Loading...
HE Decision.pdfCITY OF' EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR HEARING EXAMINER 8�9 FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-92-27 OF ROBERT KORONKO/FACTORY DIRECT TIRES FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the condition listed. ', MoH •_ M: Robert B. Koronko, c/o Factory Direct Tires, 22617 ® 76th Avenue West, Edmonds, Washington 98020, (hereinafter referred to as Applicant), requested approval of a variance for modifications of the sign code requirements of the City of Edmonds. The Applicant requested a variance to allow two free-standing signs to be located at 22617 ® 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, Washington. The Applicant also requested a variance to allow the total square footage of sign area to exceed the 160 square feet maximum allowed by Edmonds law. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on March 13, 1992. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: JEFFREY S. WILSON Planning Dept. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 JOHN BISSELL Planning Dept. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 LSSA BARNES, Intern Planning Dept. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 MERV HOYT 131 Second Ave S Edmonds, WA 98020 ROBERT KORONKO BRADLEY BUTTERFIELD c/o Factory Direct Tires 400 Dayton 22617 ® 76th Avenue W Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 0 lworpmak'(] Au(usf 11, 1890 ow Sister Cities Interriationi] — Hpl<inAn Al nAn HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-92-27 4/3/92 Page 2 Witnesses (Continued): PETER BECK 718 Spruce Street Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and were admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report it 2 - Vicinity Map If 3 - Application of 4 - Site Plan of 5 - Sign Elevation A " 6 - Sign Elevation B to 7 - Applicant's Declarations It 8 - Building Elevations it 9 - Staff Report to the Architectural Design Board (ADB), 3/4/92 of 10 - Photos submitted by Applicany If 11 - Comments from Engineering Division It 12 - Comments from Public Works Division if 13 - Comments from Fire Department to 14 - Comments from Parks & Recreation Division to 15 - Drawings of proposed signs After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant, and evidence elicited during the public hearing, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACTS 1. The application is for the approval of variances for modifications to the sign requirements of the City of Edmonds. The variances requested are for the allowance of two free-standing signs at 22617 - 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, Washington; and a variance to exceed the maximum 160 total square footage of sign area on site by an additional 48 feet. 2. The Applicant has operated Factory Direct Tires on the subject property for over twenty years. The property is located southwest of a large retail store (K -Mart) and has access from the K -Mart parking lot and 76th Avenue W. There is no direct access off Highway 99, which is west of the subject property. HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-92-27 4/3/92 Page 3 3. The subject property is zoned CG Commercial. It has a land use designation of general commercial. 4. The subject property is a rectangular parcel of land with a street frontage of approximately 125 feet along 76th Avenue W. The depth of the lot is approximately 210 feet. The property is developed with a two story office building and a single story tire sales and installation building. 5. The property to the north and west of the subject property is being developed with a new commercial building. Prior to this development, the property was vacant and used as a parking lot for K -Mart. The effect of the new construction on the adjacent property is that public view of the tire company is blocked from Highway 99. 6. In order to have exposure to the traffic on Highway 99, the Applicant has requested approval to place two free-standing signs on the subject property. One sign, identified as "Site All would be located at the northeast corner of the site and would identify Factory Direct Tire Sales. This sign was originally proposed to have a reader board, but the Architectural Design Board (ADB) deleted it. "Site B" is a sign proposed to be located off 76th Avenue W. The total square footage of the sign at "Site B" is 48 square feet. This sign would depict the location of access to the property off 76th Avenue W. 7. The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.60.040(F) restricts the number of free-standing signs on commercial sites to one. It is from this standard that the Applicant seeks a variance. 8. The Applicant also sought a variance from the allowable sign area for free-standing signs in a CG zone. The maximum allowed area is 160 square feet of free-standing sign area. The Applicant's original proposal was to have a total sign area of 208 square feet. However, the ADB reviewed the proposal on March 4, 1992, and excluded the requested reader board on Site A. As a result, the total square footage of the proposed two (2) free-standing signs was less than 160 square feet. Thus, the second variance has become moot. 9. In order for variances to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must exist. Those criteria include: HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-92-27 4/3/92 Page 4 A. Because of the special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the owner the rights enjoyed vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC) the minimum necessary to allow by other properties in the 10. Special circumstances exist for the grant of the variance. There is no direct access to the property from Highway 99. An adjacent lot that fronts Highway 99 is being developed and will effectively screen the view of the subject property from Highway 99. The zoning designation of CG, and the absence of frontage on a major arterial street, and the long time historical use of the property, are special circumstances that warrant a variance. In addition, the topography of the site is such that the slope of the land from Highway 99 to the subject property is significant enough to necessitate extra signage to properly identify the location of the business on site. 11. The grant of the variance will not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. With the use of the variance, the Applicant will be able to provide identification to his commercial property in a manner similar to other properties in the general vicinity. HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-92-27 4/3/92 Page 5 12. The grant of the variance is not inconsistent with the purposes of ECDC 16.40.000. It will provide an area for commercial use that is consistent with other commercial development in the area. 13. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds has been reviewed, and the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as stated therein. The use provides for an enhancement of the commercial development of the area in a manner that will not be detrimental to the subject property, nor to other properties in the vicinity. 14. The requested variance is the minimum variance request. 15. At the hearing, public testimony was received. A summary of the testimony is as follows: A. Brad Butterfield. The witness testified that he is the Chair of the ADB. He indicated that, although the ADB rarely takes a position with regard to variances, as an individual he highly recommended and supported the approval of the two free- standing signs to be located on site. He stated that the impact of the building on the adjacent lot will be such that the Applicant's business could be seriously impacted. He recommended the variance. B. Peter Beck. The witness testified that he is also a member of the ADB, and that he supported the issuance of the variance. 16. No adverse testimony was received. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Applicant requested approval of a variance to allow two free-standing signs to be located on property located at 22617 - 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, Washington. The variance is from the sign standards as set forth in ECDC 20.60.040(F). 2. The Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds has jurisdictional authority to hold a hearing and to issue a decision based on the authority granted in ECDC 20.100.010(B). HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-92-27 4/3/92 Page 6 3. In order fora variance to be Edmonds the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 of those criteria have been made in proposal, and the application satisfies in the Findings of this document. DECISION granted within the City of must be satisfied. A review light of the facts of the those criteria as addressed Based upon the preceding Findings of Facts and Conclusions, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance to allow two (2) free- standing signs on property located at 22617 - 76th Avenue W, in the city of Edmonds, Washington, is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall secure all necessary permits from the City of Edmonds. The requested variance to exceed the total sign area for free- standing signs has become a moot issue, and no variance is granted for this matter. The issue is moot because the Applicant's signs will not exceed the required 160 square feet of total area. Entered this 3rd day of April, 1992, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. .ES M. DRISCOLL ring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington 98020, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on April 17, 1992.