HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L95-0053 - THE PEAKS AT TUKWILA - SUNSHINE RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS DESIGN REVIEWL95 -0053
SUNSHINE RIDGE
CONDOMINIUMS
15200 MACADAM
RD S
L95 =0053 PROJECT APPROVAL WAS
GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IN
THE STAFF PRESENTATION AT THE
HEARING AND PRD APPROVAL.
SEE PRD FILE L95 -0054 FOR ALL
PROJECT DRAWINGS AND EXHIBITS.
'Vernon Umetsu, Assoc. P1nr.., 11/29/95
, s
PLANNING COMMISSION /BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
MINUTES
OCTOBER 26, 1995
(Approved 12/14/1995)
Mr. Neiss called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. Members present were
Commissioners Neiss, Stetson, Flesher, Malina, Meryhew, Marvin, and Livermore.
Representing the staff were Vernon Umetsu and Sylvia Schnug.
There were no citizens' comments.
Mr. Neiss noted that the McDonald's proposal originally on the agenda, had been
withdrawn.
L94 -0074: Showalter Middle School:
Mr. Meryhew declared that he has worked with the school district in the past and was
recused from the original BAR hearing. He added that his past associations would not
affect the fair and impartial implementation of the Board of Architectural Review
criteria for the signs and the bollards, which are being reviewed this evening.
Neither the applicant, Carlos Sierra, or anyone present objected to Mr. Meryhew
hearing and deciding on this proposal.
Vernon Umetsu presented the staff report. The BAR heard this design review in
November and December of 1994. At that time, sign and bollard design was not
finalized, they were specifically identified for later BAR review, and there was no
discussion of these items at the previous design review hearing. One sign and bollard
are proposed to be located at the west edge of the driveway. There is a rhythm of light
bollards that ends at the far side of the building entry. Staff finds that the detailed
design of the sign is integrated well with the school. The light bollard is well designed
and is integrated with the body of the school. However, for good design, two additional
bollards should be added to the north end of the building to provide balance and stop
the abrupt ending at the entry. Also, a third bollard should be added at the driveway
across from the second bollard to give a sense of gateway. For these reasons, staff
recommends that the detailed designs of the signs and the bollards be approved, and
that an additional three bollards be located on site, as shown on the site plan.
Mr. Malina asked if the Showalter sign is painted concrete.
Mr. Umetsu stated it is painted concrete, with the letters recessed approximately 1/4".
Z
i
w1
QQ 2
J0
vo
W =;
w0
U. a =.
z pi
'F- -CY
Z1-
,111 Lu
0 H
,W W
1- -
U.
•Z
z
Planning Commission /13AR Minutes Page 2
October 26, 1995
Carlos Sierra, Architect for the two schools' signs, 10809 SE 14th Street, Bellevue, WA:
Mr. Sierra clarified that he was there in place of Mr. Gary Goltz, who had a family
emergency to attend to. He added that Mr. Goltz was willing to add one additional
bollard at the north end, but not two. Also, with regard to the light bollard opposite the
sign, Mr. Goltz felt it would create an economic hardship to the School District because
the cost of each bollard is approximately $2,000 each. At the front end, they would not
like to add any bollards.
Mr. Livermore asked what wattage the light bulbs in the bollards would have.
Mr. Sierra said they are 250 watts, and the globes are poly- carbonate material.
Mr. Livermore asked the cost of the light fixtures in the parking lot.
Mr. Sierra estimated between $1,000 - $1,200.
During staffs rebuttal Mr. Umetsu noted there might be another option. To save
money, the bollard by the sign could be relocated to the gateway entry, use up- lighting
for the sign, and get a commitment from the School District to put in some landscaping.
Mr. Neiss closed the public hearing at 8:40p.m.
Mr. Meryhew said he liked the line of bollards starting at the sign, instead of the up-
lighting. He added that he did not like the addition of the bollard at the entry because it
breaks up that line of lights down to the entry. He also said he liked the idea of one
additional bollard at the north end.
Mr. Malina said he liked two additional bollards at the entry because it would provide
symmetry to the building.
Ms. Stetson stated she liked the two additional bollards at the end but suggested
eliminating the one by the Administration building.
Mr. Livermore asked if the bollard next to the sidewalk, at the entrance would emit too
much light?
Mr. Neiss re- opened the public hearing.
Mr. Sierra stated that the electrical engineer has said that it would not be a major
problem. There would be more glare from the parking lot lights than from these
bollards.
Mr. Livermore said he was still concerned with the output of a 250 watt bulb, that close
to a person's face.
cn w_
w o;.
w a:
a.
�_
z
o:
z
w
Do;
o N`
W,.
1-
•
wZ
V
Planning Commission /BA.K Minutes
October 26, 1995
Page 3
Mr. Sierra said the globe is made of a poly- carbonate material and is not clear. It is
translucent and has diffusion.
Mr. Neiss closed the public hearing.
Mr. Marvin said he wanted to keep the light at the sign, but would sacrifice the
proposed light on the east side. Also, the two proposed bollards on the north end
would complete the project.
MR. MARVIN MOVED TO APPROVE L94 -0074: SHOWALTER MIDDLE SCHOOL
AS FOLLOWS: TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED LIGHT BOLLARD AT THE SIGN
AND ADD TWO ADDITIONAL LIGHT BOLLARDS AT THE NORTH END OF
THE BUILDING AND DELETE THE STAFF PROPOSED LIGHT BOLLARD AT
THE EAST SIDE OF THE DRIVE. MS. STETSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
L94 -0071: Cascade View Elementary School
Vernon Umetsu presented the staff report. Mr. Umetsu stated that Cascade View's
design was reviewed by the Board in November of 1994 where it was approved, except
for the entry sign. The sign design consists of 10" raised letters in a deep blue color. The
letters themselves are raised approximately 3/4" off the dryvit finish of the entry arch.
Staff is recommending approval of the sign as proposed.
Mr. Malina asked what the sign is made of.
Mr. Umetsu said it is baked ceramic.
There were no additional comments by the applicant.
Mr. Neiss closed the public hearing.
MS. STETSON MOVED TO APPROVE L94 -0071 AS PROPOSED IN THE STAFF
REPORT. MR. LIVERMORE SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION
WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
L95 -0054 and :L95 -0053: Sunshine Ridge Condominiums
Vernon Umetsu presented the staff report. Mr. Umetsu submitted a new colored
rendering of the proposed buildings. Mr. Umetsu also noted that the applicant had
submitted design revisions the previous day, which fully resolved the issues raised in
the staff report. He then presented the proposed project and the relationship of staff
recommendations to the revised design (10- 25 -95).
• . .+rw+.e,...enw..wmw.v«,ses ="rocs. 4seonnm tssAVs4VA,C7'.�Sf'k`d i'Vn gMIR I , • f;6EfrN,i; t', i
Planning Commission / BAR Minutes Page 4
October 26, 1995
Access to the site is from Macadam Road, via a driveway on the western side of the site.
Building B has been reduced by one story, but the overall density of the project has
increased from 28 units to 31 units. Building A has not been proposed to be changed.
In the new submittal the project satisfies all of the screening standards of the PRD. The
recreation areas have been slightly revised. Berming has been taken out and additional
lawn areas for recreational space have been instituted. Over 82% of the recreational
space is on the deck.
A review of design revision consistency with staff recommendations was then
presented:
1. The applicant has achieved a 49.95% impervious area by changing the northeast
walkway from concrete to crushed rock and incorporating additional
impervious surface areas into their calculations.
2. On the north, the applicant is requesting a 9 inch setback relief; on the west they
are requesting a 6" setback relief from what was previously approved, and that
would be 27 feet, instead of the normally required 30 feet for Building B. Staff
has recommended approval, of both those requests.
3. A revised recreation deck design has been submitted (10/25/95) and correctly
calculated as providing 82% of recreation space here. The remaining recreation
area is provided by the on -site trail. Staff noted that not all the proposed trail
recreation area is properly included, but the remainder is more than enough.
4. The applicant will be creating a six-foot crushed rock trail, built to City of
Tukwila specifications between the sidewalk and the stairs on the east side of the
La Vista Apartments. In that way, we can treat this on -site trail as part of their
recreation requirements.
5. The applicant has agreed to evenly space the first four European Hornbeam trees
on the western perimeter and add another Hornbeam to create a sense of entry.
The revised design includes additional trees on the south perimeter.
6. The applicant has added a street tree to the entry landscape island to satisfy the
requirement of a "treed" landscape island.
7. a. The applicant has revised Building B, level 5 to provide eave
modulation on the north and clarified that the vertical north "score lines"
on the three north wall faces are actually the inside edge of extended
accent strips which are 18" wide by 4" deep. Staff supports this design.
b. The applicant clarified that he is proposing a visually transparent, metal
fence. Staff recommends approval of that design as positioned.
c. The applicant has installed a row of mid -sized trees along the
western perimeter and additional trees to the south in the latest design
revision (see No. 5).
d. The applicant agreed to aid ivy climbing the 10 foot high wall at the
eastern end of the recreation deck by rough finishing the concrete and
running "climbing" wires up the wall face.
.z
r4w
D
J U;
o Oo:
.co
' N w
U.;
w O:
2
w Q:
•_
Z1•••••
Z
0.
w
D
..
1•••!
:w
O
• Z:
.0 N .,
O •
z......
Planning Commission /BAx Minutes Page 5
October 26, 1995
Staff is recommending approval by the Board of Architectural Review subject to
approval by the City Council of the PRD.
Lyle Kussman, P.O. Box 1705, Bothell, WA 98041:
Mr. Kussman noted that there wasn't much that he had to add. The drawings were
revised after they received the staff report. The fence is proposed to be the same color
as the center of Building B.
Mr. Neiss asked how they gained three additional units when they eliminated one story.
Mr. Kussman noted they changed the proposed townhouses to single -level flats. The
area gained back is two stairwells, and that is where the extra space comes from. The
reason for the redesign was that the first building was much too expensive to build.
Mr. Marvin asked who will maintain the six -foot trail.
Mr. Kussman noted-that the City of Tukwila is responsible for maintaining the trail.
Mr. Neiss closed the public hearing.
MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE L95 -0053 AND L95 -0054: SUNSHINE RIDGE
(BAR), SUBJECT TO PRD APPROVAL BY THE COUNCIL, AND BASED UPON
STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED
IN THE STAFF REPORT AND AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING. MS. STETSON
SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
Mr. Neiss adjourned the meeting.
Prepared By,
Sylvia Schnug
1/
:0
ww
J
'w O
'17J:
NHS •
• :1 w.
•z':
fU �k
N'
= U
• •
LL▪ I
.. • .,:..:;t.; .axth.z1161Lxr• , °° *« t ..tu °^^:snv. ,101 Yr
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
• DESIGN -.:EVIEW
APPLICATION CHECKLIST
CITY OF TUKWILA
DEPARTMENT OF. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3680
The following materials must be submitted with your application. This checklist is to
assist you in submitting a complete application. Please do not turn in your application
until all items which apply to your proposal are attached to your application. If you
have any questions, contact the Department of Community Development at 431 - 3680.
ENERAL
Application Form
Design Review Fee — $900 00
Environmental Checklist MDNS ISSUED 11 /30/94
Environmental Checklist Fee,= $325=:00.,.;
CLANS
' HREE ..REQU,EST BY : LETTER DATED ` S I E M B E R 12 1995 .
ven (1) copies or the set or plans are require 1l tte scalle shall not exceed 1 " =30', with
the north arrow, graphic, scale and date all identified on the plans. Also, the license
stamps of the architect and landscape architect shall be on each appropriate plan.'
ce following: information should: be contained within the plan:
• Vicinity map showing location of site and surrounding prominent landmarks.
Property dimensions and names of adjacent roads:
• Lot size: and impervious (paved and building areas) surface calculations
�.: Existing and finished grades at 2' contours with the precise slope of any area
in excess of 15 %.
•
Location and dimensions of existing and proposed structure(s), accessory .
structures with appropriate setbacks, parking and loading area dimensions,
and driveways.
1VE-
Existing (6" in diameter) trees by species and an indication of which will ��' �r ` "
saved. Proposed landscaping: size, species, location and spacing. OEP 2 9 19
DEVELOPMENT.
z
w
D
- 0
O 0
CO LU
J
• LL
w0
� J
w ?
I"CI
=w
_
z�
�--0
w
~
2w
o • 22
O 1-
wW
- U
LL- -o
..z
w
O -
O '
z
1/4'" ,DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION CHECKLIST - , Page 2
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
❑ G. Location and size of proposed utility lines and a description of by whom and
how water and sewer is available.
❑ H. Location, dimensions and nature of any proposed easements or dedications.
❑ I. For commercial and industrial uses, gross floor area by use and parking
calculations.
J. For multiple residential, location, dimensions and description of common
open space and recreation areas.
o
oo
K. Dimensioned elevations of building drawn at 1/8" =1' or a comparable scale. N W
Elevations should show the type of exterior materials.
• u.
L. Location and elevations of exterior lighting for buildings and parking areas.
w 0':
J:
M. Location and elevations of dumpster screens. • o
=a
I- I"
❑ N. Color and material sample board for exterior building and accessory structure z
colors and material. PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED . I- O!
zF
2
O. Perspective drawings, photographs, color renderings or other graphics which D o
accurately represent your proposed project.
e
PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED.
cm
0 co
oI-'.
w
P. One (1) Photomaterial Transfer (PMT) of each drawing reduced to 8.5" by 11" . 9
E0 z
_,
z:...
(most printing companies can make PMT's).
PUBLIC NOTICE
N.A. in
A mailing list with address labels for property owners and residents within 300 feet
of your property. (See attached "Address Label Requirements ")
N A ▪ . ❑ A King County Assessor's Map which identifies the location of each property
ownership and residence listed. The maps may be ordered from the King County
Public Works Map Counter at 296 -6548.
RECEIVFD
`8EP 2 9 1995
COMMVMUNITy
DEVELOPMENT
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
DESIGr REVIEW
APPLICATION
CITY OF TUKWILA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3680
1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: Redesigned building "B" of Sunshine
Ridge Condominiums as previously approved.
2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and sub-
division; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection)
15200 Macadam Road South, Tax Lot #115720 -0222
Quarter: S. W. Section: 23 Township: 23 Range: 4
(This information may be found on your tax statement)
3. APPLICANT:* Name:
Address:
r �.Phone:�
Lyle N. Kussman, Architect
PO Box 1705, Bothell WA 98041 -1705
(206) 861 -7200
Signature: /%% Date: September 26, 1995
* The a 'cant i e person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and
to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant.
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
4. PROPERTY Name: RSA
OWNER
Address: 4038 NF 58th, SPat -t1P WA 98105
Phone:
(206) 524 -4846
I /WE,[signature(s)]
swear that I /we ar the •wner(s) r contract purchaser(s) of the property involved
in this application and that the f&egoing statements and answers contained in this
application are true and correct to the
best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: September 26,
19 9 °5g V E
2 91995
COMMUNi
z
11.1
u6D
J 0'
O 0,
N
ww
J.
w O.
2
gQ
O D.
w,
I- O'
Z
D •Q
0.N°
o f- •
w.
U
-O
iii Z
U -, •
0 F-.
z .
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
' DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
CRITERIA
Page 2
The following criteria will be used by the BAR in its decision- making on your proposed project.
Please carefully review the criteria, respond to each criterion (if appropriate), and describe how
your plans and elevations meet the criteria. If the space provided for response is insufficient,
attach additional response to this form.
a
1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE _
A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to .� L
provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian movement. 6 D
J V,
B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to moderate the visual o
impact of large paved areas. w w
C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to it site. n
w O.
RESPONSE: g:71
See attached. ,N <'
i°
z,
?
Z 0'
w:
o
0 I -:
w til-
1 V.
2. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA
A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged.
O~
B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. z ..
C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood
character.
D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of
safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged.
E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged.
RESPONSE:
See Attached.
.E`.w { E�\7
'
y
<Y;7:,3 '1 n 1)95
;DEVELOPMENT
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
' DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION ,--. Page 3
3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT
A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they
should be recognized and preserved and enhanced.
B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and
provide an inviting and stable appearance.
C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important
axis, and provide shade.
D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic,
mitigating steps should be taken.
E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encour-
aged.
F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accom-
plished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be
effective in winter and summer.
G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls, and
pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used.
H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining land-
scape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the
building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive
brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided.
RESPONSE:
See attached.
H. Exterior lighting will be the same as previously submitted.
4. BUILDING DESIGN
A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its
design and relationship to surroundings. c : E a
B. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and be in harmony with permanent neighboring de- ,
velopments. > r• L 12,x.?
INMMEMMMPWWaweer-
:D'EV'ELOPMEo f
z
V'
co 0
co w.
w=
CO
w0
u- a
a:
mow.
o.
z E-2
w w..
0 0.
0
w W'.
0
.z.
O
z
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION .- Page 4
C. Building components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets - should have good pro-
portions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be
consistent with anticipated life of the structure.
D. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent.
E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be
screened from view.
F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all ex-
posed accessories should be harmonious with building design.
G. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of
detail, form, and siting should be used to provide visual interest.
RESPONSE:
See attached.
5. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE
A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architec-
tural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale
should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and
proportions should be to scale.
B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the
guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings.
RESPONSE:
4 2 ` 1 5
z
�W
00
N 0
W
J
w• 0
2
u_ Q,
d
I— W
Z p;
▪ 0
z
uf
0
O -
0
= W'
H U.
O•
fiad =:
B.A.R. Page 2
1.A.
. 1.B.
The subject site is setback from Macadam Road improvements by the large
Right -of -Way which is 25 feet wide at the subject site's southwest corner
and 75 feet at the site's southeast corner. In addition, the subject property is
further separated from the existing streetscape by a large vertical change in
grade. At the southwest corner the property is 6 feet above the sidewalk
and the southwest corner of the building "A" (1) is 16 feet above the
sidewalk. The southwest corner of building "B" (2) is 21 feet above the
sidewalk.
The change in vertical height from the sidewalk south of the southeast
property corner is much more. The property corner is 39 feet above the
sidewalk at the southeast corner. Building "A "'s southeast corner is 44 feet
above the sidewalk and building "B "'s southeast corner is 46 feet above the
sidewalk.
The landscaping proposed must be reviewed from the submitted Landscape
Plan which also shows the pedestrian circulation movements.
The hillside of the Right -of -Way is well developed with native vegetation
and large trees are spaced along both sides of the R.O.W. Please see photo
board submitted. The existing trees block from street to the site most views
of the proposed structures plus the large change in vertical grade as stated
above.
The proposed structures will not be seen from Macadam Road when
northbound until one approaches the entry driveway and then only for
approximately 55 feet of travel distance.
The transition along the streetscape blends with the existing field grass
adjacent to the public trails system. Tall trees flank the main entry, creating
a sense of transition from the street to the main buildings, and help soften
and screen the adjacent buildings to the west.
All proposed development required parking and service areas are located
under the structure, in a parking garage and underground. None of the
required parking or dumpsters will be visible from off site. The only
parking visible are three (3) non - required guest parking stalls located off the
entry driveway and west of building number one.
ft, ILL
6
JU;
Uo
U 0;
' co w,
'W X
J F;
NIL' .
Wo
2
• 1 a`
•
zt-:
:W.W;,
• V '0;
'W
•
UY
• ui Z
1. _
z•
()OMNI Ui\ii
)'t_'.V .L%mot' %!:_ N �..
s • 0
1.C.
The only visible paved area will be the three (3) guest parking stalls and the
20 foot wide access driveway serving the two parking garages. The total
visible paved area of guest parking and entry driveway is 4,207 square feet
as viewed from any direction.
The height of the proposed building "A" is overpowered by the existing
structure to the east which is 25 feet higher than the roof of the new
structure. However as the proposed building "A" steps down the hill to the
west it's roof becomes very compatible with the existing structure west of
the subject site. In fact the new roof and the existing structures roof finish
only with 4 feet of vertical change.
The height of building "B" is much more compatible with the existing
structures which surround it on three sides (east, north and west). The
proposed new building's roof is 16 feet lower than the structure to the east,
3 feet higher than the existing structure located near the northeast property
corner, and level with the existing roof near the northwest property corner.
The existing structure's roof west of building "B" is approximately 18 feet
lower but it's base grade is also 15.50 feet lower. This is because of a very
fast grade drop -off.
As can be seen from the submitted photo board the proposed development
is an "in -fill" into an area of three story high apartment houses which have
been developed over the last 25 years.
2.A. The proposed development is to be stucco /dryvit which is in harmony with
the stucco covered surrounding multi- family structures. The "La Vista"
development stucco is almost #310 China White as compared to the Dryvit
Systems color chart and the Southcenter condominiums exterior color is
similar to the #108 Manor White from the same color chart. Thus, in an
effort to harmonize with the surroundings, and for that matter, the rest of
the hillside further to the east as shown on the submitted photo board, we
have selected the following Dryvit colors for use on this proposed
development.
Building A:
#302 Beth for the mass of the building.
#308 Mink for the trim features and base.
Building B:
#308 Mink for the mass of the building on the east and west sections.
#306 Swiss Mocha for the trim features and the center section.
i
•
2 r14�:
(C.,' c i
3 �.
The mass of the front building (A) is smaller than any of the surrounding
structures and with the four downhill steps fits very nicely into the "in -fill"
condition. The mass of the rear building (B) is more in scale with the
structures to east, north and west.
We have designed each of the buildings with the above in mind to create
the harmony of texture, height, bulk and scale. The colors selected were to
fit into the surroundings and roof lines to harmonize with the existing
conditions.
Because of the City of Tukwila's staff concerns that the two buildings might
appear as one structure from a distance, we have purposely designed each
structure to have different roof lines, mass, steps and color.
2.B. The adjacent properties are screened with clusters and rows of large trees
and mass plantings of shrubs. Along the east rockery, vies are trained to
grow up and screen the existing and new rockery.
2.C. N.A.
2.D. The design as submitted allows for only one vehicular access point which is
well removed and separated from both pedestrian access points which
connect to both the existing sidewalk system and also to the future
pedestrian trail which is in the Public Works Department R.O.W. which
will connect to the "hill - climb" steps from Denny's up to 57th Avenue
South.
2.E. On site vehicular circulation is kept to a very minimum with only one
driveway and two parking garages. The one access point onto Macadam
Road is at a place where sight lines for entering traffic can be maintained.
Any other access point would not be possible because of the street design
and Right -of -Way configuration.
3.C. Clusters of trees and low shrubs and ground covers provide scale to the
buildings while allowing easy visibility from the street. The main entry is
flanked by clumps and rows of trees to enhance the transition from the
street to the buildings. Shade trees are provided to create a variety of
exposures throughout the site.
3.D. Plant beds adjacent to parking is protected with curbing, with shrubs and
trees planted back from the edge of walks and curbs to protect from
pedestrian and vehicular damage as well as provide for a more secure
walkway by reducing the possibility of hiding places. , 7-."CE ,F,,,
dii.:f.•.:�vS'.'2a�.R:e �«Y:�. �_c4:.��•�ii.�',`SV:rh'(w -
2 7,195
4_t y�SiV(:Vi1pU�3i� ; e '
3.E. The recreation deck has large planters to accommodate trees and provide
additional seating adjacent to recreational areas.
3.F. The service yard for the garbage and recycling, is completely screened with
attractive walls and roofs compatible with the architecture of the structure.
3.G. Fences are used to shield the headlights from shining into the adjacent
properties.
4.A. Without architectural style restrictions we felt free to design buildings that
reflect the wishes of the land owner and developer which is quite refreshing
in this day and age. We do feel that the resulting design blends well with
the surrounding structures in the multi- family neighborhood given the site
conditions, topography and freeway exposures.
4.B. The height, bulk and scale of the surrounding development in this
neighborhood is three and four story wood frame structures which are two
hundred to three hundred feet in length that are not modulated, stepped, or
broken into segments. The windows, decks and patios are very evenly
placed.
In an effort to harmonize with the permanent neighborhood and still meet
the requirements of the Tukwila zoning code we have settled on the
attached design which in our opinion meets or exceeds the minimum zoning
code requirements and still fits into the surrounding. The code as written
was obviously not designed for "in -fill" multi- family projects in
neighborhoods such as this.
4.C. The building components were selected, placed and designed into the
buildings to further the fit into the surrounding neighborhood. The
buildings were designed so as not to over or under state their age in that the
surrounding structures range in age from the late 1940's to the late 1980's.
This is a major factor when "in -fill" development takes place and
surrounding structures are not likely to be replaced for 40 to 60 years.
4.D. We have purposely avoided bright and brilliant colors on the building
masses even though the large majority of the hillside is currently covered
with bright and white buildings. It will be almost impossible to both
harmonize and avoid bright colors without the use of the colors selected.
4.E. Mechanical equipment, dumpsters and other utility equipment has been
screened from off site views through the use of mansard roofs, walls, deck
edge returns, etc.
■a u. .r •gin' ' at2tif11;:
4.F. Exterior lighting has been kept to a minimum and when used will be
shielded to prevent off-site glare.
4.G. To avoid monotony of design which is so prevalent in the surrounding
neighborhood structures we have designed the two buildings to be different
in roof lines, mass forms, modulations, steps and color. Even the deck and
exit walkway rails have been designed to be different as you proceed
around the building. The rear building uses three (3) roof lines and varying
levels where as the front building uses only a single roof line at each step
and a single tower near its center, all of which enhances the visual interest
of the development as viewed from both near and far.
•
C = 11 tjr
2 2 1E.25
commuN1.1--v
V.E.01=-`LflE_T
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 5
INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT
The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area in order to manage
the development of this area, to upgrade its general appearance, to provide incentives for
compatible uses, to recognize and to capitalize on the benefits to the area of the amenities including
the Green River and nearby recreational facilities, to encourage development of more people -
oriented use, and to provide for development incentives that will help to spur growth. Please
describe how your proposed development relates to the goals for this District. Use additional
response space, if necessary.
1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area.
2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment
of public recreational areas and facilities.
3. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site pedestrian circu-
lation.
4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary
to the district in which it is located.
5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environmental im-
pacts.
6. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features
in the area.
't' a;, v` sv ,s.mi'�i:wi;:a::iYf'cu «�:;rrii: :;,�::�c.fi • °T.curai'.z::�,4? s`` °", "itishtiu`p;�i�e °7= .k:':ri': " sew::ea,].':rm.ch +:wio.4'la,'i'
.,`
5
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188-2599
(206) 433 -1800
z •
z
6
U'
'U O
CO W' •
N•LL
W O
• N D.
1--W,
Z�
. ,2.1
le
iO ,.
H v; •
O
• Z
U Ni
'O I - - •
MISSOULA MT 59803 -3359 CITY OF TUKWILA
RETURN TO SENDER 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
111111111111111111111)11111 11111111111
TUKWILA, WA 98108.2599
Illlmlluillnil (206) 433.1800
Kayoko M herson
15210 Maca am Rd S 0 -304
Seattle WA 9 168
•
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188 -2599
(206) 433 -1800
Z
~
• w
QQ2
JU
U O
(0 0
W W
1 I_
H
W O
u_Q
• d
� W
Z=
I- O
Z I—
W
• W
U�
O N.
WW
1— —
• O
Z
W
U=
O~
Z
•
i.-••••••,
U.S.PJvINGE
OCT 3'35 . 14
I it,Ar,e; 3 2
••
CITY OF TuKwiLit," ••
6200.SOUTACENTER'BLVD.
TUkWILA,.WA 98188-2599 •
• „.',.(206)
o
acadam RD S,.,#E104
le • 'i
98188 \
•
0 • • r - - ?.•
(•• S'
- ■
11 !, •
• Ac), g). , 41" . . . t WI%
: : 'S.:. •
• , • •
• • ; •
I' •
.• • r.•
•
z
-J 0
00
0)0
W
W
-J 1--
U)
LL
w
<
co
▪ w
z
I-0
ZI-
LU• LLJ
C.)
O (12
O H
W w
wz
— 0
(I)
o
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188 -2599
_ (206) 433 -1800
La Vista Estates Apts ec
101 E 26th #201
Tacoma Wa 98421ch�
C
w9 ri p T_
i
Z
W
c
10
00
to
J =
H
N lL
W0
LL
co n
IW
Z=
HO
Z F-
w
W
U0
tl
ww
f-
U.
H
— O
LUZ
co
O~
Z
Ui:il3•.
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA•98188.2599
(206) 433.1800
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188-2599
(206) 433-1800
John & Umeko Momil
4026 27th Avo S
Seattle WA 90100
'����., ...� .,- ...�..�
z
W
re
6
L
00
N
W =
J F-
N LL
W0
LL?
0
=
I— W _
Z�
I— 0
Z
W
W
U�
O -:
0 }-
WW
H H
LL O
..z
0-
O~
z
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188-2599
(206) 433-1800
John & Umeko Momii
4026 27th Ave S
Seattle WA 90100
z
re ~w
00
C)
J =
F—
• LL
u1 0
2qq
u .
c
=w
F-- _
Z H.
0
ZH
111 w
0 CI
ON
OH
ww
1- --
u_ O.
.Z
Cu
U=
O~
z
1 10 1
sh.T 1:0 r. • 1: • ••
Li
'■•• 4 "
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTIICENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 96168.2599
(206) 433-1800
S D209 '
Itsteir,
-E7'.47:16,717•72. 2f
.".
'
iMg.atirtlFT A ...r4irt: 17.• .•'...
Ito* it vt*cf#7.....14..419.1*A-L-t-P""IT-111.'-r- •• • 19: .., • -,-••,•,: . r'
.
' . '' .11Yr.:`■ 17' pr • f.7 i:',' a - •
•
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 96168-2599
(206) 433-1800
4„.
ftti
«.647ke,1 .
1(.0,
IVA
s.V 9 '1/I 1
4.;
.r13
- • 3 o
4114 t
• •
_,..:11):',7•1)1 I 2 I
• - - - •-•
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER 6100.
TUKWILA, WA 98160-2599
(206) 433-160
. _
m Builders Inc
c Hy S
0100
C164,
roi're
„ ett:'ill;t1
Art?U1T24)'•4.4 .iFt.'•
....
i.
i...0',‘ t vo-i"1-11V-. t it 410.1
- ,•,, ,. , .•
'''4'
'
•
•
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTEN BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188.2599
(206) 433.1000
CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTED BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188.2599
_ (206) 433.1800
z
F- w
V O'
0) 0
W =
-J 1-
N u_
w0
g
N p
_°
w
z
O
zH
np
O co
I—.
W W
tl ~.
- . O
.z
U
O
z
A P P L D A V I T O P
52otice of Public Hearing
E Notice of Public Meeting
O Board of Adjustment Agenda
.Packet
O Board of Appeals Agenda
Packet
0 Planning Commission Agenda
Packet
. O Short Subdivision Agenda
Packet
[]Notice of Application for
Shoreline Management Permit
fl Shoreline Management Permit
D I S T x I B U T I O N
hereby declare that:
0 Determination of Non -
significance
0 Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance
Determination of Significance'
and Scoping Notice
Notice of Action
j Of f icial Notice
Other
Other
was to each of the following addresses on
S TTL E 1 1 Es EoJZ W C A--C( / -)3 - `I S--=
Name of Pro
File Numb
W!
N of
N w;
:CO LL
al.
4'
co m' •
fl'Y
W
'M
AO Ni.
0 1-
w W_:
z.
PUBLIC NOTICE
City of Tukwila
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission will be holding a work session at 6:00
p.m., and the Planning Commission /Board of Architectural Review will be holding a public hearing at 8:00
p.m. on October 26, 1995, in the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the
following:
PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION - 6:00 P.M.
The Commission will be discussing the Council's Draft Development Regulations.
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
CASE NUMBER: L95 -0043: Riverton McDonalds
APPLICANT: Robert Comiskey
REQUEST: Increase the area of a wall sign from 38.6 sq. ft. to 50.4 sq. ft. per
TMC 19.32.
LOCATION: 15210 Pacific Hy. S., Tukwila.
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING
CASE NUMBER: L94 -0074: Showalter Middle School
APPLICANT: South Central School District No. 406
REQUEST: Final approval of a freestanding sign as part of a remodel.
LOCATION: 4628 S. 144 Street, Tukwila.
CASE NUMBER: L94 -0071: Cascade View Elementary School
APPLICANT: South Central School District No. 406
REQUEST: Final approval of a freestanding sign as part of a remodel.
LOCATION: 1360132 Ave. S., Tukwila.
CASE NUMBER: L95 -0053: Sunshine Ridge Condominiums - Design Review
L95 -0054: Sunshine Ridge Condominiums - Planned Residential
Development
APPLICANT: Lyle Kussman
REQUEST: Approval of a 31 -unit condominium in a 2 -story and a 5 -6 story structure, on
1.07 acres. The project requires approval by the Board of Architectural Review
and a recommendation by the Planning Commission on the PRD.
LOCATION: 15200 Macadam Rd. S., Tukwila
Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement or by appearing at the public
hearing. Information on the above cases 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 items.
Published:
Distribution:
Seattle Times
October 13, 1995
Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent
Property Owners, File.
.
A P P In_A V I T OP DISTRIBUTION
kile-.X2t2l,k2i10' hereby declare that:
( -1
.35(/
Notice :of Public Hearing
ONotice of Public Meeting
OBoard of Adjustment Agenda
Packet
EBoard of Appeals Agenda
Packet
OPlanning Commission Agenda
Packet
•0Short Subdivision Agenda
Packet
:Determination of Non-
significance
Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance
Determinatioh of Significance
and Scoping Notice
Notice of Action
0Official Notice
Other
ONotice of Appliction for 00ther
Shoreline Management Permit
0 Shoreline Management Permit
was Mailed to each of the following addresses on
Name of Projectin34.14,elAt
File Number L-q OOS
:: '
•
• ,.
I s
...,ziorEt JERRY V.
15210.MACADAWRD'S
SETTLE .WA,
7888457026003:
CULLEY:EILEEN•B'
17246SE142N0!
RENTON WA
OD-211
• 788895-0280r*.'
:LEE.JAMESqUA,
. • 3807DIAMOND:HEAD.CIRCLE
HONOLULU HI'
t
• . .788895-.0300T05 . .
' MCPHERSON:KAY6K02
15210:MACADAM-RD:S.0T304.
• SEATTLE WA.
.186110,-..0320; •
• :.:STRUNK.LESTER4ON-
' .15210JIACADAM1RD.S.D306
SEATTLE WA.
COr9
)
NAMES CHARLES 0
3009 SE 5TH
RENTON. WA
C0379
98055
788895-0270-01'
189999. DIERS:VIRGINIA A • -109999
15210-MACADAM RD.S.00301''
98059 SEATTLE WA
4.
. .
98188
788895-0290-07
030085 L KAWAHARA'SAEKO.H. 2N2256
.7740 S'LAKERIDGE.DR
96815 SEATTLE WA. 98178
78.8895-0310-03
389999 1: KING NAOMI'FTRST:
'C/O:KINGNAOMI•FrTRSTEU. ,
98188 11, P0.80X.5301. -
AEDONDOJIA.
.282539
. ..
98054.
, 11 788695-0330....69 '' . .
. i •
2N9999 :. •MOMII'JOHN,H+UMEKO.K 179999
I
11 4826:27THt.AVE Si.. ...
98188 .I.; SEATTLE.WA -
- . 98108
,.■ .,..
;') :•••:•• •.•,. •,. .
! .7881395,9340. •
-CELAYA-OCTAVID+MARGARET: 2N1828
CELAYA,CAROLYN.
.:6752:ESPEEOWAY
• 85710-
•
)780895T036.074,2 . •
''.KASHINd:BEVERCY.4S • 1N9999
.1521014ACADAMiAPT.00310.
SEATTLE.:WA,. •
• .
1
.788895-03.50-04. . . ..
1r MOORE:JAMES'A E YIRGINIA-R.343921
•MOOG FAMILY:TRUST%
.8012.18TH,AVE NE
SEAT.TLE.. WA
98115-
al •
-11 788895-037000 •
•HECK.ROBIN.L. • '.00379
•.5210:MACADAM.RE“S- OD311,
98188 SEATTLE. WA. . maa
•
• .
• •
........% ti v
- •
•
” .
7.88890380.708:7 . •
. . .
'GOCIDELLYCYNTA. .411732
11919:197TH;ST1SE •
SNOHOMISWWA. '98290
178889.5-039006:
.HAYASHIMM.Y
1.! .150.B0X'18257%,
SEATTLEWA
•
• DOS: •
•
441051'
98118
• .
)788895-0400±.0.4!... „ • . .1 '788895-.0410.,.62'
.• .; ' ;•SCARPELLI-NOMAN4LTDtPS 129999 1 'MAXWELL•LINDA.J
9852:ARR0WSMITH:AVE 1
' :WHITING ROBERT:L'
1
• .; SEATTLE:WA. 98118 , .15280:MACADAM4RD'E.0102
• i • ,. .1
• •
78889570420700 .
• :KING1NAOMI,F1TRST:
KING :NAOMIFTRSTEE
410:80X;5301E
•REDONDOkWA......
161226
98188
1 .788895-043008
262078 1 .BROWN:DAVID:M - C0379
• 1 15280:.MACADAM RD:S 0E-104
: SEATTLE WA
• 98054 .1
.788895-0440-06
. _ .
KING;NA0M11F-eTRST.
• C/OINGNAMOiTRSTEE!
P0'.-BOX.i5301,
.788895-0450-03:
. 262078 11ARMON:MELYNDA KAYE,
15280%MACADAM,RD:E106:
SEATTLE:WA:
.98054 1
%788895.t.6460-01'1 ." • •
PFANNENSTIEL1,NbiiM.k..1) • C1079
1528094ACADAM-RD!.S!VE107,
. •'.7EATTLE•WA.' .98188
1
• .78889570470-.09
O'HARA.JIHARRY
1 16420-148TH:AVE:SE •
•RENTON WA. . •
1
•
•
•
•
%71i..;13411270i117°.b PATRICK
152801;MACADAM RD1S 0E109:
; SEATTLE.WA: 98188
' .
1 788895-0490:,.05 .
:089999 1 VILLANUEVARODOLF0-.Q-
.VILLANUEVA.NICETA
1 '
152801MACADAMADS.0E-201
JUKWILA..WA., •
788i957.690703 • ' .
WALDROW.DONAi.DLR. 509999.
.15280:MACADAM-RD.S.VE202.
SEATTLE. WA 98188 .
.788895-0510-01.
•KING NA0M1.1F:TRST,
4 iC/O.KING NAOMI:F•TRSTEE
PO BOX 5301:
98188
179999.
98188
3N2414
98058
431997
.... •
98188
•
262C78
.•i4UNDC1\• LA
':,dA'OMER NAME RSA ASSOCIATES
LUMML• w 1 J
115720-02.1070L. ...•. ~ :
..: 115720- 02,10 -Q y: 115720 70221 -08
' '. LEXFORD :PROPERTIES . .370241 ;I11 LA.VISTA:ESTATES:APTS. 302588
C /0;. REAL'. ESTATE 1 TAX: SVC . INC . 4; • 101 ,.E .26TH ;;201 • •
3801 +15OTH:AVE•SE. -.STE 300 :I• ITACOMA•WA 98421. •.,
BELLEV,U,E .WAS...... 98006' jl ::. .•:.:..
•
-
. 7661607 50- 00 :.,. • . y;
S :C;M'I ESTMENTS' 339999
.170,0.; WESTL.. EZ,.AVE..N STE: 700 It
- -SEATTLE'WA . 98109
788895- 0010-06
'SMITH,PAMEL'A:J. '692415
,12032 : "67.TH.: AVE S ,
SEATTLE- WA 98178
••788895-0020 -04; i'
•CONNELL "MARTIN S. C0379 •1
15,210 :MACIADAM RD'S :4;D -102 ••
SEATTLE. . WA' 98188 I.
. 1.
788895-0040-00-
' STIEGER•:MARILYNiTRUSTEE' 480385
• SOVT.H ,CEN.TER':VIEW' CONDO ;ASSOC.
15280• MACADAM: RD :APT :E'•206:
788895- 0030 702
•ROBEN.JOHN-.W'
•15210 ;MACADAM
SEATTLE' WA
• • C0379
MS' 00-103
98188
:.TUKWI.L'A.WA;;.... .• .. 98188 ;I
.788895- 0050 -07 :,
NUNNX•--GOPAL, •
.1636 •N :WELLS• ST:03107;
CHICAGO: IL •
!
•3N2915• •
60674
.788895-0060 -051 •:I :788895 - 0070 -03
CROWDER: GILDA :J'• :.3N9999 • .� . HUA ! KEN: '
•3231145.THIAVE;S_W' . ,15210 :MACADAM:R
SEATT.LE:WA: 98116 i1 .TUKWILA ..WA.
PI
788895,'00.80-0.1,`....• .• ... !I •
HAMILTON :OONALDiF +CHIRISTIN609999
• 11102 :.S.E2EIRST<.PLACE .
BEL'L•EVUE' WA :: 98004.
;.• . •'''-;:;'..169999 •
:S i•4:0.10T '
- 98188
788895- 0090 -09. . :..
YORK.JR:THOMAS :P(•TRSTE)i
•5.6186ATH•AVE•E'-
PUYALLUP :WA
:788895-0100 -07! • �; - 788895 - 0110 -05:.
.KLEIN;BART +KARI'J•` • .289999 111 KING ;•NAOMI:•F :•TRST :'' • • •': 282539
•1521.0:MACADAMIRD•.4:D -1107 . !I •C /.O:KING NADMI F:TRSTEE••
TUKWILA'•WA:.'• :98188 1I PD•BOX :5301'
- •REDONDO.WA•
•
•129999
• 98371
• 78889.5-0120 -03...
WANGSANTHONYiG.
520.4!:29TH =AVE' S.' .
SEATTLE;WA-
98054 •
788895-0130 7011
580648 I . .WANG•TONY :G. .
• 5204' 29TH:. AVE • SOUTFI
" 98108 1 -SEATTLE WA
•788895-0140-091.
:LINK:DAVI01G:
CLARK - LINK :.ANN'
;507.- N•FDURTH:ST:
'MOUNT.VERNON;H.A . ,
88957
RUIZ: N
152101.MA
yvE.ATTLE : W
Li .788895 - 0150 -06
.202187• ,COTTENGA1M.EDWARO': •
15210-MACDAM RD S.1:0202.
TUKWILA•WA
.98273
6.0 704::• ,788895-0170 -02:• • . : .- OLASiR'. : :C0379 i OSG000+•ALAN:G :C'GRAVER K E
DAM • RD . S : '0D -203. hi - 15210:•MACADAM': F RD S :00:204
• . 98188 SEATTLE :WA
'•788895- 0180 ?0Q', -
"' • •H0LTON: STEVEN''K.
•15210:MACADAMI.RD:S•0D205:.
SEATTLE-WC'.
• ' 788895= 0200 -06.'! :• :.•` "'';' !;! .78889570210704:%_
•''DISHI :VICTORI.Y6:MAXINE' :E: , 449999 I11 HAN:•SUNG'.IN •
15210MACADAM:RD (0207; 1;1 152101MACADAM- RO;:;S40208
'TUKWILA.WA••' 98188 ii 'TUKWILA.WA,:
i„ •
559999'•
98108
909999
98188
C1079
98188
H •788895- 0190-08.
C1079. i :l SHI70ZAWA:MIDORI 219999-
15210- MACADAM.RD.S- •(D206.
98188 t= TUKWIL'A:WA. •98188
788895 -022 '02%
'ISRAEL: :JAC <L :
15210 :MACADA R0 +'S.0209
S ATTLE .WA '
•
C0779
98188
y .788895- 0230-00
REAO.JACK•E.
- 15210•.MACADAM RO -GD- 210
II; SEATTLE WA,.
179999
98188
• 241024
98188
J
CAROLE A
-C.,A13N 112TH .
SEATTLE WA
.788895,0540-05,
STEIGERMARILYN
2400.NEt9TH:
RENTON WA:
13oov..)-u..:Ju-yr
695953 KING NAOMI F TRST
C/0 KING NAOMI.TRSTEE
9811; 1 PO 80X 5301-
REDONDO.WA
T .788895-0550-02, •
C1279 i'l ' KAWAHARA.SAEKO H
•7740,S.LAKERIDGE.DR
98055 ',1 SEATTLE WA
„I •
.... , .
788895-056000j.„
• CROWLiROBERT):Ci
•15280:MACADAM:RDY0E7208-
TUKWILA:WA• '
200655
98188
I ....,
..!: ;788895.... 570...08
". • JONES: LFRED, .
.1'
• ..5772.St 52ND
■1: 'SEATTLE'
788895-0580T06t
SARDESON,jAY:E+RACHELLI-B, 049999
•15280:MACADAM;RD.S0;VE7301.
. SEATTLE'WA : 98188
282539
98054
--.2N2256
' 98178
E1279
98188
788895-0590T0 '
VASQUEZIRITA Y. .; • ...-.,760280.
15280: MACADAM DLVE-302'. •
SEATTLE.WA. 98188 • •
... • • :r •
. • 786895-70600.70.2i
HUA.KEN. . 269999 I.
15280:MACADAM_ IRWS:VE303 . 1.
• • SEATTLEIWA,' • "-" 98188
.78889570620r08...
:.COFFELT1MARS.HAG:
:3625:NE:9THIST, .
• RENTOP:WA.
78889540610-00.
.HEYER:KENT:R+VICKIO.4.
319•ALOHA,ST:
SEATTLE'44A. •
909999.
98109:
' ;'• 788895-0630-06
.049999. , %BRETTELUH:C.C••MISAMI C038f
• ;15280,:MACADAM,ROCE306:.
:98056 •
:TUKWILA•WA. - 98168 •
'4
!
.788895.:0640T�4I:
•
:QUINWEDWARD't'A+CLAUDIA'IN 139999
22005.::SEAUINtRDi ..
MAPLE.:VALLEYWA- • 98038
.78889570660:-.09Y„.• '
.:IBLINGS'vCAROLYW:J! . .410565
'6125.93RDrAVE:SE:
MERCER ISLANDAA:
...-.
•
; • !. .,:":,:.''; . !,.!'..'.....:::.....; ' ...:•:::' .•••' . .:. . •
• • . .
'.;,::.-1 - -
98040:
• .788895706
CONDOMINI
▪ SALANT:RUB
,19800!PACIFIC
70L
LBUILDER-VINC! S-0179
WUS'
1!•
t.,
•a.
SEATTLE. WA. .98188. .
• '•.•■:•••••
..)
• • •
•• •
PUBLIC NOTICE
City of Tukwila
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission will be holding a work session at 6:00
p.m., and the Planning Commission /Board of Architectural Review will be holding a public hearing at 8:00
p.m. on October 26, 1995, in the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the
following:
PLANNING. COMMISSION WORK SESSION - 6:00 P.M. a
v,
00,
The Commission will be discussing the Council's Draft Development Regulations. co C;
cow
w=
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. u) a.
w O;
CASE NUMBER: L95 -0043: Riverton McDonalds 2 `
APPLICANT: Robert Comiskey � Q
REQUEST: Increase the area of a wall sign from 38.6 sq. ft. to 50.4 sq. ft. per y d
TMC 19.32. F.T. w
LOCATION: 15210 Pacific Hy. S., Tukwila. ? F.
z O0'
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING w w.
CASE NUMBER: L94 -0074: Showalter Middle School ,p —
APPLICANT: South Central School District No. 406 .0 1--.
REQUEST: Final approval of a freestanding sign as part of a remodel. "" F v!:
LOCATION: 4628 S. 144 Street, Tukwila. u_ P.
Z.
CASE NUMBER: L94-0071: Cascade View Elementary School v N;
APPLICANT: South Central School District No. 406 IO i.
REQUEST: Final approval of a freestanding sign as part of a remodel. z .. _`.
LOCATION: 1360132 Ave. S., Tukwila.
` �