City of Tukwila
My WebLink
|
Help
Search Tips
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Planning 2014-05-22 Item 3 - Adoption of 4/24/14 Minutes
COT-City
>
City Clerk
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Agenda Packets
>
2011-2019 Agenda Packets
>
2014-05-22 Planning Commission / Board of Architectural Review - Washington Place
>
Planning 2014-05-22 Item 3 - Adoption of 4/24/14 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/16/2014 10:34:52 AM
Creation date
5/16/2014 10:34:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Boards and Commissions
Date (mm/dd/yy)
05/22/14
Board or Commission Name
Planning Commission
Agenda or Minutes
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
BAR Public Hearing Minutes <br />April 24, 2014 <br />The applicant has not finalized the selection of the patterned pavement, which staff is requesting <br />be deferred and approved administratively when the building permit is issued; <br />There needs to be coordination on the placement of the fence to accommodate future landscaping; <br />There is no ground cover shown inthe plan; <br />One of the window patterns needs to be addressed. <br />Staff recommends approval of the project with seven conditions as listed in the staff report. Condition <br />number two regarding lighting on a common meter and timer was recommended by the Police <br />Department. <br />Omied Pazooki <br />, for the applicant, gave some background on the project and said they think the project is <br />a good additionto the area. He also complimented staff on their work with the project. The applicant is <br />agreeable with most of the conditions but expressed concern with condition number tworegarding the <br />auto-court lighting being on a separate meter. Mr. Pazooki suggested lookingat this condition further to <br />see if there is a better option because he is worried about the cost. He said maybe a lighting sensor would <br />work. Staff suggested stating the goal that lighting is provided without being prescriptive and they work <br />with the applicant on solving the issue. <br />Mr. Pazooki addressed questions from the Commission on the following issues: <br />Lighting; <br />Unclear language regarding the pedestrian pathway; <br />Offsite parking; <br />The proposed sidewalk having pervious treatment, something more thangravel such as an organic <br />material; <br />Fencing and landscaping; <br />Diverse ground cover; <br />Underground utilities; <br />The type of planting at the front entrance; <br />The front door color plan. <br />There were no public comments. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />The BAR deliberated. <br />There was additional discussion regardingthe sidewalk; condition numbertwo pertaining to lighting;the <br />requirement for ground coverage and how it will be managed. <br />AMENDED CONDITIONS: <br />Condition Number 2: Exteriorlighting at front entries and within the courtyard areashall be designed <br />to provide uniform lighting levels within the common areas at night. (Shall be <br />approved administratively as part of the building permit) <br />Condition Number 7:A Diverse palette of ground cover shall be added tobackyard areas of the units to <br />cover 90% of the landscape area within three years, <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.