330 ADMIRAL WAY.pdfZ
Cr
41
CA
U)
LU
-j
Lu
Z
Uj
L)
LU
LL
t1i
L)
8
Z
Ell
ME
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 5TH "ENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX 1206) 771-0221
HEARING EXAMINER
S t
Ruly
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION 30
139?
OF THE HEARING EXAMINER IDEpt
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICANT:
CASE NO.:
LOCATION:
APPLICATION:
REVIEW PROCESS:
A variance to allow a wall mounted sip height of 19 feet 7 inches,
where the maximum sip height is 14 feet as measured from the
ground directly below the sip (see Exhibit A, Attachments 2
through 5).
Variance; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes I "t
final decision,
MAJOR ISSUES:
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
Section 20.60 (SIGN PERMITS).
b.' Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
Chapter 20.85 (VARLANCES)
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION:
Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions
Hearing Examiner Decision: Approve with conditions
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the official file which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report. and
after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The
hearing on the application was opened at 9:01 a.m., May 15, 1997, in the Plaza Room, Edmonds
Library, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 9:09 a.m. Participants at the public hearing and
the exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is
available in the Planning Division.
HEARING COMMENTS:
The following is a summary of the comments offered at the public hearing.
0 Incorporated August ii, 1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan,Japan
Z
L
in
Le 14
U1
U.:
T i
Z I
1-- 1
Z
LU
0
Q
LL.
1B
Y
8
Z
From the City: ,
John Bissell reviewed the staff report and recommended conditions.
From the Applicant:
Steve Zamberlin, Agent for the Applicant, said he agreed with the staff report and the
recommended conditions. He said the proposed sip is a replacement for an existing sign
and there will be no change of use or impact.
From the Community:
Roger Hertrich said he was against raising sips above the allowed height. He said sips
can be placed at a lower location on the building. He didn't believe the application meets
the variance criteria.
Response from the Applicant:
Steve Zamberlin said the business has been in business for 15 years with the current sip
which is to be replaced by the proposed sip. The proposal is very similar to other
businesses and signs in the area. The proposed location is the only location on the
building where a sign can be located as the building structure limits sign placement to the
fascia band. He noted that the first floor of the building is basically all windows.
Response from the Community:
Roger Hertrich said Arnie's is a very visible and well known restaurant. He believes 14
feet is an adequate height for a sign. He felt the more we comply with the code, the more
it is fair for everyone.
Response from the City:
John Bissell said staff believed the proposal meets the criteria.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Site Description
1. Site Development And Zoning:
0
a) Facts:
1.) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Commercial Waterfront (CW).
2) Existing and Proposed Development: The. site is currently developed with a
commercial building which contains retail, Arnie's Restaurant and office uses.
Arnie's Restaurant currently has two sign, both of which are mounted on the
building. One is located on a fixed awning and reads: Arnie's Restaurant and
Bar and the other one which is located on the fascia of the building reads: Arnie's
3) Terrain and Vegetation The site is nearly flat and has ornamental trees and other
vegetation in planting beds (see Exhibit, Attachment 4).
.0,
Z
t
LI
Cn
L4
La 14
Ui
U.
Z
Z
LU
2
M
U
0
a
Uj
X
LL
W
Y
0
Z
�11
M
2. Neighboring Development And Zoning:
a) Facts:
1) North: Developed with a commercial building which contains retail, Richard's
Restaurant and office uses, and is zoned CW. Richard's Restaurant has one large
sign which reads: Richard's Waterfront Bar and Grill.
2) South: Developed with a Parking lot and Port of Edmonds Marina facilities, and
zoned CW. Further south is Anthony's Restaurant. It has one large free standing
sign in front of the restaurant which reads Anthony's Home Port. It also has two
signs on the building, including a neon sign over 14 feet high which reads:
Anthony's Home Portfteshftsh daily.
3) East: Developed with a street and Burlington Northern Railroad Tracks. Beyond
the Burlington Northern Tracks, is land developed with a commercial/industrial
complex and zoned CG under a contract rezone.
4) West: Puget sound waters are located to the west and are currently developed with
the Port of Edmonds Marina, and zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW).
b) Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding
zoning and development.
B. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance
1. Compliance with CW
2. Zoning Standards
a) Facts:
(1) The fundamental site development standards in a CW zone are set forth in
Chapter 16.55.
(2) The proposed building and site development conforms to all CW requirements.
(3) ECDC Chapter 20.60.020 states the standards by which signs may be developed.
including height. The standards from which the applicant is requesting relief are,
"Sign height for attached signs is the vertical distance frqm the midpoint of the
t�p of the sign to the finished grade. "(ECDC 20.60.020(l))(1)) and 'Attached
signs shall not exceed 14feet in height. " (ECDC 20.60.020(19)(2)).
b) Conclusion: As conditioned the proposal complies with the development standards
for CW zones as set forth in Chapter 16.55 and 20.60 except the standard for which
the applicant is seeking a variance.
3. Compliance with requirement for a Variance
ECDC Chapter 20.85 (Variances) states an applicant may request a variance from the
standards of this Chapter pursuant to the procedures set forth in ECDC Chapter 20.85.
Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC also sets forth the mechanism whereby a provision of the
L a
(7)
Code may be varied on a case -by -case basis if. the application of the provision would
result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship.
Z
a) Facts:
Luf
1)
ECDC Section 20.85.010 establishes the decisional criteria.with which a variance
'4 UI.
U 01
request must comply in order to be granted by the Hearing Examiner. These
criteria include: a special circumstance must exist; no special privilege is granted;
lit Mi,
the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code; the
-J I-- �
si) LL
proposal will not be detrimental and is the minimum necessary.
0
2)
The applicant states that special circumstances exist: "The proposal meets tile
_3
Special Circumstance criteria as Arnie's Restaurant is located on tile secondfloor
U.
of the Landing retail and office complex and the proposed sign location on the
T
:r UJ
building is the only wall surface area on the building that Arnie's Restaurant has
ge t�-,
as an exteriorfacade. The bottom of thefacia area on the wall starts at 12-feet, 7
0!
inches and extends up to 20-feet, 6 - inches 77tis is the only area on the building
LU!,
for a secondfloor tenant to place a wall sign.
3)
The applicant states that the proposal would not be a grant of special privilege as
0
the City has granted two other sign height variances in the immediate area for
second floor restaurants. One was granted for a building directly to the north. The
other was granted for a building located approximately 1,200 feet south of the
U.
subject building.
LU V,
4)
The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
0
and by developing a restaurant along the waterfront where restaurants are
Z
encouraged to bring people to the waterfront. The Comprehensive Plan allows
signage necessary to identify the business.
5)
The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as
the applicant is developing a restaurant where the zoning code allows restaurants.
6)
The applicant states that the proposal will not be detrimental as the proposed
illuminated sign is replacing an existing illuminated sign of approximately the
same sign area at approximately the same height.
7)
The applicant states that this is the minimum variance because there is no
0
alternative location on the existing building to locate the proposed sign.
8)
The proposed design has been approved by the ADB with the condition that the
applicant obtain a variance to allow the proposed sign height (File No.
ADB-96-34) (see Exhibit A, Attachment 6).
9)
Additionally, staff found that a sign placed on the first floor of the building in
conformance with the sign height requirements would be difficult to see from the
street as the street trees obscure the view.
b) Conclusions:
1) Special Circumstances
0
z
J
U)
U.:
Ln
Z
M
L)
0
0
Ui
LL
0
z
0
I
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-61
Page 5
Special circumstances include the size, shape, topography location or
surroundings of the property and public necessity for public structures.
Special circumstances appear exist for this proposal due to the location of the
proposed restaurant and the location of the surrounding street trees.
2) Special Privilege
It does not appear that any special privilege will be demonstrated in granting
this variance as other sign height variances have been granted by the City of
Edmonds for second floor restaurants located in an adjacent building and in a
nearby building.
3) Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan
Approval of the proposed variance would allow for the development of the
site in a manner consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and the
Comprehensive Plan designation of the site.
4) Not Detrimental
Approval of the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or welfare because no new impacts will be created.
5) Minimum Required
The request is the minimum necessary as there is no alternative sign location
on the subject building.
C. Technical Committee
1) Comments from City Divisions and Departments:
a) Fact: No City Divisions or Departments submitted comments.
D. Critical Areas Ordinance
1. Review:
a) Fact: The subject proposal is exempt from critical areas review under ECI 20,15B
(Critical Areas Ordinance).
b) Conclusion: The applicant has complied with the requirements of the ECDC 20.15B.
DECISION
Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the requftfor a variance is approved,
subject to the following conditions:
.01 1. This variance is to allow the proposal in the location identified on the proposed site plan
and building elevation (See Exhibit A, Attachment 4). Any other structures, additions or
4
1*1
[k]
Case No. V 97-61
Page 6
remodels would have to conform with the typical setbacks or height requirements for the
zone or the applicant/property owner would be rc�quired to obtain an additional variance.
2. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds
Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinantes.
3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit from the Building Division for the proposed sign
prior to installation.
4. The permit is transferable to future tenants and owners, but not to other locations.
Entered this 29h day of May, 1997, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner
under Chapter 20. 100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds.
00 . . . . ........
Ron McConnell
HtMng Examiner
WI�MN�11; - W4
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filink reconsideration's and
appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should
contact the Planning Department for further procedural information.
REQUEST FOR RECONSMERATION
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Exaniiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the
initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register
and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land
which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request tnuest
cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances
governing the type of application being reviewed.
APPEMS
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the
name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and
reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with
0
z
Le
21
I,:
U.
LAI
Z
0
0
LAJ
X
U.
0
z
69,
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 9 7
Page 7
the Pommunity, Development Director Within ten (10) working days after the date of the
decision being appealed.
LAPSE -OF APPROVAL
Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains A building,pernift, or if no building is
required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval,
the conditi6nal'use permit shall expire and be- null and void, unless the owner files an
application for an extension of the time before the expiration date.'
NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of -the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner re quest
a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office.
EXHIBIT:
The following exhibit was offered and entered into the record.
A. Planning Division Advisory Report
PARTIES oF RECORD:
Amie's Restaurant
300 Admiral Way, Suite 105
Edmonds, WA 98020
Steve Zamberlin
National Sip Corp.
1255 Westlake Avenue North
Seattle, WA 98109
z
141
WI
- I
LU
U.
LD
z
LU I
0
0
LU
LL
us
u
P
0
z
M
Lu
CITY OF EDMONDS -BARBARA FAHEY
Pis
MAYOR
250 STH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 420e) 771-0220 '-,FAX 1206),77170221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4C C)
ic..
Public Works Planning Parks and Recreation oEngineering,
t
Letter of Transmittal
Date:
May 8, 1997
To.
Amie's Restaurant
300 Admiral Way, STE 105
Edmonds, WA,98020
Su4ject:
V-9740
Transmitting,
Agenda & Staff Report
For.Your Information: M
As you requested:
For your, file;
Comment:
Note attachments:
Sincerely,
cn W;
LU 3:;
-i
(n LA.
w
T)
3: LAJ
�- x
z �-
; 0
Z I--
LU w
0-
01--
L'..f
Lk,
c
LLI ff,
u !i
81-
z
El
El
tI%_4 W 'All v ym
k1.
M6 -1",,
M.g
N
V11i
g0w I
4
�T
AS 40 R, 1�
AA,�
E�
410
gy
R. . . . . . ..... .....
@5�
CITY OF EDMONDS,
AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS,WA 98020
Z
PLANNING DIVISION
ADVISORY REPORT
FINDINGS1 CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
do
To: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner
w U.
Z—u 0,
From-.
John Bissell
LL Project Planner
Da� MAY 7,1997
Z 0 File: V-97-40
Arnie's Restaurants
Hei ring.Date, Time, And Place: Mpy 15,1997, At 9:00 AM,
Plaza Room - Edmonds Library
650 Main Street
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section, Page
1. R ITRODUCTION ............................................ 2
A. Application ............................................................... 6 ........ .... ...................................................................... 2
B. Description of Proposal .................................. I .......... ... ........................
C. Recommendations ......................................................................................... 2
H. INDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................... ......................... 2
A. Site Description ................................................................................ * ......................................................... 2
B. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance ...................... ................................... 3
C.'rechnical Committee .................................................................................................................................. 5
D. Critical Areas Ordinance ............................................................................................................................ 5
M. CONSIDERATION AND APPEALS ................. 6 ........................... 6 ..................................... 5
A. Request for Reconsideration .................................................................................... I ................................... 5
B. Appeals ............................................................................ I ........................................................................... 5
IV. APSE OF APPROVAL .......................................................................................................... 5
V. OTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR ........................................................... 5
..........................
VI. PPENDICES ........................................................................ 6
V11. PARTIES OF RECORD .................................................................................. 6
V9761.DOC/M 7.1097/Stafflkport
ay
Z
cc
UJ
LL
La
Z
0
0
UJ
us
Z
E
C7
Arnie's Restaurant
File No. V-97-61
Page 2 ol`6
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Application
1. ARplicant Arnie's Restaurants (see Attachment 2).
2. Site Location: 300 Admiral Way (see Attachments 1, 2 and 4).
3. Request: A variance to allow a wall mounted sign height of 19 feet 7 inches, where the
maximum sign height allowed is 14 feet as measured from the ground directly below the sign.
(see Attachments 2, through 5).
4. ReviewProcess: Variance; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes final
decision.
5. Major Issues:
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.60 (SIGN
PERMITS).
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.85
(VARIANCES).
B. Description of Proposal
Application by Arnie's Restaurant for a variance to allow a wall mounted sign height of 19 feet 7
inches, where the maximum sign height allowed is 14 feet as measured from the ground directly
below the sign (see Attachments 2 through 5). The proposed sign has received approval by the
ADB conditional upon the approval of variance. (File No. ADB-97-34) (see Attachments 2
through 6).
C. Recommendations
Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend
Approval of this application subject to the following conditions:
I . This variance is to allow the proposal in the location identified on the proposed site plan and
building elevations (see Attachment 4). Any other structures, additions or remodels would
have to conform with. the typical setbacks or height requirements for the zone or the
applicant/property owner would be required to obtain an additional variance.
2. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds
Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance
with the various provisions contained in these ordinances.
3. The applicant must obtaining a sign permit from the Building Division for the proposed sign
prior to installation.
4. Ile permit should be transferable to future tenants and owners, but not to other locations.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Site Description
1. Site Development And Zoning:
a) Facts:
do
(1) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Commercial Waterfront (CW).
(2) Existing and Proposed Development: The site is currently developed. w ith a
commercial building which contains retail, restaurant and office uses.
V9761.DOC/ May 7,19970mff RePort
M
K,
3;1
Arnie's Restaurant
File No. V-97-61
Page 3 of 6
(3) Terrain and vegetation: The site is nearly flat and'has ornamental vegetation in
planting beds (see Attachment 4).
Z 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning:
a) Lacts.
(1) North- Developed with a commercial building which contains retail, restaurant and
L4 01, office uses, and zoned CW
(2) South: Developed with a Parking lot and Pot of Edmonds Marina facilities, and
zoned CW.
ca U6 (3) East- Developed with a street and Burlington Northern Railroad Tracks. Beyond the
0 Burlington Northern Tracks, is land developed with a commercial/industrial complex
and zoned CG under a contract rezone.
(4) Aest- Puget sound waters are located to the west and are currently developed with
the Port of Edmonds Marina, and zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW).
b) Conclusion: , The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding
Z zoning and development.
0
B. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance
00 1. Compliance with CW
Uj
2. Zoning Standards
U. a) Facts:
(1) The fundamental site development standards in a CW zone are set forth in Chapter
16.55.
0
Z (2) The proposed building and site development conforms to all CW requirements.
(3) ECDC Chapter 20.60.020 states the standards by which signs may be developed,
including height. The standards from which the applicant is requesting relief are,
"Sign height for attached signs is the vertical distance from the midpoint of the top
of the sign to the finished grade. "(ECDC 20.60.020(D)(1)) and " "Attached signs
shall not exceed 14jeet in height. " (ECDC 20.60.020(D)(2)).
b) Conclusion As conditioned the proposal complies with the development standards for
CW zones as set forth in Chapter 16.55 and 20.60 except the standard for which the
applicant is seeking a variance.
0. 3. Compliance with requirement for a Variance
ECDC Chapter 20.85 (Variances) states an applicant may request a variance from the
standards of this Chapter pursuant to the procedures set forth in ECDC Chapter 20.85.
Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC also sets forth the mechanism whereby a provision of the Code
may be varied on a case -by -case basis if the application of the provision would result in an
unusual and unreasonable hardship.
a) Facts:
(1) ECDC Section 20.85.010 establishes the
decisional criteria with which a variance
request must comply in order to be granted by the Hearing Examiner. These criteria
include: a special circumstance must exist; no special privilege is granted; the
proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code; the
proposal will not be detrimental and is the minimum necessary.
V9761.130C/ May 7.1997/ StaffPqmrt
77 R
77,77:7, 1 777OWN11
Arm*e's Restaurant
File No. V-97-61
Page 4 of 6
(2) The applicant states that special circumstances exist: "The proposal meets the
Special Circumstance criteria as Arnie's Restaurant is located on the secondfloor of
the Landing retail and offlce complex and the proposed sign location on the building
is the only wall surface area on the building that Arnie's Restaurant has as an
'r
exteriorfacade. The bottom of thefacia area on the wall starts at 12-feet, 7-inches
and extends up to 20-feet, 6-inches. This is the only area on the building for a
secondfloor tenant to place a wall sign.
(3) The applicant states that the proposal would not be a grant of special privilege as
the City has granted two other sign height variances in the immediate area for second
LU
floor restaurants. One was granted for a building directly to the north. The other was
granted for a building located approximately 1,200 feet south of the subject building.
W U.
0
(4) The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
by developing a restaurant along the waterfront where restaurants are encouraged to
bring people to the waterfront. The Comprehensive Plan allows signage necessary to
U.
identify the business.
T)
X Ui,
(5) The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as the
Z
applicant is developing a restaurant where the zoning code allows restaurants.
01
(6) The applicant states that the proposal will not be detrimental as the proposed
Lui
illuminated sign is replacing an existing illuminated sign of approximately the same
sip area at approximately the same height.
U fA
0
(7) The applicant states that this is the minimum variance because there is no
alternative location on the existing building to locate the proposed sign.
(8) The proposed design has been approved by the ADB with the condition that the
U-
applicant obtain a variance to allow the proposed sign height (File No. ADB-96-34)
(see Attachment 6).
(9) Additionally, staff has found that a sign placed on the first floor of the building in
conformance with the sign height requirements would be difficult to see from the
street as the street trees obscure the view.
b) Conclusions:
(1) Special Circumstances
Special circumstances include the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings
of the property and public necessity for public structures.
Special circumstances appear exist for this proposal due to the location of the
proposed restaurant and the location of the surrounding street trees.
(2) Special Privilege
It does not appear that any special privilege %vill be demonstrated in granting this
variance as other sign height variances have been granted by the City of Edmonds for
second floor restaurants in adjacent buildings.
(3) Zoning Code and the CompreltegKive Plan
Approval of the proposed variance would allow for the development of the site in a
manner consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan
designation of the site.
(4) Not Detrimental
Approval of the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare because no new impacts will be created,
1 "4 '-�;N
P01 �' NTV
'" it K
IN
ON
V9761.DOC May 7,1997 Staff Report
W
E77 14 Ni
I:�
z
Lu
U.
T)
z
0
z
El
H
Arnie's Restaurant
File No. V-97-61
Page 5 of 6
(5) Minimum Required
The request is the minimum necessary as there is no alternative sign location on the
subject building.
C. Technical Committee
1. Comments from City Divisions and Departments:
a) Fact: No City Divisions or Departments submitted comments.
D. Critical Areas Ordinance
1. Review:
a) ERSt The subject proposal is exempt from critical areas review under ECDC Chapter
20.15B (Critical Areas Ordinance).
b) Conclusion The applicant has complied with the requirements of the ECDC Chapter
20.15B.
III. RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any
person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department
for further procedural information.
A. Request for Reconsideration
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written' request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial
decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or
presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the
subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific
references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of
application being reviewed.
B. Appeals
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name
of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the
appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community
Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date of the decision being appealed.
IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL
Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building Uequired,
substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the vanance shall
expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the
expiration date.'
.0
V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in
the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office
V9761DOC I May 7,1997 Staff Rep�ort
Arnie's Rataumnt
5
File No. V-97-61
Tap6of6
APPENDICES
Ai 1 throujah 6 are attached.
I Vi inity Map*
Ic
2.. Application
3. Declarations of the Applicant,
:4. Site Plan
5. Sign section and elevation views
6. ADB Minutes from the April 2,1997 ADA meeting
VH. PARTIES OF RECORD
b
Amie's Restaurant. Steve Zarnberlin Planning Division
ngineering .
300 Admiral Way, STE 105 Nati onal Sign Corp.
�Divisio.n
Edmonds, WA 98020 1255 Westlake Ave N
Seattle, WA 98109
Pub,lic.Works, Division Parks & Recreation Fire Department.
Division
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN
IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
A,
b 4
w
Z
z
U,
U01
cl!;
W
U) LU
'U
Cl) LL
10
T) 0
X Lul
�- X
z �-
0
� I.-
LJJ LU
m
(n
0;-
UJ U
!i- C
tu
0
z
D)
E
city of edmonds'
land use application
0 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
0 COMP PLAN CHANGE
13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
0 FORMAL SUBDIVISION
El HOME OCCUPATION
0 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
0 OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMEND
0 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP
0 REZONE
0 SETBACK ADJUSTMENT
0 SHORELINE PERMIT
11 SHORT SUBDIVISION
1:1 STREET VACATION
g VARIANCE
0 RESUBMITTAL FILE #
It.
FILE ZONE
DATE REC'D BY
F E 120i+-RECEIPT# X-14�f
H RING DATE
HE 1:1 STAFF 13 PB 0 ADB 0 CC
ACTION TAKEN:
13 APPROVED
APPEAL# -
0 DENIED 13 APPEALED
Applicant 4RAllf-5 geSIARR"
Phone
-171-59199
Address 3019 hoffil t-14Y
6V17r /0-5r
OX0,41p$ P14
qpzp
Property Address or Location 300
APTAft
W4Y V9
Property Owner
Phone
Z?.S- 1712 7.
Address AV 4,f t LVAY
gso
Agent $vw' zmzmol zw f/
Q161V
40 4
-A Phone
Address 1X575' AAK 10,
I;e
5 47%1-4" W'4 ?,4/0!?
Tax Acc # 2-3210-311 OLY 00 21
Sec. -Twp.
-Rng.
Legal Description
Details'of Project or Proposed Use LA�1- (I - AerJ $)W4f�- 6f12r, 14144M1Wh-)V,0
The undersigned applicant and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the application
agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including
reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon false, misleading,
inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
The undersigned applicant grants his/her/its perml sion ublic officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter
WoRdan.
f p
the subject property for the purpose of inspecti d U a t to this application.
A'r
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/OWNER/AGENT Pill TAC,HMENT 2
0
Z
rn LU
LU
_j
(D U_
0
LU
LL
Uj
Z
Z
LU LLI
Cr
0
0
Ui
LU rj
0
Z
F1
0
national sign
April 15, 1997
City of Edmonds
Community services Dept.
Attn: John Bissell
250 - 5th Ave. N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Variance - Applicant Declarations
Arnies Restaurant, 300 Admiral Way
1. The proposal meets the special circums
Arnies Restaurant is located on the secont
Landing retail and Office complex and the
location on the building is the only wall
the building that Arnies Restaurant has as
facade. The bottom of the fascia area on
4k, 121-711 and extends up to 20f-611. This is
the building for a second floor tenant to
2. The proposal is not a Grant of Spec
exact type of variance, for allowing a
second floor tenant to be located above
limit, has been approved for various bu
City of Edmoi&ds. Two properties in the
vicinity, Anthony's Homeport Restaurant
Restaurant Bar & Grill, have signs loca
height limit and are also second floor,
tance Criteria as
floor of The
Droposed sign
surface area on
an exterior
the wall starts at
the only area on
:)lace a wall sign.
Privilege as this
sign for a
14 foot height
sses within the
e waterfront
Richardst
above the 14 foot
nts.
3. The proposal is consistent with the Coanrehensive Plan
as this type of commercial restaurant busi:j�ss is encouraged
in the waterfront area to bring people to the downtown and
waterfront commercial areas of Edmonds. These businesses
are allowed to be identified with proper signage and this
proposal falls within the scope of the Com�rehensive Plan.
4. The proposal is constant with the pur
ordinance and with the zone district in w
Restaurant is located as the sign area pr
feet is well under the limit of the prope
feet and this wall sign has also been rev
Architectural Design Review Board. This:
within the scope of the Zoning ordinance
businesses to be identified with proper s'
IAk v
1 0,
;es of the Zoning
:h Arnies
ised at 64 square
I of 90 square
,ed by the
posal falls
allowing
acFe.
HMENT 3
0
!FMTTT7�7177
0
in,
S,
4,
P4
J�
Wl� "k
V RR
.4
'61
-0,
12
national sign
Z
R
cc 21 S.. The.proposal neets,the criteria of not being'
detrimental to surrounding properties as the -proposed sign
is replacing an existing wall sign on the building. Both
signs, the current existing and the proposed new sign, are
LU
illuminated' approximately the same size in area, and are
located at 'the same location on the building wall.
CD LL
Therefore, there will not be a significant change to the
LU
property and to the surrounding properties.
LL 6. The variance is the Minimum variance needed to �77`
accommodate the wall sign as there are no other alternative
locations on the building to place the sign for a second
floor tenant. The proposed overall height of 191-711 is the
0
proper height on the building for placement of the sign to
adequately identify Arnies Restaurant and this location does
not negatively alter the building appearance and character.
UJ
0
Z
0'
U.51) Wesdaht Ave. N. Seaidc� WA 98)09 206-2P2,0700 1-aF1C16_2811;1'1,k�))
IV
—IOMEvqn3)o—coi3—Hi—Lzl�OAJmJw�no i�oi s 0 0
NVMI UVR13 SS31 SI 3nVU4 SIHI NI m3nn000 3,L, 41 :33UON
d
Tc
ol
Won.
NW-1
I IN
Ism 0-
XUZIM
�mm rii-
0 oil
......
7
ADB-97-34 NEW WALL AND FREESTANDING SIGNS FOR AN EXISTING RESTAURANT
Arnie's Restaurant
300 Admiral Way
z
Steve Zamberlin and Jeff Cooper, both with National Sign Corporation, 1255 Westlake Avenue North,
Seattle,
cc X the applicant's representatives, were present.
5
UJ U,
John Bissell presented the staff report and explained that this proposal by Arnie's Restaurant is for new
d 01
0, signs to replace existing signage for the restaurant. The proposal includes a wall -mounted sign, which
UJI
1 1 ",
exceeds the allowable height limit, and a freestanding sign, which must be reviewed by the ADB. The
to U. new signs will use different colors and materials and will be different in size from the existing signs.
_0
The wall -mounted sign will be a reverse pan channel sign with exposed neon letters on an aluminum
background, faced internally illuminated "Arnie's"
with a plastic ribbonat the bottom. The word will be
illuminated "Pacific
T) a with red exposed neon in pan channel letters with a blue border. The words
X La Northwest Favorites" will be internally illuminated with white neon and a purple plastic faced ribbon.
z I.- The background will use two shades of green and a yellow border, and yellow neon back lighting is
101 proposed. The original application indicated that the sign area would be 104 square feet where 90 square
�-1
Z
Us LUI feet is allowed, however, prior to the beginning of this meeting, the applicant submittad a revised
2 :), proposal indicating that the sign area will be 64 square feet. The sign height will be 20.5 feet where 14
I r I I I I
04 feet is allowed. Mr. Bissell pointed out that the applicant will be required to obtain a variance for the
wall -mounted sign height.
The freestanding sip will be non -illuminated and will have white and blue letters on a green background
L&_ with yellow trim and a purple ribbon. The support posts will be painted blue. The sign will be located in
C� the landscaped area near the intersection of Admiral Way and West Dayton Street and will have an area
of 32 square feet, which is the maximum size allowed. The sign height will be six feet, where 14 feet is
z allowed, and the surrounding landscaping is sufficient to meet Code requirements.
Steve Zamberlin distributed the revised wall -mounted sign design to the Board. He then explained that
the restaurant chain is renovating all three of its existing restaurants and displayed a colored rendering of
the new logo. Mr. Zamberlin clarified that the wall -mounted sign height has also been reduced to 19.7
feet from 20.5 feet. He explained that the exposed neon lettering is consistent with the signs used by
several other businesses in this area, and that the ribbon area is aluminum rather than acrylic, so that the
only portion that illuminates is the white letter copy. The fish portion of the sign has some illumination
from behind which will create a halo effect.
0 Jeff Cooper indicated that the owners of the area known as "The Landing", where Arnie's is located, is
agreeable to having the freestanding sign with the Arnie's logo and feels that it will be helpful in
attracting business to the area. He explained that the tenant sign for The Landing will remain in place.
Boardmember Goodrick indicated that she is a social acquaintance of the owner of the restaurant.
Board Chairman Young asked if there were any objections to having Boardmember Goodrick participate
in the discussion and decision on this matter. There were no objections.
Boardmember Sullivan referred to pictures provided by the applicant's representatives and asked if the
canopy on the building will be changed, and whether any signage will be included on it.
ATTACHMENT 6
Jeff Cooper indicated that the canopy will be redone without signage on it.
Architectural Design Board Meeting April 2, 1997
N q
'd
d
0 airman Young commented that the new freestanding sign would be an improvement over the
existing signage, however, the issue of allowing only one sign of this type, along with the possibility of
Z
consolidating the two signs, must be resolved with the property owners involved. He suggested that the
applicant's representatives work with the parties involved to identify the best option.
CC 21
U1
There were no audience comments on this proposal.
d
(0 UJI
Jeff Cooper stated that he has a preliminary design which would combine the existing tenant directory
Ui
and the proposed freestanding sign. He indicated that he would like to submit that design to the
_j I
U.
Architectural Design Board at a later date for consideration. Mr. Cooper also pointed out that there are
—0
LU
other establishments in the area which have freestanding signs that exceed the 14 -foot height limit.
Boardmember Sullivan
U.
M
stated that the size of the wall -mounted sign is appropriate, and would approve
T) a
that sign as submitted, with the condition that the variance is obtained and all other signage is removed
X U1
from the building. He also recommended that the tenant listing and address information be combined
with the restaurant signage to create one freestanding sign,
LU Lul
Boardmember Pierce agreed with Boardmember Sullivan's comments. He complimented the applicant's
representatives on the logo and design. He suggested that the freestanding sign be designed so that the
height does not cause the sign to become visually overpowering.
0
LU
Boardmember Oaklief commented that the wall -mounted sign is tastefully designed and well balanced.
He also stated that he supports the granting of a variance for the sign height. Mr. Oaklief explained that
he agrees with Boardmember Pierce's suggestion that the freestanding sign be designed so that it does
not become too overpowering for the location.
Z
Boardmember Chalupnik concurred with other Boardmember comments about the approval of the wall -
mounted sign and stated that he feels the sign height is appropriate.
Boardmember Goodrick agreed with other Boardmember comments regarding approval of the wall -
mounted sign. She also commented that since the freestanding sign needs design modifications, that sign
should be considered at another meeting.
Boardmember Sullivan suggested that the freestanding sign be sized appropriately to the pedestrian
nature of the area, and include the address of the building and a tenant directory which could easily be
updated, as needed. He also suggested that "The Landing" be incorporated into the sign as well.
Board Chairman Young asked for clarification from the applicant's representatives regarding how they
would like the Board to proceed on their application.
Jeff Cooper indicated that they would like the Board to act on the wall -mounted sign portion of the
application, which would allow the applicant to begin the variance application process, and requested the
opportunity to re -submit the freestanding sign portion at a later time.
Auft W