal.
Please direct any questions to myself at 242 -2177 at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Gary Crutclyfield
Assistant Planner
GC /cw
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
F. A. LESOURD
WOOLVIN PATTEN
DONALD D. FLEMING
GEORGE M. HARTUNG. JR
LEON C. M19TEREK
OWNAYNE E. CO =PLE
THOMAS 0. McLAUGHLIN
PETER LESOURD
JOHN F. COLGROVE
C. DEAN LITTLE
LAWRENCE E. HARD
RODNEY J. WALDBAUM
RICHARD P. MATTHEWS
Ms. Shirlee Kinney
City Clerk
City of Tukwila
14475 - 59th Avenue South
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Enclosures
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 624 -1040
March 12, 1976
Re: International Harvester v. Tukwila
Dear Ms. Kinney:
Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Mr.
Hard yesterday, enclosed are the City's documents which we
understand constitute the official record of the City and
which are necessary in the preparation of the transcript
in the above matter.
The Court's ruling provides that the transcript
be filed by March 15, 1976, which of course is Monday and
it is doubtful that the transcript can be prepared by that
date. I have telephoned Mr. Thorpe's office to advise that
the transcript is being prepared and will be filed at the
earliest possible date.
If any further information is necessary, please
call me or Mr. Fleming.
Very truly yours,
LeSOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
Bonnie J. Kost
Secretary for Mr. Hard
STEPHEN F. CHADWICK
ROBERT L PALMER
COUNSEL
STEPHEN J. CHADWICK
1983.1931
WARREN R. SLEMMONS
1910 -1970
JOSEPH E. GANDY
1904 -1971
ORVILLE H. MILLS
1908 -1974
F. A. LESOURD
V /OOLVIN PATTEN
DONALD D. FLEMING
G=ORGE M. HARTUNG. JR
LECN C. MIS TEREK
DWAYNE E.COPPLE
THOMAS 0. McLAUGHLIN
PETER LESOURD
JOHN F. COLGROVE
C. DEAN LITTLE
LAWRENCE E. HARD
RODNET J. WALDBAUM
RICHARD P. MATTHEV /S
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING & HARTUNG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1300 SEATTLE TOWER
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
Enclosure - order
MAR 1 2 1-
(206) 624 -1040
March 11, 1976
Ms. Shirlee Kinney
City Clerk
City of Tukwila
Tukwila City Hall
14475 - 59th Avenue South
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Re: International Harvester v. Tukwila
Dear Ms. Kinney:
On February 26, 1976 the Honorable Jerome Johnson
heard the petition of International Harvester for a writ of
certiorari and a writ of mandamus against the city of Tukwila.
The court :ruled that the plaintiff is entitled to have a
trial on the question of whether or not it should have been
granted a sign permit. The court also ruled that the City
must prepare a full transcript of the record and proceedings
of the City's action in denying plaintiff's application for
a sign permit. This certified transcript of the City's
records will then be filed with the Superior Court of King
County.
This transcript is due on March 15, 1976. If it
is not possible to have it done at this time, please let me
know and I. will make arrangements to give you whatever
additional time is necessary to prepare the transcript.
Very truly yours,
LeSOURD, BATTEN, FLEt ING & HARTUNG
1 1�
Lawre E. Hard
STEPHEN F. CHADWICK .
ROBERT L. PALMER
COUNSEL
STEPHEN J. CHADWICK
1883 -1931
WARREN R. SLEMMONS
1910 -1970
JOSEPH E. GANDY
1904 - 1971
ORVILLE H. MILLS
1908 -1974
TO
MINI -MEMO
S J £ 57a.c ti s
SUBJECT /i�►T64C. ,T'D/u 7 TEZ &6Ai
P46.---/-}561O Pie-0v/06 T?' / 77 e 444.. 0,
DATE
Q N 7 17/- '1 B ,r G. r fi9-o/4-A) e DE / ✓h ,
Ft) re P A
SIGNED fy
REPLY
SIGNED
Edgar D. Bauch
Mayor
City of Tukwila
14475 - 59th Ave. So.
Tukwila, Washington 98067
242 -7150
DATE 2 ` /fir
'?) , ( R COO c fe 1.771) FOR 4- 464)
RETAIN WHITE COPY FOR OUR FILE. SEND ❑ YELLOW, ❑ PINK COPY TO CUSTOMER.
XNO REPLY NECESSARY ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ TELEPHONE ❑ RETURN ENCLOSED MEMO WITH REPLY
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
32
vs.
CITY OF TUKWILA,
FEB G 19,16
n7.,011^,D, pp,TTE•,
r
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, )
)
Plaintiff, ) No. 807802
)
ORDER GRANTING WRIT
)
SUPERIOR COURT 0 WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY
This matter having come before the above - entitled Court
upon Order to Show Cause entered herein, the Presiding
Judge's Department having assigned the matter for hearing to
Department 18, the Honorable Jerome M. Johnson presiding,
the Court having reviewed the records and files herein,
including Response•to Petition and Motion to Dismiss Application
for Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus, and Affidavit
cf Richard J. *Thorpe, the.Court having heard argument of
counsel, and finding that because of confusion .in the notices
and information given to the applicant, complicated by the
,issue of timeliness of appeal not having been clearly resolved
by the City Council; but being perpetuated by the notice
given by the Planning Director, appeal having been taken
within thirty days in accordance with a reasonable interpretation'
of the letter from the Planning Director, 'fairness requires -
that plaintiff be allowed to proceed with its appeal; it is
hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that defendant's Motion to
Dismiss Application for Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus
be and is hereby denied; and it is further.
ORDER GRANTING WRIT - Page 1.
Defendant.
MIME, VE81EN, TE'WELL,
BERGMANN & TAYLOR
1710 NAGIFIC OIOG.
SEATTLE 0a104
873.2)60
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
13.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Presented by:
5 -1LF
RI HARD J. THORPE of ELVIDGE, VEBLEN,
TEWELL, BERGMANN TAYLOR, Attorneys
for Plaintiff
Approved as to form and Notice of
Presentation waived:
LAW ENCE E. HARD of LeSOURD, PATTEN,
FLEMING & HARTUNG, Attorneys
for Defendant
ORDER GRANTING WRIT - Page
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the City of Tukwila be and
it is hereby ordered to prepare and certify to this Court on or
before the 15th day of March, 1976, and to serve upon plaintiff's
attorneys a full transcript of the record and proceedings of the
City's action in denying plaintiff's application for a sign permit;
and it is further
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this cause be remanded
to the Presiding Department for assignment of an early trial
date for hearing upon the allegations of plaintiff's Applica-
tion for Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus.
DONE IN OPEN COURT this 21 day of F I 4 ?..r , 1976.
S 1 J'�=�'- -Oti Jo nt4 g0
J U D G E
E1.V(OGE,. VERLEN. TEWELL,
BERGMANN & TAYLOR
1710 PACIFIC u_na. •
SETTLE 94104
423.234a
tvEIVEll
JAN 061916
OF lU1CVU11A
3
4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
5
6 INTERNATIONAL
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
32
v .
CITY OF TUKWILA,
THIS MATTER having come before the above entitled Court this da
upon application for Writ of Certiorari supported by affidavit exe-
cuted by K. L. Hussey, for Writ of Certiorari directed to the City
of Tukwila requiring it to certify to this Court at a specified time
and place a full transcript of the record and proceedings of the
City's actions in denying International
cation for sign permit, and further for
to the Building Official of the City of
official to issue a permit; and it appearing to the Court that there
may be sufficient grounds for such a writ to issue, and the Court
being fully advised in the premises, Now, Therefore, It is:
ORDERED that the City of Tukwila, the defendant in the above
� rcS 1 T�dg
entitled cause, appear before The " —Llo , Judge of
the above entitled Court, or to whomever Judge this cause be
assigned/tat the hour of 9:30 A.M. on the may of February, 1976
and then and there show cause, if any it has, why the writs prayed
for should not issue.
DONE IN OPEN COURT This
Presented by:
V
HARVESTER COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
Defendant.
RICHARD J. THORPE of E»VIDGE,
VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN &
TAYLOR, Attorneys for Plaintiff
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
WRIT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED
FILED
'76 FE8 4 PM . 3 : qU CieRTints•
SETT .
E T Y J. MULLEN y
CLERK
KING COUNTY WA.
OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY
)
/7z
NO.
D fl)O2
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY WRIT
SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED
Harvester Company's appli-
a Writ of Mandamus directed
Tukwila.reouiring that
February 1976.
J U D G E
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL,
BERGMANN II TAYLOR
1710 PAC% $C SLOG.
SEATTLE 95104
623.2369
January 8, 1976
Very truly yours,
Kj 11 Stoknes
Planning Director
KS/cw
ku„
Frank Todd, Mayor
CITY OF TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
;TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Richard J. Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
3rd Avenue & Columbia Street
Seattle, Washington 98104
RE: Your appeal for a sign permit for the International Harvester
Property in Tukwila.
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
Please be advised that the City Council at their last regular meeting
of January 5, 1976, allowed your time period to appeal the Board of
Adjustment decision on the interpretation regarding the sign for
International Harvesters to run from January 5, 1976.
I hope this additional time will give you and your client ample time
to review your alternatives and to determine what action you wish to
pursue.
.•'
r
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL ME
January 5, 1976
Page S
Proposed ordinance,
Requiring auto -
opening heat /smoke
vents & draft
curtains
Natural Environment
Element
143.
' ETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATTERS
Sign Code appeal - Kjell Stoknes, Planning Director, stated the normal
International process for appeal from the Board of Adjustment is
Harvester to court and not the City Council. Attorney Parker
agreed. Mr. Richard Thorpe of the law firm Elvidge,
Veblen, Tewell, Bergmann & Taylor stated the ordinance
sets out the procedure to go from the building offi-
cial to the Board of Adjustment then to superior
court. There is another provision however for staff
interpretation to appeal to the Planning Commission /
which is aside from the ordinance. He stated his
request for sign permit was denied by the Planning
Department and by the Board of Adjustment and he was
told that the proper procedure for appeal of denial
of reversal of staff interpretation was the City
Council. Since this is in error, he requested that
his 10 -day appeal period begin from this date rather
from the date of rejection by the Board of Adjustment
in order to file with superior court. Kjell Stoknes
explained the staff's position on the term "frontage"
regarding the International Harvester property as it
applies to the Sign Code. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECOND-
ED BY SAUL, THAT THE 10 -DAY APPEAL .PERIOD START
TODAY TO APPEAL FOR SUPERIOR COURT. CARRIED.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY STERLING, TO AMEND THE
AGENDA TO CONSIDER ITEM 10.a. AT THIS TIME. CARRIED.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
Council President Traynor stated this ordinance had
been considered by the Public Safety Committee and
by the Council of the Whole. Councilwoman Davis
stated there seems to be some negative aspects to the
ordinance and she felt it should be denied. Council-
man Sterling stated the Council was not provided with
any background regarding the need for the ordinance.
This is so much more restrictive than the U.B.C. and
we have no staff recommendation on this. The Fire
Department felt this ordinance was desirable but the
commercial buildings are already meeting the require-
ments presently established. Councilman Johanson
stated the concepts are good but we have no informa-
tion regarding costs as related to the cost of up-
grading existing buildings or construction of new
buildings. Discussion continued. MOVED BY TRAYNOR,
SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY
TITLE ONLY FOR ITS SECOND READING. CARRIED. Attorne]
Parker read proposed ordinance requiring automatic -
opening heat /smoke vents and draft curtains (curtain
boards) in addition to certain sections of the Unifori
Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code which pertain
to these two items, by title only. MOVED BY TRAYNOR,
SECONDED BY STERLING, THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE
DENIED.* Councilwoman Harris stated Fire Marshal Jim
Hoel had stated they were in the process of gathering
back -up information and would like to see this ordi-
nance referred back to committee until the informatio]
can be submitted to the Council. Council President
Traynor stated the ordinance can be brought back to
the Council with information at any time later even
if it is denied tonight. *CARRIED.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, TO TABLE ALL
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS TO THE NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEET-
ING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 13, AUDIENCE COMMENTS.
CARRIED.
Mr. Bruce Solly asked what the status of the Natural
Environment Element is at this time. Mayor Todd
stated the Council has held the public hearing and
the committee will carry on.
c
CITY or TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
Mr. Richard J. Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
720 Third Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Frank Todd, Mayor
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
This office has reviewed your application for sign permit to erect
lettered signs and logos for International- Harvester building located.
at 13123 - 48th Avenue South.
August 1, 1975
It appears from the information submitted that the area of the proposed
signs exceed the area allowed under Section 19.32.140. Thus, the
requested sign permit is hereby denied. You have the right to appeal
to the Board of Adjustment if made in writing within ten (10) days from
date of this letter. Such appeal should be directed to the Planning
Department at this address..
Should you have any questions or desire any further information, please
contact Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Planner, at 242 -2177.
Sincerely,
// 04 lir 49
Barney Ruppert .
Building Director
BR /cw
cc: Gary Crutchfield
.1,11 115$1,
•r s!: 1:7i i70li��Pae.'s:ti8�ii$'a�9bt G a e v e e ! i"s!S3tc�e¢a�7fl •� �,
dI•
--- CONC. BLOCK WALL
~PAINTED — DAWN YELLOW—
ON THE FRONT OF THE
- SERVICE SHOP
iSi 1 ----1, '
8"X 9"X16" CONC.
BLOCK F : �C° SKIM COAT �. ^ J( V ^.,.;0
3070 GLASS -c) F PLASTER }
_WALK DOOR — --------- • SCALE : 1/16" = (' —O"
"STRAN" PRE— FINISHED "SA"
FASCIA SHEETS — MIDNIGHT BRONZE
SHEETS a CORNER /SIDE TRIM ONLY _
-FOR 4- CORNERS — ALL OTHER FLASHINGS.
STRUCTURAL. ETC. — BY OTHERS
''- STRAN" PRE — FINISHED "SA"
WALL SHEETS — DAWN
—YELLOW
lEgsTiqg12 00
"-STRAN" PRE- FINISHED "SR": •
ROOF SHEETS - DAWN YELLOW
"GTRAN" PRE-FINISHED "SA"
--WALL SHEETS - DAWN
-YELLOW .
L ir -0" X 14 OVERHEAD
DOORS - MANUALLY
-OPERATED
ALL RAKE TRIM AND
-- GUTTERS TO BE
-MIDNIGHT BRONZE
-ALL STRUCTURAL MULL:
-DRIP TRIM, ETC. TO se' :
- MIDNIGHT BRONZE
070 METAL'
ALK DOOR
IONS,
ALL STRUCTURAL
MULLIONS . DRIP TRIM,
ETC. TO BE MIDNIGHT
BRONZE
-THIS DOOR TO
HAVE ELECT.
OPERATOR
8 "X8 "X16" CONC.
-BLOCK (W/ SKIM COAT
OF PLASTER )
�N. MAROA AVE., FRESNO, CALIFORNIA
- "STRAW' PRE- FINISHED "SA"
FASCIA SHEETS - MIDNIGHT BRONZE -
SHEETS a CORNER /SIDE TRIM ONLY
FOR 4- CORNERS - ALL OTHER FLASHINGS,
---STRUCTURAL, ETC. - BY OTHERS
® Lul
-- SCALE: 1/16"
•
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
- WINDOWS W /18" HIGH
GLASS - WELD PANELS
- BELOW
SOLAR BRONZE GLASS
3070
-DOORS
.4.
I 0 It
WOOD @M OWN GOoo U CEO
(4. I I
-HE IG
E L
A Molar New Faciiity to Serve the Growing Needs
f the Transportation ration industry in the Northwest
International Harvester — a vital part of this
area's economy since the turn of the century —
is growing again with Seattle.
We proudly present Super- Branch, our huge
new $2 million complex nearing completion
(July 15th occupancy) in Tukwila, at the in-
tersection of Interurban S. and Interstate 5.
Huge means 35,000 square feet under one roof;
over five acres of space; and a fully equipped,
modern 26 -bay service facility for diesel and
gasoline powered vehicles.
Huge means more than $1.5 million of new and .
used vehicles in stock; and $500,000 of parts
and supplies, all of it at
a
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD Q. ELVIDGE, C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
Dear Madam Clerk:
RJT:hla
Encs.
Ms. Shirlee A. Kinney, City Clerk
City of Tukwila
14475 59th South
Tukwila, Washington 98067
ELVI[S VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & AYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILQING
THIRD AVENUE & COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 9B104
Re: Application for Sign Permit
This is notice of appeal by International Trucks
of a denial of application for sign permit made by the Planning
Department, which we appealed to the Planning Commission, which
the Planning Commission referred to the Board of Adjustment.,.and
which the Board of Adjustment has rejected within the last ten
days.
Please place upon the agenda of the next regular meeting
of the City Council this appeal.
Attached, to better identify the application and the
reasons therefor, you will find letter from the Planning Department
advising of the Board of Adjustment's rejection, together with a
copy of the minutes of the Board of Adjustment meeting and staff
report concerning the subject application.
Yours very truly,
rc o
CAI ;;s4—r
pEc 1, 5 1.01
December 15, 1975
Ric har• J Thorpe
(L6.1. if7
623.2369
AREA CODE 205
Mr. Richard Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
Seattle, Washington 98104
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
Gary Cru
Assistan
GC /cw
cc: Bldg Dir
Ping Dir
t.
Frank Todd, Mayor
CITY of TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
field
Planner
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
This letter shall constitute notice of the aforedescribed Board action.
Sincerely,
F%,
8 December 1975
The Tukwila Board of Adjustment, at its regular meeting conducted 4 December
1975, considered your appeal . of the administrative interpretation of Section
19.32.140 (A), Tukwila Municipal Code.
The Board voted unanimously to sustain the administrative interpretation of
Section 19.32.140 (A) to mean "one sign is permitted for each face of the
building whose associated yard abuts a public right -of- way." Thus, identifi-
cation of the International - Harvester building is limited to that face whose
associated yard abuts 48th Avenue South.
III A OLD BUSINESS
Board Vacancies
e
CITY OF TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of the Meeting, 4 December 1975
Val -Vue Sewer District
Frank Todd, Mayor
e
The regular December meeting of the Tukwila Board of Adjustment was called
to order at 8:10 P.M. by Vice- Chairperson Altmayer. Members present were:
Mrs. Altmayer, Mrs. Crain and Mr. Bauch. Gary Crutchfield represented the
Planning Department.
Vice- Chairperson Altmayer called for approval of the minutes of the regular
November meeting. Motion by Mr. Bauch, seconded by,Mrs. Crain and carried
to approve the minutes of the regular November 'meeting as prepared.
Vice - Chairperson Altmayer read the Staff Report explaining the appointments
made by Mayor Todd are in Council committee and noted that Mr. Hall had with-
drawn his name from consideration.
Mrs. Crain inquired as to whether or not Val -Vue had complied with the
stipulations of the variance granted last month. Mr. Crutchfield explained
they had obtained a Building. Permit but have not, as yet, gained approval of
a landscape plan in spite of a written reminder nearly two weeks ago. Further
noted he would pursue the matter further and report back to the Board at the
regular January meeting.
IV NEW BUSINESS
APPEAL of Staff Interpretation - International- Harvester
Mr. Crutchfield read entire Staff Report explaining that International - Harvester
had appealed the staff interpretation of the restriction "One sign is permitted
for each street upon which the property fronts" contained in Section 19.32.140 (A).
Further explained all exhibits attached to the staff report.
Board of Adjustment Page 2
Minutes of the Meeting 4 December 1975
Mr. Richard Thorpe, attorney representing International- Harvester, introduced
himself as the municipal court judge in Edmonds and is familiar with the
Edmonds Sign Code. Pointed out the several properties which face Interurban
Avenue but are separated from Interurban only by the City of Seattle right -of-
way — adamant that they should be identified toward Interurban but they do
not abut Interurban. Asserted a traffic hazard if his facility is not
identified to Interurban traffic. Proposed that the Board interpret the
restriction to limit signs to those portions of the building which have direct
access and visibility from a street.
Mr. Crutchfield pointed out that the word visibility would be as debatable as
the word front which would lead to additional interpretations. Staff interpre-
tation of Section 19.32.140 (A) is that "One sign is permitted for each face of
the building whose associated yard abuts a public right -of- way." Noted that
although this interpretation will create a problem for land - locked parcels,
the variance procedure is specifically designed to handle such instances and
should be utilized in preference to interpretation of certain words within the
restriction.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding the intent of the Planning Commission
when this restriction was written. Also noted the interpretation must be consid-
ered in an objective manner -- not to decide if the requested sign fits the
building. Vice - Chairperson Altmayer noted that similar circumstances may be
experienced by other businesses and feels this sign is appropriate. Mr. Bauch
noted the Code should be amended by ordinance rather than interpretation.
Motion by Mr. Bauch, seconded by Mrs. Crain and carried to sustain the Staff
interpretation of Section 19.32.140 (A) as stated in the Staff Report.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE - Doce's Signs
Mr. Crutchfield explained that Doce's has requested a variance from Section
19.32.140 (A) to allow two (2) additional freestanding signs, one located at
each parking lot entrance. Noted the hearing has been duly advertised and posted.
Vice - Chairperson Altmayer opened the Public Hearing and Mr. Crutchfield read the
Staff Report and displayed slides of the signs.
No one was present to speak for or against the request. Vice - Chairperson
Altmayer closed the Public Hearing.
Mr. Crutchfield explained the applicant had requested the variance to allow
the signs to remain erected as there is a traffic safety problem there due to
the location of the entrances. Further noted in the FINDINGS section of the
Staff Report that Tukwila Police Department accident reports had been reviewed
for the past year and none of the four accidents which occurred in the vicinity
were even remotely attributable to lack of sufficient identification of parking
lot entrances.
c
Board of Adjustment
Minutes of the Meeting
e
Page 3
4 December 1975
Motion by Mrs. Crain, seconded by Mr. Bauch and carried to deny the
requested variance based upon the findings and conclusion of the Staff
Report and to order removal of the non - conforming signs to be accomplished
within thirty (30) days.
Vice - Chairperson Altmayer reminded the Board members of the Special Meeting
scheduled for 8:00 P.M. Wednesday, 17 December 1975.
Motion by Mrs. Crain, seconded by Mr. Bauch and carried to adjourn the regular
December meeting.
Vice- Chairperson Altmayer adjourned the regular December meeting at 9 :45.P.M.
Gary Crutchfi ' d, Secretary
Tukwila Board of. Adjustment
4 December 1975
I . CALL TO ORDER
II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. Board Vacancies
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. APPEAL of Staff Interpretation - International- Har■e
B. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - Doce's Signs
V. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
VI. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF TUKWILA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
STAFF REPORT
4 December 1975 8:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM IV A : APPEAL of Staff Interpretation (International- Harvester)
REQUEST: APPEAL of Staff Interpretation of Section 19.32.140
APPLICANT: International- Harvester
LOCATION: 13123 - 48th Avenue South
ZONING: M -1 (Light Industry)
International- Harvester recently applied for a permit to install a wall sign
and logo on the west face of their building located on 48th Avenue. The request
was denied in light of Section 19.32.140 (A) which states "One sign is permitted
for each street upon which the property fronts." Although the International -
Harvester facility plainly "fronts" on 48th Avenue, their representative feels
it also fronts on Interurban Avenue due to an access easement (across privately -
owned property) to Interurban Avenue thus permitting a sign to be placed on the
west face (that face visible from Interurban Avenue). See Exhibit "C" for
illustration of the property's relationship to the surrounding properties and
streets. Exhibit "A" is a written statement provided by the representative of
International - Harvester and Exhibit "B" is a drawing of the sign desired to be
applied to a portion of the west building face.
The staff interpretation of Section 19.32.140 (A) is as follows:
One sign is permitted for each face of the
building whose associated yard abuts a public
right-of-way.
Interpretation of the word "front" to not mean "abut" effectively circumvents
the entire restriction in that the determination as to how. many signs are
permitted would be based on how many streets the facility had access easements
to or, worse, how many streets from which a portion of the building is visible.
The staff interpretation was made in consideration of the intent of the restric-
tion as well as the knowledge of the Planning Commission's intent when the word
"front" was used in creating the Sign Code and the City Attorney has indicated
the validity of the staff interpretation in Exhibit "D ".
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Staff Interpretation be sustained by the Board of Adjustment.
.4
-1-
,XHIBIT "A"
AGENDA ITEM IV A
APPEAL - International- Harvester
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL FROM STAFF INTERPRETATION
International Harvester Company has built and is operating
a branch store in Tukwila near the intersection of Interurban
and 48th. It is a $2,000,000 facility with 35,000 square
feet under one roof, the whole site covering a little over 5
acres. It has a 26 -bay service facility for both diesel and
gasoline powered trucks and is also capable of handling a
huge inventory of new and used vehicles. It is thelhope of
the manager of the branch, if public acceptance warrants it,
that he will be able to operate the service facility 24
hours a day. It is anticipated that the branch will be a
$4,000,000 to $5,000,000 a year. business.
International Harvester seeks to place upon the Interurban
side of the facility signs as depicted in the attached
elevation sketch. The size of that side of the building is
over 6,000 square feet, and the.sign code easily allows
signing on that side of the building of the size requested.
However, the sign code provides that "one sign is permitted
per each street upon which the property
s
Firstly, the only Washington Supreme Court case which
seems to discuss the question of an establishment fronting
on a street, held that although it did not .abut the street
(as a matter of fact it was in a hotel.lobby 80 feet from
the front door of the hotel, which did open directly onto
access.
the street) it did front because it had direct access to the
street, the main entrance being "directly from Third Avenue
through the unobstructed hotel lobby." Zbinden vs. Seattle,
74 Wash. 1, 3.
The International Harvester property here in question
has direct access to Interurban through an easement 30 feet
wide and 240 feet long between the Union 76 station and the
Tuk -Inn Restaurant.
It is appropriate that the ordinance speaks in terms of
"fronting" rather than "abutting ". Between Interurban
Avenue and the businesses along it (the Union 76 Gas Station,
the Tuk -Inn and the Texaco Gas Station) runs a transmission
line right -of -way. It would be foolish to say that although
those businesses are visible from Interurban and have direct
access to Interurban, that if they do not abut Interurban
they should not be allowed to have a sign. If an intervening
transmission line right -of -way should not prevent them from
fronting, and if an 80 foot intervening hotel lobby does not
prevent fronting, then the businesses in should not
prevent International Harvester from fronting upon a street
from which it is highly visible and to which it has direct
It is therefore respectfully submitted that the Interna-
tional Harvester property does front on Interurban and is
therefore permitted a sign on the side of the building which
faces Interurban.
Secondly, such an interpretation of the code supports
and furthers the purpose of the code. Of the two streets to
which the International Harvester facility has direct access,
the main one is Interurban. 48th Avenue South, is merely an
access road which travels only a distance of a couple of
blocks to the river, passing the International Harvester
facility, a trucking concern, and a Hertz truck rental.
Interurban is a main arterial with a forty -mile per hour
speed limit. The facility is visible from a distance of 200
feet away when heading west on Interurban (with a view of
the 48th Street side) and from a distance of 400 feet while
heading east on Interurban, (viewing the Interurban.side).
All traffic approaches on Interurban. The facility is
visible not only before reaching it, but is also visible
from Interurban while passing in front of it, in between the
businesses and up the easement. it is visible, but not
identifiable, except while traveling westbound on Interurban
from the 200 feet before coming abreast of it. During the
whole approach from the west, and while passing in front of
it, it is not identifiable without signing on the front
which faces Interurban.
Also traffic exiting the northbound lanes of Interstate
. 5
5 proceed westbound parallel to Interurban to a point where
they reach, Interurban west of the facility. As one proceeds
down that ramp, the whole side of the building facing
Interurban is visible over the top of the businesses along
Interurban, without any identification.
-3-
According to the sign code, the purpose that the City
of Tukwila seeks to accomplish in its regulation of signs is
"so that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly, and
safety may be increased by reduction of clutter and distraction."
The facility must be easily identified, or there could be a
safety hazard for people looking around trying to find it.
Furthermore, the facility, being one for the sale and service
of trucks, will draw from the freeway, and the visibility
from the freeway off -ramp is of importance, also from a
safety standpoint. Interurban, with the amount of traffic
that it carries, at the speed which is permissible, is no
place for people wandering around looking for something that
can be easily identified without "clutter and distraction."
It is clear therefore, from a common sense approach,
from a safety approach, and from strict interpretation of
the wording of the code, that identifying signing on the
Interurban side of the building is necessary and permissible.
Respectfully submitted,
'7":7/ : '
RICHARD J. THORPE
:TC. TO BE MIDNIGHT
1RONZE
•
Lflf � ; ;�� 11 11.111
• �. fir:
S .12.1 ^ .& ••..:: _i.. .t_... .•• ,. .. • • —
"STRAN" PRE- FINISHED "SA"
FASCIA SHEETS - MIDNIGHT BRONZE -
SHEETS a CORNER SI OTHE O 8NINGS,
FOR 4- CORNERS
STRUCTURAL, ETC. - BY OTHERS
ITITIMill
r
1 owraniar_kranint:
r77 fr:c1
1/16" c i.- 0
SCALE
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
WINDOWS W /la. HIGH
GLASS - WELDPANELS
• BELOW
- SOLAR BRONZE GLASS
1 W 0
f
. ; • .
Y... •
• COC. : • :
: • r , '
•
3 0 0'
, •
Niom 76
Pr
P, 0 P
• , •
P 1 I t.
•
•
•
;11 tyt IL
al 6 fit 6.P.WAY
- •
•
4. De_
1 , 30' e • • ."
2%
iNTee02113A.N Ave
s ThKriNi 14
Pi T Af.P-. i.I.,•-in"
S2r1n Aaaigact(7
I •
TeS*4.0
G AS e ,•,.'r11- •
4.
C.
J1
f.' •
r
4.
cn
•
‘4--1--1-2-..1.-1-1-111.11■11!:111.111.11111.1.1..11 111..11.1_1__Lt I I 11_1_3 11!1_1 /
I - I A
ITT
L.1_ L_I. J_I J 1—.L...!_
k
GC /cw
12/2/75
MEMORANDUM
CITY of 0 UKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TO: Wayne Parker, Ci ; Attorney
FROM: Gary Crutchfield f L sistant Planner
SUBJECT: Interpretation of Section 19.32.140 (TMC)
Please indicate your opinion regarding the interpretation stated below.
Section 19.32.140 (A) states in part: One sign is permitted for each
street upon which the property fronts."
Staff interpretation of this restriction, as well as the Planning Commis-
sion's intent at the time the restriction was created, restricts the number
of signs to one for each face of the building whose associated yard abuts
a public right -of -way.
Any development whose property did not abut upon a public right -of -way would
qualify for a variance from that restriction.
1 have conferred at length with Gary Crutchfield regarding
the above interpretation and am of the opinion that the sign code
justifies that interpretation.
ayne R. Parker
City Attorney
EXIHIBIT "D"
AGENDA ITEM IV A
DATE: 2 Dec: 1975
APPEAL - International - Harvester
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD Q. ELVIDGE, C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
C
Planning Department
City of Tukwila
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98067
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE $ COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
November 26, 1975
Attention: Gary Crutchfield
RE: IH signs - Interurban side
Dear Gary:
Enclosed you will find Application for Sign Permit, .
together with our check in the sum of $10.00, for a permit
to erect the signs that have been approved by the Planning
Commission. Would you please forward the permit to us in .
the enclosed envelope.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this
matter.
RJT : s lb
Enclosures
823.2389
AREA CODE 208
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD Q. ELVIDGE, C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
RJT : ms
Enclosure
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE & COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
Planning Department
City of Tukwila
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98067
November 21, 1975
Attention: Gary Crutchfield
Re: IH signs - Interurban side
Dear Gary:
International Harvester hereby appeals the staff inter-
pretation of the word "fronting" in TMC 19.32.140 (A), and
we hereby request that this appeal be placed upon the agenda
of the Board of Adjustments' meeting of December 4, 1975.
Enclosed you will find Memorandum in Support of Appeal
from Staff Interpretation which we request you circulate.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this
matter.
Yours very truly,
RICHARD J. THORPE
823.2389
AREA CODE 206
•
..
p iECEIVE
Giti; O1 1975
CITY OF TUKWILA
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL FROM STAFF INTERPRETATION
International Harvester Company has built and is operating
a branch store in Tukwila near the intersection of Interurban
and 48th. It is a $2,000,000 facility with 35,000 square
feet under one roof, the whole site covering a little over 5
acres. It has a 26 -bay service facility for both diesel and
gasoline powered trucks and is also capable of handling a
huge inventory of new and used vehicles. It is the hope of
the manager of the branch, if public acceptance warrants it,
that he will be able to operate the service facility 24
hours a day. It is anticipated that the branch will be a
$4,000,000 to $5,000,000 a year business.
International Harvester seeks to place upon the Interurban
side of the facility signs as depicted in the attached
elevation sketch. The size of that side of the building is
over 6,000 square feet, and the sign code easily allows
signing on that side of the building of the size requested.
However, the sign code provides that "one sign is permitted
per each street upon which the property fronts."
Firstly, the only Washington Supreme Court case which
seems to discuss the question of an establishment fronting
on a street, held that although it did not abut the street
(as a matter of fact it was in a hotel lobby 80 feet from
the front door of the hotel, which did open directly onto
-1-
the street) it did front because it had direct access to the
street, the main entrance being "directly from Third Avenue
through the unobstructed hotel lobby." Zbinden vs. Seattle,
74 Wash. 1, 3.
The International Harvester property here in question
has direct access to Interurban through an easement 30 feet
wide and 240 feet long between the Union 76 station and the
Tuk -Inn Restaurant.
It is appropriate that the ordinance speaks in terms of
"fronting" rather than "abutting ". Between Interurban
Avenue and the businesses along it (the Union 76 Gas Station,
the Tuk -Inn and the Texaco Gas Station) runs a transmission
line right -of -way. It would be foolish to say that although
those businesses are visible from Interurban and have direct
access to Interurban, that if they do not abut Interurban
they should not be allowed to have a sign. If an intervening
transmission line right -of -way should not prevent them from
fronting, and if an 80 foot intervening hotel lobby does not
prevent fronting, then the businesses in question should not
prevent International Harvester from fronting upon a street
from which it is highly visible and to which it has direct
access.
It is therefore respectfully submitted that the Interna-
tional Harvester property does front on Interurban and is
therefore permitted a sign on the side of the building which
faces Interurban.
-2-
-3-
Secondly, such an interpretation of the code supports
and furthers the purpose of the code. Of the two streets to
which the International Harvester facility has direct access,
the main one is Interurban. 48th Avenue South is merely an
access road which travels only a distance of a couple of
blocks to the river, passing the International Harvester
facility, a trucking concern, and a Hertz truck rental.
Interurban is a main arterial with a forty -mile per hour
speed limit. The facility is visible from a distance of 200
feet away when heading west on Interurban (with a view of
the 48th Street side) and from a distance of 400 feet while
heading east on Interurban, (viewing the Interurban side).
All traffic approaches on Interurban. The facility is
visible not only before reaching it, but is also visible
from Interurban while passing in front of it, in between the
businesses and up the easement. It is visible, but not
identifiable, except while traveling westbound on Interurban
from the 200 feet before coming abreast of it. During the
whole approach from the west, and while passing in front of
it, it is not identifiable without signing on the front
which faces Interurban.
Also traffic exiting the northbound lanes of Interstate
5 proceed westbound parallel to Interurban to a point where
they reach Interurban west of the facility. As one proceeds
down that ramp, the whole side of the building facing
Interurban is visible over the top of the businesses along
Interurban, without any identification.
According to the sign code, the purpose that the City
of Tukwila seeks to accomplish in its regulation of signs is
"so that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly, and
safety may be increased by reduction of clutter and distraction.
The facility must be easily identified, or there could be a
safety hazard for people looking around trying to find it.
Furthermore, the facility, being one for the sale and service
of trucks, will draw from the freeway, and the visibility
from the freeway off -ramp is of importance, also from a
safety standpoint. Interurban, with the amount of traffic
that it carries, at the speed which is permissible, is no
place for people wandering around looking for something that
can be easily identified without "clutter and distraction."
It is clear therefore, from a common sense approach,
from a safety approach, and from strict interpretation of .
the wording of the code, that identifying signing on the
Interurban side of the building is necessary and permissible.
Respectfully submitted,
RICHARD J. THORPE
Gary Crutc
Assistant
GC /cw
cc: Ping Dir
Bldg Dir
ield
anner
C
Frank Todd, Mayor
CITY of TUKWILA •
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Richard Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
Third Avenue & Columbia Street
Seattle, Washington 98104
21 November 1975
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
The Tukwila Planning Commission, at its regular meeting conducted 20 November
1975, reviewed your request that International- Harvester be allowed a greater
percentage of sign area as an integral part of the main building design pur-
suant to Section 19.32.140 of the Tukwila Municipal Code.
The Commission voted to grant your request as described above and International -
Harvester is thereby authorized to install the additional signing as depicted in
the drawings approved by the Commission. Please be advised that a Sign Permit
is required to formalize that authorization.
Should you have any questions please contact me at 242 - 2177.
Sincerely,
C
Frank Todd, Mayor
CITY OF TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of the Meeting, 20 November 1975
The regular November meeting of the Tukwila Planning Commission was called
to order at 8:15 P.M. by Chairman Mettler. Members present were: Mr.
Mettler, Mr. Zepp, Mr. Kirsop, Mr. Lamb and Mr. West. Planning Department
was represented by Fred Satterstrom, Associate Planner and Gary Crutchfield,
Assistant Planner.
Chairman Mettler called for approval of the October minutes. Motion by Mr.
Lamb, seconded by Mr. Kirsop and carried to approve the minutes of the
regular October meeting as prepared.
OLD BUSINESS
A. Council Actions
Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report explaining City Council actions regarding
various matters during the past month. Mr. Satterstrom noted the Comprehensive •
Plan General Goals and Introduction had been adopted by the Council as recommended
by the Commission.
B. Comprehensive Plan Review
Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report and a memorandum from the Planning Depart-
ment to Chairman Mettler recommending appointments be made to all the Comprehen-
sive Plan Review Committees. Chairman Mettler noted he may make some changes in •
the recommended appointments and agreed to meet with Mr. Satterstrom prior to
Thanksgiving.
Mr. Satterstrom requested one of the Commissioners volunteer to chair the Open
Space Committee scheduled for the month of January 1976. Mr. Kirsop volunteered
to chair the Open Space committee while Mr. West volunteered to chair the
Residence committee.
Planning Commission
Minutes of the Meeting
NEW BUSINESS
(None)
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
(None)
SIGN REVIEWS
A. International- Harvester
•
•
Page 2
20 November 1975
•
Mr. Crutchfield read the Staff Report and a letter from Mr. Richard Thorpe,
attorney for International- Harvester, explaining that International - Harvester
desired to install an additional sign which create a total sign area five square
feet in excess of that allowed by Section 19.32.140 (TMC). Mr Thorpe was
requesting the greater area be allowed as "an integral part of the main building
design" (Section 19.32.140).
Mr. Thorpe presented a sketch depicting how the exterior design of the building
would appear if the greater area was allowed and reiterated the basic comments
contained in his letter.
Mr. Crutchfield pointed out the fundamental issue in this matter was whether or
not the proposed sign is "an integral part of the main building design" as
opposed to whether or not five square feet of additional signing area be allowed.
Mr. Lamb explained his understanding of the word "integral" was restricted to
being "integral" to the structure. The size, color or shape of the sign does
not make it "integral" - nor does the feeling that the sign would constitute
"beauty ".
Mr. Thorpe maintained the sign must simply be "essential to the design.of the
building" as opposed to' "essential to the structural characteristics ".
Mr. Crutchfield pointed out the existing sign located on the fascia constituted
100 square feet. If that sign were 95 square feet, the nine square foot logos
could be applied to the building without exceeding the allowable sign area. The
problem appears to be created by the fact the fascia sign already existed.
Further, the letters making up the fascia sign could have been made slightly
smaller and remain "integral to the design" as Mr. Thorpe asserts yet not .
exceed the allowable sign area.
Mr. Kirsop stated interpretation by the Commission that this would constitute
an "integral" sign sets a precedence and enforcement problem.
Planning Commission Page 3
Minutes of the Meeting 20 November 1975
Mr. Thorpe reiterated his position that the total signing concept was
"integral to the design of the building ".
Considerable discussion ensued regarding other methods by which approval of
the sign could be given. Mr. Crutchfield pointed out the excessive setback
could be cause for allowance of a geater wall sign area similar to the existing
allowance for freestanding signs. However, this is not currently in.the Sign
Code. .
Motion by Mr. Lamb and seconded by Mr. Zepp to allow ,the logo to be to
the white brick panel as an integral part of the building design. Motionac'rried
with Mr. Kirsop voting NO. '' -
Mr. Crutchfield asked what position should be taken by Staff with respect to
future requests of a similar nature. Mr. Lamb stated each must be handled on
an individual basis in concert with the desire of the applicant.
Mr. Crutchfield read the remainder of Mr. Thorpe's letter requesting signing be
allowed on the west face of the building under the assertion the International -
Harvester property fronts on Interurban Avenue by way of an access easement
across private property. Mr. Crutchfield suggested the matter not be considered
by the Commission but directed to the Board of Adjustment through a variance
procedure or an appeal of an administrative interpretation. Some discussion
followed regarding the intent of the word "front" as used in Section 19.32.140.
Commissioners Mettler and Kirsop, present during construction and adoption of
the Sign Code, stated the intent of the word "front" was to mean "abutting ".
Motion by Mr. Kirsop, seconded by Mr. Lamb and carried to take no action
regarding this request and to refer the applicant to the Board of Adjustment.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairman Mettler asked about the use of a bus station being allowed in a C -2 .
zone as he had been approached by a property owner recently.
Mr. Crutchfield explained a memorandum is on file explaining the events taken
to date regarding the desire of an individual to locate what Staff interpreted
from verbal conversation to be a package freight transfer station as opposed to
a "bus station" which is explicitly allowed in the C -2 zone. Noted the
interpretation that the C -2 zone was to include only those uses designed to
primarily serve the local residents (an interpretation sustained by the Board
of Adjustment in June 1975) had been given the individual in writing. All
future information was requested to be in writing to alleviate verbal misunder-
standings.
Planning Commission Page 4
Minutes of the Meeting 20 November 1975
Motion by Mr. Lamb, seconded by Mr. Zepp and carried to adjourn the meeting..
Chairman Mettler adjourned the regular November meeting at 10:50 with the
reminder that the regular December meeting will be conducted on the 18th due
to Christmas.
Herbert Lamb, Secretary
Tukwila Planning Commission
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
20 November 1975
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. Council Actions
B. Comprehensive Plan Review
IV. NEW BUSINESS
. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
VI. SIGN REVIEWS
A. International - Harvester
VII: ANY OTHER'BUSINESS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
20 November 1975
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: VI A : Sign Review - International Harvester
OR
8:00 P.M.
REQUEST: Sign Review Pursuant to 19.32.140 (TMC)
APPLICANT: International- Harvester
LOCATION: 13123 - 48th Avenue South
ZONING: M -1 (Light Industry)
International- Harvester desires to erect a wall sign larger than that allowed
by Section 19.32.140 and, additionally, desires to erect two such wall signs
rather than one as limited by Section 19.32.140. Mr. Richard Thorpe, attorney
for International- Harvester, has requested the Commission allow the larger
sign area as an integral part of the main building design. as authorized by
Section 19.32.140. Additionally, Mr. Thorpe has requested the additional wall
sign be authorized since the property "fronts" on two streets thus allowing two
wall signs.
A letter from Mr. Thorpe explaining his position is attached as Exhibit "A ".
Since the request is effectively two -fold, the Staff Report deals with each
individually.
1. Firstly, in consideration of whether or not a larger sign area should
be allowed by the Commission as an integral part of the main building
design, the fundamental question is the definition of the word "integral"
as it is used in the Sign Code and more specifically in Section 19.32.140.
What constitutes a sign which is an integral part of the main building
design? To constitute such:
A. Must the sign itself be an "integral" part of the structure,
without which the building would not be structurally sound or
complete?
B. Must the sign itself simply be painted on or attached to a
background which is an "integral" part of the structure?
Planning Commission Page 2
Staff Report
20 November 1975
Certainly either of the above would constitute a precedent inasmuch
as it would be utilized by the Planning Department to review future
similar requests. In consideration of this fact, the following
comments are offered.
A. This alternative would certainly be the most restrictive and
would limit such signs to those which were "integral" to the
structural characteristics of the building.
B. Conversely, alternative B would allow virtually any sign to
be declared an "integral" part of the main building design
and would effectively negate the size restrictions contained
in Section 19.32.140.
The Commission is requested to provide a definitive direction under
which. the Planning Department may review future requests of a similar
nature as well as provide a decision regarding the assertion of
International- Harvester.
2. Secondly, the assertion that the International - Harvester property
"fronts" on Interurban Avenue is deemed by this office to be an
inaccurate interpretation since they do not own property adjacent
to it. It is the feeling of staff that agreeing to this interpre
tation would set a precedence that would have far - reaching negative
effects. We recommend that the Commission not take jurisdiction on
this matter and refer the applicant to the Board of Adjustment through .
a variance application.
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD Q. ELVIDGE, C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE & COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
City of Tukwila
Planning Commission
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington
November 10, 1975
NOV 10 1975
CITY OF TUKWILA
Re: International Truck
Gentlemen:
Enclosed you will find the following:
East elevation - 48th Street side
South elevation - Interurban side
Advertising announcement with sketch of the
prototype
Vicinity map showing location of surrounding
businesses.
We are requesting, on behalf of International Harvester,
that we be allowed:
1. A greater percentage of area of sign than is
allowed by the Tukwila sign code on the 48th
Street side, and
2. An equal amount of sign on the Interurban side of
the building.
823.2369
AREA CODE 206
We will discuss these requests in that order.
1. The side of the building which faces 48th Street
has an area of 2963 square feet. The sign code would permit
3 1/2% of that area, which equals 104 square feet.
There presently is lettering upon the fascia, previously
approved, of 100 square feet which was previously requested
and installed because it was imperative to have some identifi-
cation on the building. The greater area of sign which is
being sought would allow the erection of an IH logo and blue
City of Tukwila
November 10, 1975
page 2
rally stripes. Logo covers approximately 9 square feet. Our
request therefore is for approval of lettering of a greater
percentage of area than explicitly allowed, by five square
feet.
The grounds upon which we request this is found in TMC
19.32.140, which says in part:
"Where signs can be shown to be an integral part
of the main building design, a greater percentage
[of area] may be allowed upon approval of the
planning commission."
It is our position that the signs in question are an
integral part of the main building design.
International Harvester has recently embarked upon a
program of identification for their truck dealerships and
branches. An integral part of the identification design is
the placement of the name of the dealer, or in this case,
the words "International Trucks" upon a bronze- colored
fascia, and also placing on a white segment of wall, the
International Harvester logo and the two parallel rally
stripes. The new identification makes the appearance of the
building more attractive, neater, and much less cluttered
than the previous type of identification. This identifica-
tion has been integrated into the design of the new buildings
being built by International Harvester, of which the new
branch in Tukwila is one.
The building was originally designed and built with the
bronze fascia extending around the sales and parts area upon
which the white letters "International Trucks" appeared.
The building consists of three color elements, the Solar
Bronze glass windows, walls and roof of Dawn Yellow, and two
white wall sections to break up the masses of yellow and
bronze. The building was designed and built with these
white sections, which are not only part of the structure,
but also esthetically necessary.
It is upon the white wall section that the logo and the
blue rally stripes fasten. The identification of the truck
division of International Harvester, on stationary, signs,
service trucks, packaging, etc. is the IH logo and the rally
stripes. These are integrated into the building design by
making them a part of the building itself.
The trim color for the building is Midnight Bronze,
which is integrated into the whole building: the fascia,
City of Tukwila
November 10, 1975
page 3
rake trim and gutters, and all structural mullions, drip
trim etc. Covering only one -ninth of the fascia on the 48th
Street side are the white letters "International Trucks ".
The criteria of the code is whether the signs are "an
integral part of the main building design." Thus, one must
look at the design of the building as a whole and whether or
not the signs harmoniously go together to form a whole unit.
Design does not mean structure, nor can a method of affixing
the sign. Rather it meets the arrangement of elements that
make up the total picture or concept - connoting a particular
pattern and some degree of achieved order or harmony.
When we look at the building as a whole, the main
building design can be seen to flow from the southeast
corner, where all of the glass is. Proceding northerly
along the east face from the corner, is the Solar Bronze
glass with "International Trucks" above on the fascia. The
fascia continues, passing over the white wall section with
logo and rally stripes, then over the remainder of the .
building which is Dawn Yellow. So too, proceding westerly
along the south face from the same corner, is the Solar
Bronze glass with "International Trucks" above on the fascia.
The fascia continues here also, passing over the white wall
section with logo and rally stripes. The eye then passes
beyond over the remainder of the building which is Dawn
Yellow.
The signs in question are not miscellaneous, unharmonious,
uncoordinated objects which do not suit the building, but
are an integral part of the main building design - they are
harmoniously designed right into the overall appearance,
pattern, design of the building.
We therefore respectfully request an allowance of
greater percentage of area so that the IH logo and the
parallel blue rally stripes may be added to the 48th Street
side of the building.
2. We also seek an amount of sign on the Interurban
side of the building which would equal the total we request
for the 48th Street side. As is stated above, the signing
would be identical. The Interurban side of the building is
over 6000 square feet, and the sign code easily allows
signing on that side of the building of the size requested.
However, the sign code provides that "one sign is
permitted per each street upon which the property fronts."
City of Tukwila
November 10, 1975
page 4
Two questions then arise: (1) Is International Harvester
property front on Interurban? (2) If it does not, should
International Harvester not be allowed the signs on the
Interurban side of the building anyway.
Firstly, the only Washington Supreme Court case which
seems to discuss the question of an estblishment fronting on
a street, held that although it did not abut the street (as
a matter of fact it was in a hotel lobby 80 feet from the
front door of the hotel, which did open directly onto the
street) it did front because it had direct access to the
street, the main entrance being "directly from Third Avenue
through the unobstructed hotel lobby." Zbinden vs. Seattle,
74 Wash. 1, 3.
The International Harvester property here in question
has direct access to Interurban through an easement 30 feet
wide and 240 feet long between the Union 76 station and the
Tuk -Inn Restaurant.
It is appropriate that the ordinance speaks in terms of
"fronting" rather than "abutting ". Between Interurban
Avenue and the businesses along it (the Union 76 Gas Station,
the Tuk-Inn and the Texaco Gas Station) runs a transmission
line right -of -way. It would be foolish to say that although
those businesses are visible from Interurban and have direct
access to Interurban, that if they do not abut Interurban
they should not be allowed to have a sign. If an intervening
transmission line right -of -way should not prevent them from
fronting, and if an 80 foot intervening hotel lobby does not
prevent fronting, then the businesses in question should not
prevent International Harvester from fronting upon a street
from which it is highly visible and to which it has direct
access.
It is therefore respectfully submitted that the Interna-
tional Harvester property does front on Interurban and is
therefore permitted a sign on the side of the building which
faces Interurban.
Secondly, if it does not, we urge that International
Harvester should be allowed the additional side on Interurban.
Of the two streets to which International Harvester facility
has direct access, the main one is Interurban. 48th Avenue
South is merely an access road which travels only a distance
of a couple of blocks to the river, passing the International
Harvester facility, a trucking concern, and a Hertz truck
rental. Interurban is a main arterial with a forty mile per
City of Tukwila
November 10, 1975
page 5
hour speed limit. The facility is visible from a distance
of 200 feet away when heading west on Interurban (with a
view of the 48th Street side) and from a distance of 400
feet while heading east on Interurban, (viewing the Interur-
ban side). All traffic approaches on Interurban. The facility
is visible not only before reaching it, but is also visible
from Interurban while passing in front of it, in between the
businesses and up the easement. It is visible, but not
identifiable, except while traveling westbound on Interurban
from the 200 feet before coming abreast of it. During the
whole approach from the west, and while passing in front of
it, it is not identifiable without signing on the front
which faces Interurban.
Also traffic exiting the northbound lanes of Interstate
5, proceed westbound parallel to Interurban to a point
where they reach Interurban west of the facility.. As one
proceeds down that ramp, the whole side of the building
facing Interurban is visible over the top of the businesses
along Interurban, without any identification.
According to the sign code, the purpose that the City
of Tukwila seeks to accomplish in its regulation of signs is
"so that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly, and
safety may be increased by reduction of clutter and distrac-
tion." The facility must be easily identified, or there
could be a safety hazard for people looking around trying to
find it. Furthermore, the facility, being one for the sale
and service of trucks, will draw heavily from the freeway,
and the visibility from the freeway offramp is of importance,
also from a safety standpoint. Interurban, with the amount
of traffic that it carries, at the speed which is permissible,
is no place for people wandering around looking for something
that can be easily identified without "clutter and distraction."
We therefore respectfully request that the signing
requested, as it appears on the elevation sketches enclosed,
be permitted.
RJT:ms
Enclosures
Yours very truly,
RICHARD J. ORPE
, 031 •
-1.-7 T ir riri, I I ,r11-111111.1-11111.111:II:imiri
•
LP
CI`
•••
1
- 4 /-1: Jx
I
C)
-''Irs••••••‘,,z7
•
-17.1
--Ar,
-- • •
. 1tOtd
1 • ., • • •-4•3
• :
• ; -
7r 7
: r1 I I
r -
Q
•
;
T, •ti
, 1-`:41 •• C_ZNI••••.r.11
• '
• 7 ; .1 tsr C I ?-4
. . .
,Q 0
, I • •
•
...A5 0 cr 0
-3 tDv
CONC. BLOCK WALL
- PAIN TED - DAWN YELLOW -
ON THE FRONT OF THE
SERVIC E SHOP -
6" X 9"X16" CONC. • 6001' 14
- 9LOCK (W/ SKIM COAT
3070 GLASS 9F' PLASTER)
-WALK DOOR -- - •
- SCALE + I/16" = I' -O"
"STRAN" PRE -FIND
FASCIA SHEETS — M
SHEETS 8. CORNER
-FOR 4- CORNERS -
STRUCTURAL, ETC.
(e
"STRAN"
WALL SHE
- YELLOW
_L.LL_LJ _1_1 _LL.LI. 1 1 L
• • • • ; ,. .!
- 1 11
• -• - - 1 • • 1.-
-7-'1- . i --
- - 1 ..; 1 ' • 3' ; 1
• ' ', ; ■ • 1
- i ' L.; 7 " ; - ; : 1 •
_ - i .. ns . • , .
• ; i - .• ;
_ ; ; , • •
• • . i t ,
--- - : / - i-*-- 7 ; 7 i ;
- 7 7 ■ ; I ' • :
• ..... I
- - • - 7 - - ; 1 - - . ; • - - ; ! • , -
_ _ . .1 1 1 ; : : ..
. . f i 4
, . i
; . •
I i i
: r
- . . . • • : . j r ■ 1
- • . r .
- 1 ... ! i . : ..1 . •
; : i 1 ; • • ;
• ; ' '
t '--"
; _ I.
1:
; • 1.- ' •
• I
c.c../c..ge re ,
; • '
;
; I • •
• ;
1111111
' - 1 .
L . - ) 6
r
s1
-
1
......•
s-
e6f's '
•
1 ' :
- • • : ; ' I - r. - i • • i ;
• i Sec. 0 E.-1-..c.: IL._ A i. I i .1 _ i ',
1 1 : ; i • • : ; ' 1 i ; ' •
• _LI_ 1 I .!...L.: ',. I A ; •I•
._,. 3' • . , ; , -
. . • ,
1 1 AN '
9 . . c . 14
i • ' ; :
rA t 4. 4 3P.
• •
/C2').-•
I
0
U)
w/
0
0
0
a
z
•
4 "' CRUSHED ROCK BASE
N. 49 24!W. 172.00'
"UNION" OIL COMPANY
• PARCEL '
t
t
M)
•
r7 ar CHA /17-Line
C ,E
• �;
N. 49° 24' W. 347.29'
TE FOR "VIPS"
RANT
9. 49° 24' E. 295.21'
.(
F F. 15.69
•
IOW
....ter,
.N.1:C.
!'TE•XACO" OIL COMPANY
PARCEL
0
0
0
1
110
2q'
•
1,1
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD q, ELVIDGE, C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
Mr. Barney Ruppert
Building Director
City of Tukwila
6230 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Dear Mr. Ruppert:
JV:hla
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE Q COLUM•IA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
August 21, 1975
623.2369
AREA CODE 206
On August 4, 1975, International Harvester appealed
your #ejection of its application for a sign permit covering fascia
signs on its building at 13123 48th Avenue South in Tukwila.
We would like the privilege of withdrawing our applica-
tion for this sign permit.
Yours very truly,
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
Sincerely,
arney upper
Building Director
BR /cw
CITY of TUKWILA
6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067
Mr. Richard J. Thorpe
1710 Pacific Building
720 Third Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Frank Todd, Mayor
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
cc: Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Planner
This office has reviewed your application for sign permit to erect a free-
standing sign for International- Harvester located at 13123 - 48th Avenue
South in Tukwila.
Pursuant to Section 19.12.060 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) this
office denies the aforedescribed sign permit application due to the fact
the proposed sign does not comply with Section 19.32.140 (TMC) in that the
total sign face area of the proposed sign exceeds that allowed by Section
19.32.140 (TMC).
The applicant has right of appeal to the Tukwila Board of Adjustment if
such appeal is made in writing within thirty (30) days. Should you have
any questions or desire to discuss the matter, please contact Gary. Crutchfield
at 242 -2177.
14 August 1975
JOHN VEBLEN
DUANE TEWELL
JOHN G. BERGMANN
WILLIAM A. TAYLOR
THOMAS A. ST. PIERRE
JAMES H. KRIDER
RICHARD J. THORPE
STEPHEN P. LARSON
FORD Q. ELVIDGE. C.B.E.
OF COUNSEL
Building Director
City of Tukwila
6230 South 154th
Tukwila, Washington
RJT:slb
ELVIDGE, VEBLEN, TEWELL, BERGMANN & TAYLOR
LAWYERS
1710 PACIFIC BUILDING
THIRD AVENUE & COLUMBIA STREET
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
August 4, 1975
Gentlemen:
International Harvester hereby appeals your rejection
of its application for a sign permit and, pursuant to Tukwila
Sign Code 19.12.060, respectfully requests review of the
Board of Adjustments at their next regular meeting.
623.2369
AREA CODE 206
Mr. Gary Crutchfield
Planning Technician
City of Tukwila
Tukwila, Washington
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
WRP:bb
WAYNE R. PARKER
• ATTORNEY AT LAW
PUGET SOUND NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
POST OFFICE BOX 3207
MIDWAY, WASHINGTON 98031
August 24, 1973
TR. 8 -4431 TR. 8 -2631
This will acknowledge your letter of July 31, 1973, received
in my office on August 6, 1973, regarding the City sign
code and, specifically, Section 19.32.140 of the TMC.
This property owner will undoubtedly contend that the reference
to one sign being permitted on each street which the property
fronts allows him to erect a sign fronting on the freeway.
Advertising signs which are visible from the freeway are a
great asset to any business.
I feel the City is justified, however, in maintaining that the
use of the word "street" does not include a limited access
freeway and that the property owner is not justified in
placing a sign upon the face of the building fronting the
freeway.
It will be up to the City to take a position in this regard .
and let the property owner appeal to the Planning Commission,
the City Council, or the courts if necessary.
It might be well to amend the Ordinance in this regard to
remove any doubt regarding the type of street which permits
the property owner to maintain a sign.
Very truly yours,
�RKE
WAYNE R. PARKER
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER
SIGN ANALYSIS
Total square footage of building facing 48th = 2,718.
Sign area allowed to be 31/2% of face area as above or i 035 x 2718 = 95 sq. ft.
—One face mounted sign on each street the property fronts — 48th (1 face .
mounted sign only). Max size = 95 sq. ft.
--One free standing sign to meet following conditions.
1. Total of all faces not to, exceed 190 sq. ft.
2. Sign to be setback from street the height of the sign (min.)
3. Sign to be in landscaped area.
4. Size may be increased 10 sq. ft. plus 1% per each additional 10'
of sign setback. 19.32.140.
5. Max. height = 45'
DRESS •
1618 Willow Road Palo Alto CA 94304
PHONE
It' -5- . -;
ME OF BUILDER
*- Campbell Neon Inc.
STATE LICENSE NO. C-1131
3
SALES TAX Na
;DRESS •
1120 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, WA • 98109
PHONE
K 623 -1364
.
•
•
. • •
• . • ... ,•
• . '
l
'
I APPLICATION •
` FOR
FOR
l- I_LDIR6 PERMIT -
•
ESTIMATED VALUE 1 D 1/ iC O
! COMPLETED WORK S • J
•
: PERMIT FEE / 141 a
. P M 7 $
3 PLAN CHECK FEE
LATE PERMIT FEE $
TOTAL FEE • _,___
TYPE OF
CONST.
OCCUPANCY .
GROUP
OAtE ISSUED
FIRE
( ZONE .ZONE
USE '
EXPIRAUON DAZE .
FIRE SPRINKLERS
REQUIRED fl Yes III No
MAX.
OCC. LOAD
.:ATION OF WORK / NUMBER E+ STREET
13123 - 48th Avenue South
BLOCK . SU.BDIVISION •
INER
Willard LeVine
.SCRIPTION OF WORK:
NAME OF TENANT:
,Y MATURE OF BUSINESS:
b.U[LuINU
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
• Tukwila, Washington 98037
Phone: (206) 242 -2177
Erection of lettering (INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS) on fascia (A) and
sign with HI insignia and rally stripes. O. These signs arP 4U
integral part of the main building
International Harvester Co.
and motor truck service.
• •
Sale and distribution of motor trucks and parts
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.
•
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 C� orp 0 TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES.
• APPPLICA ' /
N
DRESS
1618 Willow Road P . 'Ito •4 . ,
PHONE
Y 415 328 - 8183
ME OF BUILDER
'<• Epcon Sign 'Company
STATE LICENSE NO. LC-168
sates TAX No.$M578086386
DRESS
,` 1275 Mercer Street, Seattle, WA :, ' ,._
PHONE
x 623 -3100
\
•
•
• •
'
•
•
•
r
f
`;
'
APPLICATION
FOR
j oil
&J- I D=I=f+e PERMIT •
•
:, ESTIMATED VALUE
" COMPLETED WORK S •
'PERMIT FEE
I S
i 'PLAN CHECK FEE S
" LATE PERMIT FEE S
r TOTAL FEE $
TYPE OF
CONST
OCCUPANCY .
GROUP
DAIS ISSUED
FIRE
I ZONE .
USE •
ZONE
EXPIRAIION DALE •
-
I FIRE SPRINKLERS •
I REQUIRED a Yes III No
MAX.
OCC. LOAD
ATION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET
.13123 - 48th Avenue..South
BLOCK • SUBDIVISION' •
CITY. WI' DEV .Uhr'E i
6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Phone: (206) 242-2177
•
'NER
Willard LeVine
:R I PT ION OF WORK:
k - . Erection of iderntjfi.Qati on pylon
•
•
NAME OF TENANT: International Harvester Company
JY NATURE OF BUSINESS: Sale and distribution of motor trUCks and parts
and motor truck sPruicP_
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.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE - AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CO �• ORM TO i U �'.y CODES AN P ORDIN NCES.
APPLICANT
1st
Super - Branch from International Harvester
A Major New Facility to Serve the Growing Needs
Of the Transportation Industry in the Northwest
International Harvester — a vital part of this
area's economy since the turn of the century —
is growing again with Seattle.
We proudly present Super- Branch, our huge
new $2 million complex nearing completion
(July 15th occupancy) in Tukwila, at the in-
tersection of Interurban S. and Interstate 5.
Huge means 35,000 square feet under one roof;
over five acres of space; and a fully equipped,
modern 26 -bay service facility for diesel and
gasoline powered vehicles.
Huge means more than $1.5 million of new and
used vehicles in stock; and $500,000 of parts
■1
•
and supplies, all of it at your service through the
efforts of a trained, experienced staff of 75 men
and women.
We hope you'll welcome Super- Branch, the
most modern facility for truck sales, parts and
service anywhere in the United States. It's our
latest expression of International Harvester's
confidence in a growing Seattle area economy.
•
IN
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER
lb VD
NTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 1 :nI 41 RTIATIONAL'TRUCKS
YI
PI nds7
wuwuuu luliWwuuu IUM
Description of Signs
The fascia is corrugated, plated aluminum and the letters
are white heavy gauge plated aluminum.
The rally stripes are blue heavy gauge plated aluminum
and the logo is heavy gauge plated aluminum -
H black
i - red.
;got =
iiTITnZ 1 1 r r i i( r r r 1 1 1 1 1 r r I i i r iTT1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 I I 11 I;T 1 I 1 11 I I i 11 I 1 I 1
r ;
to '
L P
A
V �
1J1C S Ll
- „43°
ti
r
L
r
••,•
.
' ;
1
DESCRIPTION OF PRIMARY IDENTIFICATION PYLON
The identification pylon which is the subject of the
attached application is designed by your applicant to be the
primary identification of the dealership. This handsome
pylon sign with rally stripe and new International Harvester
corporate marks will identify the dealership and guide the
customers to the main entrance.
The sign is made of weather and impact resistant lexan
plastic panels a new unbreakable plastic developed by
General Electric Company. These panels are supported by a
sturdy bronze colored steel frame.
The height of the sign is 35 feet, and it would be set
back 35 feet from both of the nearest property lines.
Since the legs upon which it stands are six feet tall,
the pylon would not obstruct the view of motorists.
The sign is internally illuminated to the soft, glowing,
steady light.
Each side of the pylon comprise of 174 square feet,
which is 2.4% of the square feet of the side of the building
which is parallel to the face of the sign.
1
2
3
4
SL'(L cos .IE
ALLOKAILE
LATERAL SOIL
PRESSURE (PS3)
VCR FOOT OF UEPTH
DEPTH OF
EMBEDMENT
(dl
NCM ?: -H OF
HORIZONTAL
REBARS
Rrcu);).D
LEa:1:1H1.F
VERTICAL
REDAR
cOGD - -- COMPACT WELL - GRADED
SAND AND GRAVEL
1tARD
.E1 L - CRA'CD FI:C AND COARSE
SAND
141.1 PRAl2 :ED 50 WATER RILL NOT
SIAND1
400
5
6
' U)
AYLP AGE _.. COMPACT FINE SAND
MCi.,I:a.1 CIA
COSt:'ACT 5ANDY LOA)(
I.r SE C !AND AND CRAYEL
LILL BRAINED 50 :: ATLP. WILL NOT
StANDI
200
7 •
8
.
p ` - 6
FOUR - -- SOFT CLAY
CLAY LOASt
:'C AILY CCETUAC : ED SAID
CLAYS CONTAI iE LARGE A`.:LM ;NT0
or ',IL r
.WATER STANDS 14 R!a:c WET 5L450'11
100
.
9
10
Z - X G x ?y'SrL.
/ 'L tE X 37'
a
2 =5�
a
SEC ,aN A -R.
NRT1•'AL f; PAD( CT
Jc^ to `V = F
's FEDPR •c
(:G) IR£GJ.
L-!.'t 3 "r''3
r:
t22 r. J CORP:E45. <%
+GN 7'b .. t,Af0.97 W4'1.7,
aA. /Le Cti/+Cgf re /S
n9nit � / %:2G
i
2 YA.sf / a-r- . -�.-i
Sr £P.fct6rj
If
1 1 . 1 . - ' --4- : 1 4 * i
_,__._/ .3 •
•
.3 3 HER ..•T
P'.f CCD
l�)FC SCE
k
.6 f
j • 1 1 j (1-r ft E.: rR :C.9
5 e ✓! 7 :c
i,
is i Kf ncri.
-±--3
- 1 ' r -
,c.JTJNG
ALES
LI '141 $ U J 14::
t
r - .•n04" -� .r • -v, .- •re
• _ < c
TO L•FTFPAI :NC DEPT)( (31 OF FOUNDATION. CSC TABLE BELOW F00 TI(E CRAM OF 5011. ArrLtrAOLE
TO THE 300 SITE. IF 2:0 CFAUE OF SEMIS AFPLICADLC. (55Ci1 .U" ROCK. CR 51(ALLCW :6 ATER TABLE),
ADVLE TEXLITE.
I. F .CNDATION L•'S1C115 PASLD EN THE UIOFCFEI BUILI11 :Y; CODE, 1115 EDI:MN. VOLT :AIF 1.
L. SOIL GRADES 33.40 ALLOW ACLC LATERAL SOIL PRESSURES ARE FROM TABLE 123.33 OF D.B. C.
3. FOUNDATIONS WERE DESIGa :5005010 LATER AL .501L FRESSURET F_CAi. TO TWICE THE TABULATED
VALUES.
1. FOUNDATION 15 T:ASCD , :”: A NO - : -COPS TF!31FD CCl2P1?1c5: AT THE SEP 000 PAVEMENT).
5. F'n11:1DA73ON SIM L1. FF. ('fd'z ^D AGAINST WAI.IS OF FRCAVAT!e ?l. NO BACK F13L P FFEa1TTFD-
GENEP.AL NOTES:
1. DF 1C.a " ::D LOAD 05 FSF.
L ALL 005305075.! :;AL3 Et 5059 P51 COVFe S1VE STRE! 2 5.1)0
AI 15 �1Yi+.
3. P.E.: FCRCO20 ST SHALL BE:.tTFRNLDIATE GRALE A-STSI A -(5.
s.
5T.007UR AL S7E61, SHALL CC3IFCPM TO .. TM A -36.
5. ELEClk:CAL (.C! D 1 13.35 AMP. 100 VOLTS. 904 F. F. 60 CYCLE.
6. LAMP! ( 6) F(AT(0 CW /140 LAl2F6
1 B ALLASTS I'3 "41' /£RS.1L 11.113 A
441 UN TI.T43.1
74E50 EALLAST DANE BUILT -114 TDR•A (:.ME DELAT RELAY).
L CIRCUIT II TALL- 1. 3. • 4
•
32 DA2.LA*T5 2, 5. • 6
9. T&40C) 11P FRONZ0 PAI1:TED MEMBERS 'A1714 =TILER I LCL 0E6Y0
GLY.(PIC EP05300 - -- MUST BE SPRAY APLIZEO.
ON F56712 c+•1 •r.0 L.AmDs
R I1 tank :6313.
E..ECT,GN G1.;; '0.4 P 33
6'w JS
TEXLITE
DALLAS 111 C . T [AAS
Y_al[ Lit ..O
nwArr •: w.�t ^M ..O
L 1.Ers f_r }rw c ,„,,f;3.9.,- r
RIF 152fruI
i3i23 L+%
1kflJ
\ITIY APRaA L
i
r
7 E g `11EQ @' O()
1
1
1
1
"•STRAN" PRE - FINISHED "SR" •
ROOF• SHEETS - DAWN YELLOW
1
1
1
"- STRAN" PRE- FINISHED "SA"
WALL SHEETS - DAWN ,
-YELLOW .
1
p IS THS INCH 1
•
I 111111II ..
2 3
•ALL RAKE TRIM AND
'GUTTERS TO BE
- MIDNIGHT BRONZE
1
1
i
1
11' -0" X14 OVERHEAD
DOORS - MANUALLY . •
•OPERATED
- .
1
1
1
1
1
2
- -ALL STRUCTURAL MU
DRIP TRIM, ETC. TO
--MIDNIGHT BRONZE
06 6Z 9G LZ 9Z SZ bZ CZ ZZ LZ. OZ 61 91 LI. 91 GL 41 '£L . ZI i 14
.�li� 4, ii iiiili�.u_i Ali, ili�iiil liiiiil
i�iiiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiliiii�iilili�i �.ILiii.i�iiiiliii�� iii.l��rii.,iiii.l�i i�iniliiiiiiilliiilI���IIi�it�hiniii li. iiiliili��I
i,. .t7Y l .\. 1, f 1 1 'S- t12`�:e.`,'.e"�'.�T'l„».41 IMF W , iii�'. A 4 1. i 3 b +e . 4^..rMtl/ < JV Fdm 1 .. f J
nue
ip
•
1
1
1
1
-3070 METAL••
• -WALK DOOR'
LIONS,
ALL STRUCTURAL
MULLIONS , DRIP TRIM,
ETC. TO BE MIDNIGHT .
BRONZE
i
u
—'THIS 000 R TO
HAVE ELECT.
- OPERATOR
8 "X6 "X16'= CONC. '
BLOCK ( W/ SKIM COAT
-0F PLASTER )
2841' N. MAROA AVE., FRES NO ,. CALIFORN I A
i ;An ° �r:ti: { �-,..'�..n',Y. S.s?• ,",w ;k .. "`},.:':SFjb'
6 7
IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS
_CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS" DUE" TO
THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
• - "STRAN" PRE- FINISHED "SA"
••FAS SHEETS - MIDNIGHT BRONZE -,
SHEETS 88 CORNER /SIDE TRIM ONLY
-FOR 4- CORNERS - ALL OTHER FLASHINGS,
---S-TRUCTURAL, .ETC. - BY OTHERS' .
SC :' 1/16" 'a. I'- O "-
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT
WINDOWS W/ IS" HIGH
GLASS - WELD . PANELS
BELOW •
SOLAR BRONZE GLASS '-
CgOOD @MOWS •. d0••G] OUQT@THOM Goon EZ100
•
( H
• -HEIC-
30 70
DOOR ?
•
E L