Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L93-0078 - PACIFIC NORTHWEST GROUP A - COST PLUS APPEALl93-0078 17680 southcenter parkway cost plus ' . � City of Tukwila Department of Community Development City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE John W. Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Board of Adjustment will be holding a pubic hearing on November 4, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room #3 located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the following: CASE NUMBER: APPELLANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING L93 -0078: Cost Plus Wall Mural Christopher Hungerland Appeal of staff's decision regarding whether the graphic proposed by Cost Plus constitutes a sign per TMC 19.08.210. 17680 Southcenter Pkwy, Tukwila. Persons wishing . to comment on the above case may do so by written statement or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above case may be obtained at the Tukwila Planning Division. The City encourages you to notify your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above item. Published: Seattle Times October 24 & 31, 1993 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. 1 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206-P431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1993 Mr. Nesheim called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present were Mr. Nesheim, Mr. Goe, and Mrs. Altmayer. MRS. ALTMAYER MOVED TO EXCUSE MR. LOCKHART'S ABSENCE, BASED ON THE UNCERTAINTY OF HIS POSITION. MR. NESHEIM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Nesheim noted that this meeting was a continuation from the July 8, 1993 meeting. H93 -001: Marcus Lin Marcus Lin 4066 173rd Pl. S.E., Bellevue, WA 98008: Mr. Lin entered into the record a memorandum to clarify earlier statements and testimony in the first hearing. Darren Wilson, Code Enforcement Officer, City of Tukwila: Darren Wilson clarified that this was new evidence which staff has not reviewed. Mr. Lin proceeded to read the memorandum into the record. He then stated that some members of the Board, Mr. Wilson, and Chief Olivas appear to believe that, it is his position, that no physical inspection was made of the premises on September 17, 1992. During the discussion, Mr. Nesheim explained that he objected to the statement, "Some members of the Board, Mr. Wilson, and Chief Olivas appear to believe..." because the board members have not said anything. They haven't heard the evidence yet. Mr. Lin retracted his statement. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Board of Adjustment Minutes August 5, 1993 Rick Beeler, Director DCD, City of Tukwila: • Page 2 Mr. Beeler entered into the record a letter dated July 28, 1993 from Mr. Lin requesting a continuance. Mr. Nesheim asked if the gentlemen sitting next to Mr. Lin is indeed his attorney, please introduce himself and give his name and address since he was present at the meeting. John W. Kraft 3730 N.E. 194th St. Seattle, WA 98155: Mr. Kraft stated that he was an attorney, but is not entering an appearance tonight. He was there only to advice Mr. Lin if he had any questions. Mr. Beeler wanted to know before proceeding any further, if Mr. Lin wanted to request a continuance as stated in the letter mailed to his office. Mr. Lin said he was abandoning his request for a continuance. Mrs. Altmayer asked Mr. Beeler if he wanted a continuance for more time to prepare. Mr. Beeler stated that he only wanted to understand what action Mr. Lin is asking of the Board. Mr. Lin stated that he wanted to settle this case. Mr. Nesheim asked Staff about the progress made toward complying with the Uniform Building Code. Mr. Beeler stated that all along the City wanted Mr. Lin to apply for a building permit. Whether or not the work performed was maintenance and repair is the decision of the Building Official, Duane Griffin. The questions the staff has is whether the work perform will conform to the building codes. All our ownership information is from the King County Assessor's computerized records mailed to us. It shows Mr. Rice as the owner. Since Mr. Lin applied for the permit, we will review the application, and see if it conforms to the current Building and Energy Codes. Darren Wilson requested Mr. Lin to withdraw his statement about him not performing in a professional manner and that the inspections were not made. Darren stated again that the inspections were made and the proper procedures were taken. Mr. Lin was aware of the violations because on March 19, 1993, he stated that he Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 3 August 5, 1993 was the new property owner and would be willing to clean up the property. Darren Wilson requested a two month continuation because that would allow Mr. Lin to obtain an approved building permit with all the work completed and inspected. Mr. Lin clarified to the Board that he did not state that Darren Wilson did not make an inspection, just that he tried to clean up the property and received another letter from the City. Mr. Nesheim said that he understood about King County Assessor's records and that the staff did everything that could be done under the circumstances. MRS. ALTMAYER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO OCTOBER 7, 1993 AS REQUESTED BY DARREN WILSON, MR. GOE SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. During the discussion, Mrs. Altmayer asked Mr. Lin if he would like to withdraw his appeal. Mr. Lin answered no. • Mr. Nesheim asked if there were any reason to continue the meeting to October 7, 1993. Mr. Lin stated that he had a second issue of does the violation still exist? Mr. Beeler stated that the issue is not whether the violation exist now. The issue is the appeal and whether the violation existed as on March 1992. The point of continuance is to afford Mr. Lin the opportunity to bring .his property into conformance so he can withdraw his appeal. The appeal is what brought us here. This was not something the staff brought before the Board. If the appeal was withdrawn it would just be a Housing Code issue, or a Building Code issue before the staff. Mr. Goe asked if there were any penalties involved other than to demolish or obtain a building permit. Mr. Wilson answered no. AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, MR. NESHEIM CALLED TO. CONTINUE THE MEETING ON OCTOBER 7, 1993 AS APPROVED EARLIER. BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, MR. GOE AND MRS. ALTMAYER VOTED NO, THE MOTION WAS DENIED. ;+? » Page 4 MR. GOE MOVED, THAT BASED UPON STAFFS FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS AND TESTIMONY GIVEN, THAT THE APPEAL BE DENIED AND STAFF'S DECISION BE UPHELD. MRS. ALTMAYER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Nesheim noted that they could appeal to the Superior Court. MR. GOE MOVE TO ADOPT AS PRINTED THE MINUTES OF MAY 25, AND JULY 8, 1993, MRS. ALTMAYER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS . UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. During the Director's report Mr. Beeler discussed with the Board all current projects in the City. MR. GOE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MRS. ALTMAYER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Prepared by, Sylvia Osby City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPELLANT: REQUEST: STAFF REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: RECOMMENDATIONS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: Prepared October 28, 1993 November 4, 1993 L93 -0078 Christopher Hungerland Appeal of an administrative decision regarding a proposed wall mural which constitutes a sign as defined by TMC 19.08.210. 17680 Southcenter Boulevard Commercial C -2 (Regional. Retail) Denial Jack Pace, 431 -3686 Kim Moloney, 431 -3673 A. B. C. D. Letter from staff dated October 3, 1993 to Christopher Hungerland stating that the Cost Plus proposal constitutes a sign. Letter from appellant dated October 7, 1993 requesting appeal of staff decision. Detail Board (Figures Only) Color Board (Building Facade) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Staff Report to the L93 -0078: Cost Plus Board of Adjustment Page 2 BACKGROUND The appellant, Christopher Hungerland representing Cost Plus Inc., proposed to the City of Tukwila Planning Division to design graphics to be displayed across the facade of the Cost Plus store located at 17680 Southcenter Boulevard. The pproposed wall graphics will be referred to as a wall mural to provide consistency with Mr. Hungerland's appeal letter (attachment B). Upon review of this proposal by planning staff, Mr. Hungerland was notified by letter on October 3, 1993 that the proposed wall mural constituted a sign, and was therefore subject to all applicable regulations of the Tukwila Sign Code. This letter also informed Mr. Hungerland of his right to appeal this decision to the Board of Adjustments under TMC 19.12.040. On October 9, 1993, Mr. Hungerland appealed the decision by Senior Planner Jack Pace that the proposed wall mural constitutes a sign, and requesting a review hearing by the Tukwila Board of Adjustments. FINDINGS The appeal issue is whether or not staff interpreted the definition of "sign" correctly. Section 19.08.210 of the Tukwila Municipal Code defines a sign as: "Sign" means any medium, including point of walls, merchandise, or visual communication device, its structure and component parts, which is used or intended to be used to attract attention to the subject matter for advertising or identification purposes. Bulletin boards and readerboards are considered signs. Section 19.12.040 of the Tukwila Municipal Code outlines the appeal process by stating: Rejection of any application for a sign permit shall be made in writing to the Planning Director and shall state the reasons therefor. A copy of the rejection notice shall be signed "received" by the applicant or be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the applicant at his designated address. Within thirty days, the applicant may file with the planning department a notice of appeal and request for review by the Board of Adjustment at a regular meeting not later than sixty days from the date the notice of appeal is filed, unless a later date is requested by the applicant. After a review hearing, the Board of Adjustments shall file with the Planning Director and send to the applicant a written decision either denying the application or directing the Planning Director to issue the permit. 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 forty days of the final decision of the Board of Adjustment. Cost Plus, Inc. is a retail chain which sells imported items such as wine, baskets, glassware, and woodcrafts. The content of the proposed wall mural consists of human figures engaged in a variety of activities. Planning staff interpreted these activities and the use of Human forms as related to products sold within the store. Evidence of this is provided by figure #6, holding two bottles of wine, and figure #3, holding a basket (see attachment C). Staff Report to the L93 -0078: Cost Plus Board of Adjustment Page 3 The intent of the planning division is not to discourage all wall decorations, but to disassociate decoration from advertising. This is the case with the Tony Roma's restaurant located on Southcenter Boulevard. The restaurant facade incorporates geometric shapes into the architecture of the building, yet these shapes have no association to any product sold by the restaurant, or the company image. Cost Plus has two additional option, which of yet have not been pursued. These options include: 1) Modification of the current wall mural design to a point at which no identification can be made between images represented in the mural, and any product sold by Cost Plus or image connected with the company (i.e. logos, marketing graphics used by the company on shopping bags, receipts etc.). 2) Application to the Planning Commission to have the proposed wall mural designated a "unique sign ". A unique sign is defined under TMC 19.08.260 as: "Unique sign" means a building, or other structure of unique design and exterior decor, where the entire structure may be considered an advertising device, including but not limited to shapes imitating hats, boots, tires, statues, parts of anatomy or manufactured items such as airplanes, cars, boats, carriages, or symbols which may or may not contain lettering. CONCLUSION Staff believes the current pro osal does constitute a s defined by the Sign Code. The proposed wall mural is designated as a sign since wit is used or intended to be used to attract attention to the subject matter for advertising or identification purposes" through the use of images that can be identified with products sold within the Cost Plus store. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusion, the appeal should be denied. Cost I'Ius, Inc. 201 Clay Street Oakland, California 91607 'Icicpl►one: 510.893 • 7300 Facsimile: 510 •W)3.64i 15 November 3, 1993 City of Tukwila Planning Commission 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 COST PLIJS WORLD MARKET Re: Wall Mural at Cost Plus World Market, Southcenter Parkway Dear Planning Commissioners: As you know, we are appealing the commission's decision with respect to our proposed wall mural. To help you understand our position -- that the proposed wall mural is an original, abstract work of art, not a sign -- I've enclosed an illustration of the mural with this letter. The mural was created by Luxon•Carra, an internationally - respected design firm with over 60 years of combined commercial art experience. Luxon•Carra's retail portfolio includes projects in Sweden, Singapore and the United Kingdom. Luxon•Carra's Gail Taras, originator of the mural illustrations, has over 15 years design experience including work for American Express and Japan Airlines. Our own Art Director, Leotie Pratt, who has applied Gail's art architecturally, received her Bachelor's Degree in Advertising from the University of Washington. She also studied design for two years at the California School. of Arts and Crafts. Recently, she received a prestigious West Coast Point -of- Purchase Display award. Needless to say, an immense amount of time, talent, thought, and experience went into the creation of this mural. The result is an intriguing, thought - provoking work of art, an abstract visual extension of Cost Plus' unique relationship with craftspeople and cultures from throughout the world. Because of its artistic and cultural value, we think the mural would be a definite enhancement to the Southcenter community and the City of Tukwila. Moreover, as an original, abstract work of art, we feel the mural falls outside the characteristics of a "sign ", as outlined in section 19.08.210 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. Thank you for your time and for hearing our appeal. Sincerely, Elaine Salmonson -Olson Vice President, Advertising ,, ......._..._._.,.. John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director October 15, 1993 . Mr. Christopher Hungerland 5301 Rose Loop NE Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 This is to verify that we are in receipt of exhibits for the Cost Plus administrative sign appeal, on the above date. The architect, Christopher Hungerland, would like the following to be noted: all exhibits delivered today are to replace formerly submitted exhibits; and the background color that shows as a pale brown on one of the exhibits is wrong - the correct background color is cream, as noted in all other exhibits. Diana Paintei J Associate Planner cc Jack Pace Kim Molony 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 •. Fax (206) 4313665. CHRISTOPHER LEET HUNGERLAND, Architect 5301 Rose Loop NE, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 tel: 206/842 -0450 fax: 206/842-3882 October 7, 1993 Mr. L. Rick Beeler, Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Wall Mural at Cost Plus World Market, Southcenter Parkway Dear Mr. Beeler: On behalf of my client, Cost Plus, Inc., I am hereby filing an appeal of the decision of Mr. Jack Pace with respect to the referenced project. At the direction of the staff of the planning department, I will provide to you, no later than October 15, graphic documentation in support of this appeal. Our appeal is as follows. 1. The definitions of both "Sign" (TMC 19.08.210) and "Unique Sign" (TMC 19.08.260) are inclusive to the point that virtually any decoration and /or elaboration of a surface might be included at the discretion of the planning official, thus no true "definition" of a "Sign" or "Unique Sign" exists. This ambiguity constitutes an unreasonable burden upon applicants, who are then placed in the position of continually resubmitting a proposal until it satisfies the individual taste and interpretation of the planning official. In his letter of October 3, 1993, Mr. Jack Pace seeks to make the distinction between "decoration" and "advertising" as it might apply to our submittal. We believe that we have met his stated criteria for "decoration" and should thus be permitted to proceed with the "wall mural" depicted in our submittal. A. There can be no doubt that the images proposed in our submittal are "abstract" in character. Graphic #4, for example, depicts a figure which has "wings" on its feet and back. This image may be recognizable, by some, as a mythological character, but it is undeniably an abstraction of the human form. Graphic #3 may be "clearly discernible" to Mr. Pace as a human figure to the extent that it is humanoid, but it is clearly and undeniably an abstract representation. OCT 1 2 X993 t. (.. `..... B. The images proposed in our submittal include graphic components other than the abstracted forms mentioned above. We believe that these images are, in fact, abstract to the point that an observer will be unable to associate a specific image with a product sold by the Cost Plus World Market. Absent any further information, for example, graphic #7 is difficult in the extreme to associate with any specific activity or retail product(s). The same is equally true for all eight of the graphics proposed by our submittal. 2. In the absence of a meaningful working definition of what constitutes a "Sign ", an applicant is left with two means of proceeding: Aesthetic sensibility and precedent. A. We believe that the graphic images which we propose in our submittal constitute a high level of artistry. We recognize that such judgments are subjective; nonetheless, we feel that the character of the storefront which will result from the professional execution of the "wall mural" which we propose will make a positive contribution to the existing retail structure, to the Southcenter Parkway area, and to the City of Tukwila. B. The free - standing structure immediately to the west of our proposed project's site, the restaurant Cucina! Cucina! is decorated with the image of a "Cinzano" label which has been fatigued and distressed so as to bring it to a level of abstraction such that it constitutes "decoration ", rather than "advertising ". In meetings and discussions which I have held with members of the City's planning staff, this particular image has been cited as a desirable precedent. There is no question that the image recognizably represents the product "Cinzano ", an Italian Vermouth. There is no question that the surface on which this image appears is the wall of an establishment, "Italian" in character, which openly and enthusiastically advertises its determination to sell food and beverages. And it is clearly logical to conclude that it is possible to purchase and consume Cinzano as a patron of Cucina! Cucina! Given this precedent, accepted by the City and cited by its staff, we believe unequivocally that our proposal exceeds any standard of "abstraction ", "fatigue ", and/or "distress" to which we might reasonably be expected to adhere. Thank you for your consideration of our appeal. I look forward to hearing from you concerning the date, time, and location of the hearing itself. I will provide the supporting graphic information, to which I have made reference, to you as I have indicated. Cordially, Christopher Hungerland cc: Millicent Hall, Store Development Manager Cost Plus, Inc. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director October 3, 1993 Mr. Chris Hungerland Christopher Leet Hungerland, Architect 5301 Rose Loop NE Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 Dear Mr. Hungerland, The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development has completed its review of your proposal for a wall mural, dated September 23, 1993, which depicts human figures participating in a variety of activities, to be displayed on the storefront of the new Cost Plus World Market outlet on Southcenter Parkway. Several criteria were used to establish the nature of this proposal. Specifically, Section 19.08.210 of the Tukwila Municipal Code defines a sign as: "Sign" means any medium, including painted walls, merchandise, or visual communication device, its structure and component parts, which is used or intended to be used to attract attention to the subject matter for advertising or identification purposes. Bulletin boards and readerboards are considered signs. Based upon this definition, we believe the wall mural proposal constitutes a sign, and due to the design of the mural will likely attract attention and//or advertise the subject matter of the business. Evidence of this is provided in the mural design through the use of clearly discernible human figures participating in activities directly related to products sold within the business (i.e. weaving, basket - making, glass - blowing). It is not the intent of the City to classify all building or wall decorations as signs, but rather to make a distinction between what is decoration, and what is advertising. Abstract graphics and artwork of a purely decorative nature, which are unrelated to the activity carried on within the building/site do not constitute a sign. Graphics or artwork which are not abstract, and which relate to any activity within the building/site constitute advertising, and are regarded as a sign. At this point, you have three options. First, you may request to have your wall mural proposal classified as a unique sign. TMC 19.08.260 defines as unique sign as: " Unique sign means a building or other structure of unique design and exterior decor, where the entire structure may be considered an advertising device. including but not limited to shapes imitating hats, boots, tires, statues, parts of anatomy or manufactured items such as airplanes, cars, boats, carriages, or symbols which may or may not contain lettering ". To qualify as a unique sign, the sign must be approved by the Planning Commission; judgement may be approved if in the udgement ofpthe Planning Commission the effect of the proposed sign would not contribute to a cluttered, confusing or unsafe condition. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 11100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Second, you may alter your current mural design to a point where it is deemed to be abstract. and unrelated to any activity carried on within the business as outlined in TMC, 19.08.210. Your last option, under TMC 19.12.040 is to appeal this decision. Within thirty days from receipt of this letter, you may file with the Planning Division a notice of appeal and request for review by the Board of Adjustment at a regular meeting not later than sixty days from the date the notice of appeal is filed, unless a later date is requested by the applicant. If I can be of any assistance, you may contact me at 431 -3686. Sincerely, Jack Pace Senior Planner [. (A/Lo_a( 0-41/uut/ CU cam, 144 ! 52 . L5 o gQM 2. Dr wets dt'u C4 Qt gpvF� Kazin - gI 5+1- - Ivy cc.. 6a6-1,,a M s j . 14 it 0144MS • ; • I , - • . • ,• \ • -.1,..”,••"••••••••••• • COST PLUS WORLD MARKET / TUKWILA STOREFRONT SIGNAGE AND MURALS STOREFRONT SIGN 20' wide x 6' high (120 sci. ft.) Internally illuminated Individual pan channel letters and graphic • DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #1 DETAIL BOARD ONLY DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #2 Figure #3 WALL MURALS Each Image 6' high • Two colors of paint (I urgunday and Tight Hue) on wall DETAIL BOARD ONLY DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #4 Figure #5 DETAIL BOARD ONLY DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure,# Figure #7 DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #8 COST PLUS SOUTHCENTER STORE Store # 73 / Seattle / September 20,1993 Millicent Hall / Store Development Manager Leotie Pratt / Art Director 510 - 893 -7300 COST FLUS WORLD MARKET / TUKWILA ENLARGED VIEW OF STOREFRONT MURALS DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #1 PF.TAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #5 • '.DETAIL oonr, ONLY • • • . : • DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #2 DETAIL BOARD ONLY Figure #3 DETAIL BOARD ONLY OF.TAIL 50ARD ONLY Figure #6 Figure #7 PF.TAIL BOARD ONLY Figure wa •' •-• • • .