Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L93-0016 - WARREN DANA - SEGALE RETAIL CENTER DESIGN REVIEWl93-0016 strander boulevard and andover park west segale retail City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 Mr. Meryhew called the meeting to order. Members present were Messrs. Meryhew, Knudson, Malina, Haggerton, Flesher and Mrs. Craft. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Denni Shefrin, and Sylvia Osby. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 15 AND 22,1993. MRS. CRAFT SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center Jack Pace presented the staff report. He noted that the Planning Commission had previously reviewed this project and proposed several conditions. Two of the conditions required that the applicant bring the modifications back before the Commission. The first condition dealt with building facade for the back of the building and the corners. The applicant has added a grid pattern and some columns. They have not specified what color the grid pattern would be. Staff is suggesting that the color of the grid patterns be different than mass of the building. The second condition dealt with the site plan and the corner of the site. The applicant has taken out two parking spaces and is proposing a plaza with plantings and a seating area. Staff is recommending a couple of changes: additional trees in the court and flag poles on either corner. Mr. Malina asked if the applicant was going to propose a color this evening. Mr. Pace said that is suggesting that the color be noticeable and stand out and not suggesting a particular color. Mr. Malina asked if the colors would conflict with the types of businesses that will be going in there. Mr. Pace said they are just asking for a contrast. It could be the same color, just darker or lighter. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 September 14, 1993 Dana Warren, M.A. Segale, Inc.: Mr. Warren said that they concur with staff's recommendations for the building facade and they would use a contrasting tone of color. With regard to the front plaza area, they feel strongly that the plan they submitted is in compliance with what the Commission requested at the last meeting. He continued by saying that the problem he has in marketing the site is the opportunity for visibility. Additional plantings, especially those with height, would be a detriment to the marketing of this center. Mr. Warren requested that the Commission approve the plan as shown. Mr. Knudson asked by how much, did the applicant exceed the landscaping requirement. Mr. Warren said they exceeded it by 300 %. Mr. Meryhew asked how high the Japanese Holly gets. Mr. Warren said that it would be kept trimmed to 36 ". Mr. Meryhew closed the public hearing at 7:25 pm. Mrs. Craft (inaudible.) Mr. Knudson said that he thought staff was going overboard on the trees. He agreed that visibility might be a problem with additional trees. The applicant has done everything that has been asked of them. Mr. Malina said that this is a nice project as it stands. Mrs. Craft (inaudible.) Mr. Haggerton said he thought the City was going way overboard on trees. Some of the existing trees are growing too large and creating a safety problem. With regard to the flag poles, they add a nice touch, but who is going to maintain them? Mr. Meryhew said he thought they did a nice job on the corner and additional trees and flag poles would detract from that. MR. FLESHER MOVED TO APPROVE L93 -0016 WITH CONDITION #1, WHICH THEY'VE AGREED TO, AND DELETING CONDITION #2. MR. HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Meryhew excused himself from the Fosterview Estates public hearing, and Mr. Knudson took over as Chair: PIanning Commission Minutes Page 3 September 14, 1993 Mr. Knudson opened the public hearing at 7:35 pm. L92 -0064, L92 -0065, L92 -0014: Dujardin Development Co. Denni Shefrin stated that in addition to the packet received by the Planning Commission, staff did receive a letter from Pam Carter, dated with today's date which has been distributed to the Commission. Ron Lamb, 4251 S. 139 Street: Mr. Lamb asked why this site was the last large undeveloped parcel in Tukwila. The reasons are in the staff report: slides, springs, surface water and traffic. Three of these issues are clearly life /safety issues. Density compounds these problems. The springs migrate because of the thin soil. The answers to his questions have not been answered in the staff report. Many of the most serious questions remain unanswered and will remain unanswered until the bulldozer hits the ground. Mr. Lamb said to his knowledge, only one peer review has been done and serious concerns were raised with regard to slides, springs and surface water. The PRD application and Tukwila Municipal Code 18.34.070 states that the developer must clearly demonstrate extraordinary public benefit in order to be granted reduced lot sizes. In the PRD application, the developer answers this crucial question by saying the wetland and sensitive area buffer provide public benefit. The wetland and the buffer is the law, not a public benefit provided by the developer. The vicinity map used by the developer and the staff needs to be corrected to show the true size of the park. It does not extend all the way east to 43 Ave., it extends only half way. Because of the access problem, the public park appears as a private amenity for the developer. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires public access to sensitive areas that are on property being developed. What kind of access is being proposed for Fosterview Estates? How will the sensitive area as Fosterview Estates be maintained and protected? The developer's traffic consultant assumes that the new extension of 37th Ave. will take traffic off of 44th Ave. and 139th. If one looks at the current intersection of 44th & 137th, .the roadway curves and is banked to direct traffic onto 44th. If nothing is done to this intersection, the banked curve will still direct traffic south on 44th Ave. after the development is completed. With regard to the width of 43rd Place, the right -of -way is 30', and the pavement width is 20'. According to Tukwila Municipal Code 17.24.040, a local public street must have at least 50' of right -of -way and 30' of pavement. As a public street, 43rd is somewhere between the smallest street and an alley. Mr. Lamb also expressed concern for the driveways coming out onto 42nd Ave. He suggested that lots 6 -9 be combined to make three lots. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 September 14, 1993 Mr. Lamb then read into the record a letter from Nancy Lamb. Jannelle Scarber, 13716 41 Ave. S.: Ms. Scarber said that the developer has indicated at informational meetings that they would clear -cut the site, except for the sensitive areas. Then tonight, they have stated that they will be leaving a 45% canopy. The developer also stated that the smallest lot size would be 3,949 sq. ft., however lot 8 is 3,804 sq. ft. and lot 7 is 3,814 sq. ft. as shown in their drawings. The issue of when the test sites were done was evaded as to time of year and the number of times completed. The applicant's letter dated May 5, 1992 states that the only time they did the test was August 1990, which was a hot, dry time of year. The developer has stated that they have worked with the water and sewer departments regarding their proposed plot design, however, they have never contacted any department. some of the developer's retaining walls show up to 30% discrepancy between submitted maps and drawings. Since the annexation of 1988, there has been little done by the City and its employees, Council and Commissioners to promote the undying loyalty of the Riverton Foster area. This is a chance for the City to show good faith and back up their empty promises to the citizens by requiring the area in question to remain open space. Mr. Flesher asked which commissioners promised life without change. Ms. Scarber said that she wasn't pointing a finger at any one commissioner. She had spoken with different people from different committees. Mr. Knudson asked who she was referring to when she indicated that the applicant had not spoken with anyone from the sewer and water departments. Ms. Scarber said Val -View Sewer and Water District 125. Mr. Knudson said that he had not indicated to anyone that life would not change. There have been some changes that have occurred that have been for the better. Bob Scarber, 13716 41 Ave. S.: Mr. Scarber said that in his opinion, the entire Fosterview Estates property should be assigned a sensitive area designation. If the development is allowed, it will displace one of the last major vestiges of any sizeable wildlife habitat in the Tukwila area. King County Planning and Council have rejected several building proposals in the past. The concerns regarding the dangers of 42nd Ave. traffic need to be weighed by the commission very carefully. He said that he did not care to pay taxes to provide this development with their own personal and private Southgate Park. Downsizing the minimum R1 -7200 sq. ft. lot size to whatever can be fit in due to special standards does not serve the citizens of Tukwila well. Severe and sudden rainfall will very probably overrun the proposed hydrologic engineering structures. Existing year -round water courses fall under the Washington State Clean Water Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1993 Act. The annexed areas should take the first priority over any and all PRD's. Mr. Haggerton asked if Mr. Scarber knew specific reasons why King County had denied applications for this site in the past. Mr. Scarber said that a good part of it was due to the instability of the hillside. Mr. Knudson asked if they were single family or multi- family. Mr. Scarber said multi - family. Mr. Haggerton said that all of the letters should be turned in prior to the meeting so that the citizens could see them. Mr. Pace said that could not be controlled. Page 5 Fred Sherman, 13715 42 Ave. S.: He said that he was also speaking for his neighbor Marjorie Cargo. This proposed project is too many homes in too small of an area. Current zoning requires a minimum lot size of 7200 sq. ft. This project has only 9 lots out of 41 that meet this requirement. Perhaps lots can be combined to meet this minimum lot size. It is an insult to all the citizens of Tukwila who live around this project that they were not consulted by the Department of Community Development until July 1993. He added that he was impressed with this developer's efforts in putting together this proposal. The traffic on 42nd has tripled since he has lived there. Mr. Haggerton asked if it was at the beginning or ending of July when he found out about the project. Mr. Sherman said it was in mid -July. He added that he was amazed that there were people within the Department of Community Development guiding the community that do not even live in Tukwila. Mr. Knudson said that some of the staff does live in Tukwila and the City tries to seek out the most qualified individuals and that doesn't have any bearing on this project. In this instance, extra effort has been taken to make sure that the citizens concerns have been heard. Staff has worked exceptionally hard and have done their homework to make sure that everything was brought out for the citizens. Todd ? 13727 MacAdam Rd. S.: He stated that he was opposed to this development because of the negative impact to his neighborhood. He added that he is concerned with the pedestrian safety. The developer's traffic engineer has underestimated the negative impact that will result in connecting 137 Street through a busy arterial like 42nd Ave. The City of Tukwila should not allow this to Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 September 14, 1993 happen until it has implemented a plan to improve pedestrian and motorist safety at the intersection at 137 and Macadam Rd. There are two METRO bus stops and school bus drop within a couple hundred feet of this intersection. The children approaching the area have no pedestrian paths and no crosswalks as they approach that bus stop. The roads are very narrow. Lee Loyd, 13531 43 Ave. S.: She said that she is a joint owner along with Pamela Reiss of the residence immediately to the north of the PRD. One of their concerns is the enclosed drainage system. She is also concerned with the removal of existing vegetation along the southern and eastern boundary, to be replaced with a twelve foot wide and open public walkway. A 12 foot wide walkway is a negative impact. Their main concerns are security, liability and privacy. The planners and builders could include a fence between their project and other properties. Mr. Malina asked how she felt about the project itself. Ms. Loyd said that some effort has to made so that the project is comfortable for the existing property owners. Mr. Knudson called for a ten minute break. Mr. Meryhew called the hearing back to order. Staff then provided a rebuttal to testimony given by those who commented. Denni Shefrin continued by pointing out the conditions in the staff report. The SAO required that subdivisions go through a PRD process. The SAO was set out to protect areas which are considered environmentally sensitive. The PRD is triggered to allow for a density transfer while requiring sensitive areas to be set aside in sensitive area tracts and that is what is proposed. It is common to allow for some deviation to zoning standards such a setbacks and lot sizes. Staff recognizes that the City has little experience with PRD's. The City has looked at a way to cluster homes in order to preserve and protect the sensitive areas. The project provides additional residential housing in the community. This is a strong guideline and policy that has been emphasized in the growth management process and in the current comprehensive plan which is being revised. Ross Earnst, Director of Public Works Department: There were actually two peer reviews conducted. The issue of driveways, street intersections on 42nd and 40th, those were discussed, measured, and designed to meet the standards that we have for those kinds of entrances to the roadways. The area is not a limited access area. However, in safety situations, they have reduced the number of accesses that were allowed on 42nd and they do meet current design standards. A sidewalk will be constructed to mitigate concerns related to pedestian safety on 40th and 42nd. The Department of Public Works has a record of 3 accidents on 42nd. That doesn't mean that that's all the accidents Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1993 that have occurred. The City does have a program to construct pedestrian paths and 137 and MacAdam Rd are included in this program. There will be a pedestrian path in next year's program. The developer will contribute 50% for the construction of the ped path along 137th. You can only require a developer to pay for their impacts. Page 7 Mr. Knudson asked if seasonal tracking of the hydrology is done. Mr. Earnst said that the applicant did a hydrologic and geologic review of the site during a dry year. They did not go out and re -do the geotechnical work. Mr. Frasier said they did ask for an expanded geotechnical analysis where additional test pits were done on the site. So there was two sets of test pits. The developer has agreed to the re- routing and up- sizing of pipes to S. 134th. Mr. Earnst said that a completed design of the system has not occurred. The City has reviewed a detailed conceptual drainage plan. The City cannot require the applicant to complete the design prior to approval of the preliminary plat. Mr. Flesher asked if there were any significant disagreements or changes during the peer reviews, or were they in total agreement. Mr. Earnst said they weren't in total agreement. The peer review on the geotechnical work was in basic agreement. Mr. Frasier stated that there were specific cautions that the peer review geotech had and they highlighted those in the fival MDNS. That precipitated changes in design which have occurred. The hydrological, hydraulic and erosion control peer review also indicated that they were in basic agreement, but there was also some additional cautions and changes to the design. Staff is confident that they will come to agreement on off -site issues to provide adequate capacity for the flows that will come from the developed site. One of the conditions that Public Works has is that those recommendations in the peer review report are met by this development as part of the final design process. Mr. Malina asked where the liability lies when the clearing and grading of the site takes place. Are there any protections in the covenants? Mr. Earnst stated that liability issues are generally left to the attorneys. What staff does is design a system, that based upon today's standards, will almost in all cases, assure that yards will not flood. However, staff cannot guarantee that a yard won't flood or that a spring will not pop up. Mr. Earnst continued by saying that they did receive Letters of availability of water and sewer from Val -View and Water District 125. There will be a dedication of parts of the system Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 September 14, 1993 to those utilities with water and sewer. As a PRD, staff has some flexibility in the roadway design. This plat has been redrawn several times. Staff altered the subdivision standards to not pave the whole area and try to minimize the amount of impervious surface area. The City has several streets which are 28 feet and some that are 24 feet. Narrow streets slow traffic down and there is not as much asphalt to drain. Mrs. Craft (inaudible). Mr. Earnst stated that once the roadway design is approved and in, someone has the right to sue if they feel that the design is in error. On the construction, the City will require a one -year maintenance agreement which is a typical requirement of a contractor. They would have to come back within a year and repair anything that is not in accordance with the design. In general, if pot holes' develop, the City will require them to fix them. That will occur in the approval of the design. The homes will be inspected by City inspectors and will issue certificates of occupancy which say they were constructed under applicable codes. Mr. Haggerton asked how wide 42nd Ave is. Mr. Earnst said that he didn't recall how wide it is. Mr. Fraser thought it was 36 feet, but Mr. Earnst said that he thought that was a little wide, 26 feet is probably more accurate. Mr. Earnst stated that one of the policies of the City Council is to build more through streets. The staff will attempt to get that policy implemented in the projects. Mr. Malina asked if staff has come to any sort of agreement regarding the fence on the Reiss/Loyd property. Ms. Shefrin stated that the City will require that a rail fence is constructed on top of the rockery. Mr. Malina asked if staff has spoken with the property owners about that. Ms. Shefrin said that she had. From a privacy standpoint, the vegetation that would be retained would serve to enhance the privacy aspect. Mr. Malina asked about the tunnel affect. Ms. Shefrin said she didn't feel a tunnel effect would be significant. Mr. Malina asked if staff is confident they could work that out with the property owners. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1993 Ms. Shefrin said that they could work that out. Mr. Malina asked about the covenants. Page 9 Ms. Shefrin said that the PRD requires that there be general language that would be covered in the covenants. Staff is requiring that there would be refinements to the covenant's restrictions that would be imposed at the administration level. The issues of maintenance, monitoring, preservation, and liability would be handled at the staff level. Mr. Malina asked about the enforcement of those covenants. Mr. Pace said that there are two levels. The City of Tukwila does not enforce covenant restrictions. The City Attorney feels that the City should not be involved in enforcing home owner association covenants. How well they are enforced depends upon how active the home owners association is. Mr. Malina asked if it could be placed in the covenants that adjacent home owners be involved in that association. Mr. Pace said that he was not aware of any covenants that went beyond the confines of a specific development. Amy Kosterlitz, Buck & Gordon, representing Dujardin Development: It's very understandable that residents in the area do not want change. This is being developed according to the City's ordinances. The City has many stringent ordinances on, the books and the applicant meets all of them. The SEPA review and mitigation required that the applicant meet all of the conditions of the peer review reports. With regard to blind corner at 139th and 44th, the applicant's study shows that they actually improve the functioning of . the corner by putting less traffic in that direction. With regard to the accesses, they meet all the city standards and they have consolidated their accesses. With regard to the drainage and geotechnical issues, the original soil borings and the report were completed in December. A follow -up study was done in August. The findings of that report showed that there were no springs discovered. There may be seeps in the wetlands. A drainage system has been designed to take care of all those issues. There was even an additional condition added to the SEPA MDNS to have on -site monitoring during construction should something occur. Mr. Haggerton asked why then has there been testimony that water is visibly coming out of the ground. Ms. Kosterlitz stated that she could not answer that. There are seepages in the wetlands area. With regard to Fire Department access, there has been Fire Department review and approval of this project. Several modifications have occurred to meet Fire Department Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 September 14, 1993 standards. There has been extensive contact with the water and sewer department. With regard to pedestrian access, the applicant is providing additional pedestrian access on the site and along 137th. The applicant agrees that pedestrian access should connect to the bus stops. With regard to the prior projects, the applicant has no specific knowledge of any applications that were denied. With regard to the privacy issue and the pedestrian path, the applicant is willing to go any way the City would like. There needs to be a balance between having the public access to the park and privacy for the existing residents. The applicant is willing to put in a fence. With regard to covenants, the major issues of concern which have been brought up are not addressed solely by covenants. Most of the conditions, both of the PRD and the subdivision, as well as the mitigated determination of non - significance are enforceable by the City. The ordinances require that the specifics of those covenants be drafted and approved by the City Attorney. Terry Gibson, Traffic Consultant for Dujardin Development: Mr. Gibson said the guardrail on 42nd and the widening of the shoulder north of the new plat road entrance was a requirement of the City Engineer, Ron Cameron. A crosswalk could be put in on the east side of Macadam and extend the walkway to the bus stops. The cost would be split 50/50 with the City. Putting in narrower road sections does tend to reduce the speed of traffic. Erin Tietze, Civil Engineer for project: Mr. Tietze said that most of the citizens who had concerns with the drainage reside in drainage area #1 and this project does not impact that area; it is an entirely different drainage area. Area #2 is the lowland area and less water will be discharged to that area than occurs currently. If 8" pipes exist on 43rd, they will be taken out and replaced with at the least 12" pipes. The roads will be located on the flatest portion of the site, thus the most stable part of the site. The bulk of the housing is also on the flatest area. With regard to the springs, there are seeps and springs, however, the bulk of them are in the wetland area and the drainage course area. This is very tight soil so very little surface water run -off is getting into the soil. If active springs are found, they will put in french drains to tie in with the footing drain system around the buildings and tie directly into the storm drainage system. Ellen Ryan, 13727 Macadam Rd S: Ms. Ryan said that according to the CIP, page 2, the Southgate Park project won't be funded until the year 2000 -2003 to the amount of $400,000. She continued by saying that change is inevitable and personally, she would prefer for Southgate Park to be a private park for one family rather than a haven for drug dealers, which is what it is currently being used for. Since there is going to be a development, it would be nice to have access for the public. The City needs to be proactive regarding some of the problems that are going to be encountered because of this development. Mr. Earnst said that Southgate Park is currently an undeveloped park. It will be more of a neighborhood passage park rather than an active park with ballfields, etc. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 September 14, 1993 Joanne Poirer, 13405 43 Ave. S. Ms. Poirier asked if the pathway will allow the public to get into the backland (the lower portion of the park). Mr. Pace said that the public won't be able to get onto the lower portion. Ms. Poirier asked if the City will keep people out of the lower park. Mr. Pace said that he wasn't sure what the City's plans are for the redevelopment of that park. Ms. Poirier asked if the 12" pipe will be replaced. Mr. Fraser said it will be replaced and up -sized as needed. Fred Sherman, 13715 42 Ave. S.: Mr. Sherman asked for a clarification regarding the density transfer calculation. Ms. Shefrin said the density transfer formula provides the maximum number of units permitted on the site given there are sensitive areas. The PRD, provides general guidelines, in turn, for how those lots would be designed. Those are two separate issues. The formula is part of the PRD provisions. Mr. Sherman said that he wasn't against the project, just against the number of units placed on it. It looked more like a condominium complex. He asked if the lots sizes could have even been smaller. Mr. Pace said that yes, they could even have been duplexes. Bob Scarber, Mr. Scarber asked who determines what is a sensitive area and what its boundaries are. Mr. Pace said that there is a wetland biologist who takes the criteria that is contained in the ordinance that defines what the rating of a wetland is and how the wetland should be delineated. There are a number of manuals used to determine the boundaries of the wetlands and watercourses. Mr. Scarber asked if this was dictated by the State. Mr. Pace said that part of the City's Growth Management Act is for cities to develop a sensitive areas ordinance. As to the specific requirements or standards, that is something the City of Tukwila developed. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1993 Page 12 • Ron Lamb, 4251 S. 139th Street: Mr. Lamb said that one of the consultant's reports said that "...there are numerous and unidentified springs throughout the project site which must be collected and directed to the new storm system." He added that he would like to get a response regarding the concerns of the sidewalk that parallels 44th Ave. In addition, he asked for information regarding the plans for the intersection of 44th and 137th. He emphasized that in approving a PRD or density transfer, there has to be extraordinary public benefit and he said he has heard little which he would consider extraordinary. Mr. Haggerton asked if his concerns with the springs were addressed when the applicant indicated that any springs found would be diverted to the storm system. Mr. Lamb said no, that did not satisfy his concerns because the flow under the surface may changed such that other problems are developed elsewhere. Mr. Earnst said that they may have erred in leaving some trees in that makes the sidewalk less safe. Mr. Fraser said that they took the consultant out several times to attempt to put the sidewalk on the east side of the street. The Department of Fisheries, the Urban Environmentalist, Planning and Parks recognized that a cut into the hill would be necessary which would remove some of the original biofiltration.There may have been a significant impact on adjacent properties if they attempted to put the sidewalk in at the east or the west side. Because of the impacts, the City felt that putting the sidewalk up above the bluff and behind some of the trees, impacts to the existing house to the east or the grading system would not occur. Mr. Lamb said that the location was the concern, it was the safety factor of a sidewalk on a steep hillside, underneath the large trees. Mr. Fraser said that there are some trade -offs. Mr. Tietze said with regard to the intersection of 137th and 44th, where the road now curves up, they will be dropping that down and it will become more of a through street and an intersection. Mr. Pace said that with regard to public benefit, roughly 25% of this subdivision will be in common area. In past subdivisions, there has been no common area of any significant size. What makes this site unique is the large percentage of common area set aside. Mr. Lamb said that is the law, it's not a magnanimous gesture on the part of the developer. He added that he was looking for something from the developer. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1993 Ms. Kosterlitz said that the public benefit is being able to provide adequate public housing, meeting the City's comprehensive plan goals and respecting the natural environment and providing significant open space. Page 13 Mr. Knudson closed the public hearing. The Planning Commission agreed to meet on September 23, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. to review testimony and make their recommendations. Mr. Knudson adjourned the meeting. Prepared By, Sylvia Schnug strander retail planting -AktPC-1 C A.417" VOt 14( 1 • ' .41rStrt amenttl!?fy'f'1S?i:� �^MIrtT;, .177...•.7.r7.17 .•- r.-, •-�.n . -,.c r-r.='.'.. , ..... • s . .. ,..m^T:9•4.rrMcw ;'.F,.'s�r rk< 1^!♦iid7(:.. �. 1'�': )':t •:!•'sM i,rxr '•'• v :c. •• i;,it, ;.G' •,T is !jY.t'!ii• A. .;;,•,;; 3:;. •J i?i�',. .;t, .�...��.s ^_,� rt'�.' •T•':k''• r :.g I,•i_`-. ■i(': "�'tC...P 6%i ice); �Y.Ii,etAketta?; ✓f!j�j�7�1. Q .ii•ZP:3•..r,,.j ►i1:14' : •. • . -a'-' i: -E .i ,r-ru ^ '. : S exx w r.rrY 3S � on di .2 rl- '•l�t:'.: :n ."• : ' .:1 � , �'' • , '!.r • .,i'" ' J .34, WI • . , '6" R01,f';,:4 Itie• ;4;le 44, , . •. 'ibt.�i+i ; �y�t�' �w� City of Tukwila Department of Community Development HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE: John W. Rants, Mayor STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: ATTACHMENTS: Prepared May 19, 1994 May 26, 1994 Rick Beeler, Director L94 -0019: Strander Retail Sign Approval and L93 -0016: Strander Retail Design Approval for Sign Design (Continued Condition). Segale Business Park Approval of area increases for three signs and design approval for seven signs. Strander Retail Center, SE 1/4 of the Andover Park E. /Strander Blvd. intersection in Tukwila, WA. Site area is 9.39 acres. Commercial C -2 (Regional Retail) A. B. C. D. E. Site Plan Showing Sign Locations Building Elevations of Tenant Spaces and Proposed Signage. Letter Requesting Sign Area Increases and Calculations (5/15/94) Seven Sign Area Calculations Colored Sign Designs (to be presented at the hearing) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Staff Report to the L94-0019 & L93- 00016: Strander Retail Signage Page 2 Planning Commission/BAR VICINITY /SI'T'E INFORMATION Project Description: The applicant requests: A. Planning Commission approval of area increases for three signs per TMC 19.32.140 and B. Board of Architectural Review approval for the design of seven wall signs as a required condition of approval for file No. L93 -0016. Existing Development: Signs would be located in the Strander Retail shopping facility which is currently under construction (see Attachmen A) Surrounding Land Use: The surrounding area is developed in commercial and industrial uses. The signs would face commercial areas. Terrain: The terrain is flat. Signs would be mounted on northwest facing walls, between 14 and 28 feet above grade (Attachment B). BACKGROUND The Strander Retail building was approved by the Board of Architectural Review on September 14, 1993 (L93- 0016). This approval included further review of the proposed signs for design consistency with the development. In addition, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve increasing the area of three signs. Sign location is shown in Attachment A, sign designs as mounted on the building walls are shown in Attachment B, and sign area calculations are shown in attachments C and D. Staff will first review the proposed sign area increase, then will review the proposed design of these and the remaining four signs for design consistency. Staff Report to the L94 -0019 & L93- 00016: Strander Retail Signage Planning Commission/BAR Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF SIGN AREA INCREASE DECISION CRITERIA The substantive purpose of the Sign Code is: "To establish standards and guidelines for the design, erection and installation of signs and other visual communication devices so that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly and safety may be increased by minimizing clutter and distraction." (TMC 19.04.020(A) The Tukwila Municipal Code permits the Planning Commission to increase the allowed sign area in Table 1, 19.32.140 by 50% for each doubling of the required minimum setback distance for the wall upon which a particular sign is to be placed; except that in no case may the sign area exceed 6% of the exposed building face area or 500 square feet, whichever is less. FINDINGS The applicant is requesting sign area increases for three signs as summarized below: 1. Barnes and Noble, West Elevation Sign Proposed sign area: 146.0 s.f., based on a proposed increase of 52.62 square feet. Exposed building face of tenant area: 2,446.00 s.f. Basic sign area allowed: 93.38 s.f. The sign is located 100 feet from the property perimeter, which is five doublings of the 20 ft. building setback. Allowed sign area based on two doublings of the setback could have been 186.76 s.f.1. However, the sign area is limited by the 6% of wall area, or 500 s.f. maximum sign size. Six percent of 2,446 s.f. is 146.76 square feet. The proposed 146.0 s.f. sign is about equal to the maximum area permitted. 193.38 + (2 x (46.69 = (50% of 93.38)) Staff Report to the L94 -0019 & L93- 00016: Strander Retail Signage Planning Commission/BAR Page 4 2. Starbucks Coffee Proposed sign area: 40.68 s.f., based on a proposed increase of 5.52 square feet. Exposed building face of tenant area: 754 s.f. Basic sign area allowed: 35.16 s.f. The sign is located 165 feet from the property perimeter, which is eight doublings of the building setback. Allowed sign area based on one doubling of the setback is 45.24 square feet. The proposed 40.68 s.f. sign area is less than the amount permitted. 3. Smith's (Northwest Elevation) Proposed sign area: Two sign areas of 250 s.f. each are proposed. The total 500 s.f. of sign area is based on an increase of 350 square feet. Exposed building face of tenant area: 9612 s.f. Basic sign area allowed: 150 s.f. total. The signs are located no closer than 170 feet from the property perimeter, which is 17 doublings of the 10 ft. setback. Total allowed sign area based on five doublings of the setback is 525 square feet. However, total sign area is limited to 500 square feet. The proposed sign area is equal to this maximum. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed sign area increases are all within the permitted range established in TMC 19.32.140, and may be approved by the Planning Commission. • 2. Staff firids that the proposed signs do not significantly "...contribute to clutter and distraction." RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of all three proposed sign increases. Staff Report to the L94 -0019 & L93- 00016: Strander Retail Signage Planning Commission/BAR Page 5 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW EVALUATION OF SIGN DESIGN Pursuant to its review of the Strander Retail building (L93 -0016) the attached sign design materials have been submitted for approval by the Board (Attachment D colored sign materials to be presented at the hearing). This review is to determine if the signs are of a consistent design quality with the approved project design. FINDINGS 1. The proposed signs are placed in a logical location (Attachment A). 2. The scale of the signs are consistent with the Tukwila Sign Code requirements, subject to approval of sign area increases as discussed above (Attachments C and D). 3. The colors of the sign complement the color pattern approved by the Board in its earlier project approval (Attachment E). The previously approved project color scheme will be presented at the hearing. 4. It should be noted that the Barnes and Noble sign on the north wall is currently a free - standing sign. However, the applicant is investigating the opportunity to make this a wall mounted sign. No significant change in the "look and feel" of the sign is anticipated whether it is wall mounted or freestanding. CONCLUSION A review of the attached materials demonstrates that the proposed signs are harmonious and have a consistent design quality with the approved project design. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends approval of the signage as proposed. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared September 9, 1993 HEARING DATE: September 14, 1993 PROJECT/NUMBER: Segale: 93 -0016 APPLICANT: Dana Warren OWNER: M.A. Segale REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE: Review two conditions of approval related to Segale Retail Center. Southwest corner of Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West 9.39 Acres ZONING: C -2 (Regional Retail Business) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial STAFF: Jack Pace ATTACHMENTS: A -1. Conditions of Approval B -1. BAR minutes June 24, 1993 C -1. Building elevations D -1. Reveal details E -1. Corner site development plan F -1. Tukwila CBD Street Tree Program 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Staff Report to the Planning Commission • FINDINGS BACKGROUND: L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center Page 2 The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) approved the project with ten conditions (Attachment A -1) on June 24, 1993. Two of the conditions #1 and #5 required modifications to be brought back to the BAR for their review. DECISION CRITERIA: Conditions the applicant needs to respond to: #1 Facade Design: In order to incorporate visual harmony with neighboring developments, redesign the southeast facade to include banding or modulation of some type, to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. #5 Arterial Focal Point: To strengthen important axes, require a redesign of the site's northwest planter area adjacent to the intersection of Andover Park West and Strander by removing two parking spaces and including public amenities such as benches .and low vegetation; to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. Facade Design: The applicant has proposed the following changes to the facade design: (attachments C- 1/D -1). A. To the back of the building, a "grid pattern - painted accent color." At this time the color has not been decided. B. To the side of the building, the windows have been redesigned and a grid pattern has been added in the corner of the building wall. C. To the front of the building, the windows have been redesigned with a grid pattern. Arterial Focal Point: At the corner of Strander and Andover Park West, the applicant has proposed to (see attachment E -1): A. Remove two parking spaces. ,._. Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center Page 3 Planning Commission B. Develop a small plaza with a "rock platform" which would be approximately three -feet high and designed with a seating area. C. Seasonal planting areas. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends . Segale Retail Center modifications be approved with the following conditions: Facade Design: 1. At this time, the applicant has not specified the color of the columns in the rear of E5 the building or color of the grid pattern. Staff recommends that the columns and grid patterns be a different shade or color to provide a greater contrast. erial Focal Point: 2. e City Council • • mmittee has completed` P s gram. The purp • e of the program is to "ha ony and consisten ' within Tukwila's central is a s IIary of the stree tree program. eir review of the CBD Street Tree evelop a theme that will provide siness district. Attachment F -1 Based up this plan and the : • plicant's site plan, staff re: • mmends adding 3 trees from the n • ' es list be located the landscape area behind e rock platform. In addition, sta • ecommends addin: a flag pole on either side of e plaza. The flag poles, in addition to the trees will bet - r define the plaza space. ATTACHMENT A -1. ATTACHMENT A CONDITIONS L93 -0016: SEGALE RETAIL CENTER 1. Facade Design.. In order to incorporate visual harmony with neighboring developments, redesign the southeast facade to include banding or modulation of some type, to be reviewed by. the Board of Architectural Review. 2. Building Color. Require predominant wall colors to be warm (beiges, taupes) rather than cool (grays, blues). . 3. Arcade Columns. For building components to have good proportions and relationship to one another, redesign the shafts of the columns to appear relatively shallower (eg 2' -0" or less) when seen in comparison to their base and their top. 4. Arterial Corners. To provide visual interest along these arterial streets, redesign the facades at the southwest and northeast corners of the building to incorporate repetitive geometric patterns. 5. Arterial Focal Point. To strengthen important axes, require a redesign of the site's northwest planter area adjacent to the intersection of Andover Park West and Strander by removing two parking spaces and including public amenities such as benches and low vegetation; to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. 6. Portal Plantings. To enhance architectural features, require the cedars in the portal areas to be a minimum of 6' -8' tall at the time of planting. 7. Service Area Perimeter Plantings. To be effective in winter and summer and to screen the service areas, require cedars to be a minimum of 8' tall, spruces to be a minimum of 8' tall, and cypress' to be a minimum of .6' tall at the time of planting along the eastern, southeastern, and southern planting areas. 8. Signs. Signs are to be approved by separate application to the BAR. Background colors for each of the panels at the five entries are to be approved at that time. 9. Exterior Lighting. To maintain harmony with the rest of the project's lighting design, eliminate floodlighting of the building's facade. 10. HVAC Equipment. Roof -top HVAC equipment shall be painted the same color as the roof -top. ATTACHM —PVT B -1 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 24, 1993 (REVISED PER VERN MERYHEW) Chairman Meryhew called the meeting to order at 8:06 p.m. Members present were Messrs. Meryhew, Malina, Haggerton, Knudson, Clark, Flesher and Mrs. Craft. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Diana Painter, and Sylvia Schnug. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 27, 1993. MR MAUNA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. There were no citizen's comments. L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center: Jack Pace presented the staff report. He entered into the record a letter from Nancy Lamb Mr. Pace noted that to notify citizens that the meeting was continued, the site was posted, a notice was put in the Seattle Times, and notices were sent to adjacent businesses located within 300 feet of the site. Mr. Pace said that the site is located at Strander and Andover and the proposal is for an approximately 200,000 square foot building. There will be approximately 500 parking spaces. The building heights range from 26' to 36', the landscape area ranges from 10' to wider around the perimeter of the site, as noted in the landscape plan. The setbacks vary from 29' to 20'. Across the street from the site is Southcenter Plaza. Mr. Pace noted that many of the comments included in the staff report reflect direction that the Board has given staff on past decisions. Taking the design review criteria, staff has made comments based on direction given by the Board in the past. This is probably one of the more visible sites compared with past projects. Staff and the applicant have come to the point where they have agreed to disagree. One of the concerns of the staff is the dominance of the vast parking lot. The Code requires 300 parking spaces, however, that is recognized as too small. The second issue is 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 the focal point. This corner will be a dominant focal point and there is nothing to create that focal point except for the potential sign. Thirdly, staff is concerned because this structure does not have a back side. The project is at the corner of Strander and Andover and office/warehouse businesses face the back of the project. In the staff report, staff highlights the concern of how visible the site is and how the building can be modulated and improve the visibility of the corners. The model depicts heavy landscaping, however, this probably would not occur for 15 -20 years. The landscape material will be much smaller at the time of planting. The walls are from 26+ feet high and nursery material will not cover the blank walls. Looking at other projects, such as Southcenter Plaza, a variety of techniques have been used to break up the blank walls such as landscaping, building materials and patterns /detailing. Another concern of staff is the dominant color. Given the other types of building around there, staff is concerned with how to give the project richer color or richer design. Mr. Pace continued by saying that additional landscaping is needed to break up the parking areas and blank walls. A question staff has raised, is whether larger plant materials should be used to do that. The Southcenter Plaza project, in many areas, have 4 1/2" caliper trees in the front to have the immediate effect of breaking up the wall. With regard to building design, this building will be viewed from 360 degrees. Other comments noted in the staff report, deal with the detailing of the walkway within the arcade area, as well as dealing with lighting and focusing more on the entries; making these a more dominant element than they are. This is a fairly long building and the question is how to provide more of a focal point so that it doesn't read as a low, flat building. Mr. Knudson asked where 4 1/2" caliper trees were required on other projects. Mr. Pace said that 4 1/2" caliper trees were placed along the front of Southcenter Plaza in front of the Target store. The model does not depict what the project will look like when it opens, but how it will look several years down the road. The issue is how to deal with certain restraints of the site, demands that the tenants have and at the same time, improve the visibility of the site since it can be viewed from 360 degrees. Mr. Pace indicated that in looking at the report, the Board has four alternatives: 1. Approve the project as submitted; 2. Deny the project as submitted; 3. Approve the project with conditions; or 4. Modify the project requesting that it come back before the Board and specifically give direction on modifications they would like to see. Staff is recommending that the project be modified and have noted 13 conditions. Given the degree and the types of conditions, staff felt it would be appropriate for the applicant to come back before the. Board. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 June 24, 1993 There are five conditions that deal with building design. In the conditions, there may be other alternatives, but the ley point is how to look at the site from all sides and ask what can be done to improve some of the facades. Staff is not suggesting any one technique, but rather give the applicant direction and let them come up with solutions. With regard to landscaping, staff is suggesting that the parking area be broken up. There are five conditions dealing with landscaping. The intent is to look at ways to improve the project, and at the same time, balance the needs of the applicant. Finally, there are three miscellaneous conditions. In summary, staff and the applicant have come to a point where they agree to disagree. The Board has several options before them. Staff has tried to articulate concerns and requirements given by the Board on past projects and implement them on this project. Mr. Knudson said that in the past, they did not want large building walls close to the street, and this project is set back from the street. Mr. Pace said that the issue is whether the Board wants the wall and the parking areas broken up. There are a variety of ways of accomplishing that. Because there is so many parking spaces, losing one or two spaces will not be critical. The bigger issue is how to provide a focal point to the building. Mr. Malina asked if the proposed 3' -4' hedging in the front of the project would screen the additional landscaping in the parking areas that staff is requesting. Mr. Pace said that a combination of hedging and additional landscape islands could be used to break up the parking areas. Mr. Knudson asked what staff is recommending for an arterial focal point in the front of the project. Mr. Pace said that they do not want to come up with specific design solutions, but to get direction if this is important to the Board. Mr. Meryhew asked if that was the corner where the sign will go. Mr. Pace said that there is a proposal for a sign and a planter, but they have not submitted the details yet for that. Mr. Knudson asked if the design of the sign would provide the focal point. Mr. Pace stated there are a variety of techniques. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 June 24, 1993 Mr. Haggerton asked how the height of the Target store compared with this project. Mr. Pace said that it is generally the same height. The height of the Target store varies a little because the building steps back. Mr. Meryhew asked the height of the Marriott Hotel. Mr. Pace said that he thought it was a little less than 40 feet. Mr. Haggerton asked if staff had received comments from neighboring businesses. Mr. Pace indicated that they did not receive any written comments and that the verbal comments were general comments as to what the project will look like and no comments were either for or against the project. One individual expressed concern for looking at the back of this building. Dana Warren, Project Manager, Segale, Inc.: Mr. Warren said that this project started last March. Mr. Warren said that when the staff report came out, he was quite disappointed because the tone of the report had a certain bias. He asked the Board to step back and pretend like they are seeing the project for the first time. He added that his job was to be financially responsible. He also has used examples of surrounding projects and projects that have been recently approved, and in many cases this project not only meets those standards, but exceeds them substantially. Mr. Warren then presented a slide show. He stated that Southcenter is considered a super regional mall. Costco has changed the way shopping takes place. Costco is successful because they sell their products cheaper than anyone else because they sell a number of the same product. They sell on a low margin, have low overhead, pay low rent, and have set a new standard for retailing across the U.S. They have no landscaping and minimal facade elements. The smaller retailers who use to operate in the 1500, 2000, 3000 square foot range are no longer in business. The new trend retailers generally take over warehouses, make minimal improvements, and have minimal landscaping. Mr. Warren stated that Segale tends to go with what has worked in the past. They have always designed straight - forward, timeless buildings using natural materials and enhanced them with greater than average landscaping. A unique thing about their landscaping is that they try and stay away from deciduous trees because six months out of a year, a deciduous tree is virtually invisible. Entrances to warehouse buildings have been flanked with evergreen materials. Mr. Warren added that they build concrete buildings, not masonry or wood structures and enhance them. One example, is a concrete building with a significant, deep reveal or a concrete stain. These reveals can add significant cost to a building. He stated that the site has frontage on Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. A retail Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 June 24, 1993 expert was hired to create three designs of the building. He came back indicating that there was only one design for the building due to the way the site sits, the way the view is obstructed. When driving down Strander Blvd. this building won't be seen until they get to the intersection. The building was designed so each tenant has their own identity. This was done with entry elements that are 35' high. One of the tenants has the option of having a mezzanine. This project provides an overhead arcade that connects Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. The Code requires ten feet of landscaping along the frontages, five feet of landscaping on the sides and no landscaping across the back. The total of the required landscaping is 15,000 sq. ft. (approx. 1/3 of an acre). He stated that they have proposed 54,000 of landscaping (approx. 1 1/4 acre), .which is four times what is required. A landscape hedge has been created along the entire frontage of the building which is composed of evergreen landscaping. All of the landscaping, except for deciduous street trees, are evergreen. Junipers have been proposed for around the base of each of the planters. The plantings behind that have been scaled up to rhododendrons which will be kept trimmed to car hood height. Tanyosha Pines have also been planted because they have a canopy. On either side of the entry elements cedars are proposed. Where the building affronts the Marriott, they have proposed 20' of landscaping when the Code only requires five feet. Where the building fronts an office building, they have proposed a double row of landscaping that is 20' wide and second level of landscaping up against the building. Mr. Warren stated that he has had discussions with people from the Marriott and they are very much in favor of the project. The loading area will be located in the back of the building where it fronts the railroad tracks and warehouse buildings. The detailing, as shown on the model, on the back of the building have been taken off for economic reasons and a level of landscaping has been added. Screen walls have also been added near the loading areas. Scott Clark asked where the dumpsters were located. Mr. Warren said next to each loading area. He went on to say that the coloring near the signage areas will be coordinated with each tenant and brought back before the Board when the signage is reviewed. A significant cornice runs across the top of the building that is detailed. In addition to that, there is a soffit with steps which provide relief. Ornamentational lighting appears on each column to create rhythms and patterns on the front of the building. On the back side of the building is the security lighting on horizontal pendants so that the light shines down and not out. Mrs. Craft asked what material the roof was made of. Mr. Warren said the roof is built -up roof and the underside is a steel bar joist. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 June 24, 1993 Mr. Clark asked where the tile detailing would be located. Mr. Warren said they are located on each of the columns; one high, one low. Mr. Knudson asked if there would be a sign at the corner. Mr. Warren said that there would be a low, 18" sign which reads "401 Strander Blvd." The tenants will have their own signs at their entry ways. The tenants who have two frontages will have two signs. He continued by. saying the glass by the end -cap tenants is continued around the side of the building and the corner has been softened with a significant planter. Mr. Malina asked if the four compact parking spots would be reverted back to full size. Mr. Warren said that those are the areas where they had standards for the lights. The ones that do not have light standards in them will be reverted back to full size. Mr. Haggerton asked if there would be HVAC on the roof. Mr. Warren stated that there would be HVAC on the roof -top. There is a parapet which sticks up above the height of the roof and serves as a screen for the HVAC. Mr. Haggerton asked why it wasn't shown on the model. Mr. Warren said because it hadn't been designed yet. Mr. Haggerton said that is one of the things they have been most critical of in the past. Mr. Meryhew asked if the entry ways on the color display was to the same scale as the model because they seem to stand up higher. Mr. Warren said that they had built a larger model and realized if there was no difference in height, but brought one element out, it automatically is perceived to be taller. He said that the Code requires a maximum height of 35 feet and they are at 35 feet. Jack Pace said that height limitation is not accurate. This is in a height exception area, therefore they can go to an unlimited height. By going through BAR, they automatically get the height exception. Mr. Meryhew asked if Mr. Warren understood that before this meeting. Mr. Warren indicated that he was aware of that. He added that they did not need any extra height and that 35 feet was more than adequate. The fact that the elements come out from the building, they appear to be higher. The only difference between the model and the Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 June 24, 1993 colored drawing is that the last step is four feet rather than two feet. Mrs. Craft asked if there was sufficient room for a mezzanine currently. Mr. Warren indicated there was. He went on to say that he was tight on parking and it would be disastrous to lose any parking stalls. Mr. Malina asked where the handicapped parking would be located. Mr. Warren stated that they would be located perpendicular to the face of the building. Also, employee parking is located at the rear of the building, as well as an employee lunch area. There is a minimal amount of lawn. Mr. Pace asked if they had already agreed to change the colors. Mr. Warren said they have changed the colors. Mr. Warren then commented on staff's conditions: 1. Mr. Warren said that staff suggested that they use the triangular parapets, but they felt they have been over used. 2. The colors chosen will agree with staff recommendations. Textures and patterns on facade are consistent with neighboring structures except that there are no plans to continue reveals or bands on back side of the building. 3. He said that they did not agree with staff's suggestion of making the arcade columns more slender. 4. With regard to the sidewalk area, they are proposing a combination of light brushed concrete and exposed aggregate. 5. With regard to the arterial corners, they've brought the glass around as much as possible and landscaped as much as the "Men's Wearhouse ". In addition, they've added 20 feet of landscaping. 6. With regard to the arterial perimeter landscaping, staff is suggesting they put in an evergreen screen along the parking lot. He said that they have provided a hedge and rhododendrons. They have gone above and beyond what is typical. 7. With regard to the arterial street trees, staff is suggesting that they place the trees at 20 foot spacing and make them 3 1/2" caliper. He stated that the only area in town where the trees were spaced 20 feet apart was at the Double Tree Inn. Retail lives and dies by visibility. The combination of 3 -4' screen wall and 20 foot on center trees will create a barrier. They have resisted the spacing, the caliper and the height of the evergreen hedge. 8. With regard to the arterial focal point, they have gone to great lengths to keep the corner of the building open so the building is visible. They are trying to gain pass -by trips. Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 Page 8 9. With regard to parking aisle landscaping, they feel they have provided significant planters around the parking area to screen it. They have exceeded the Code by five times the required landscaping. Significant landscaping has been placed elsewhere on the site as well. There is a full time groundskeeper to take care of the plantings. 10. With regard to portal plantings, staff is asking them to have the cedars in the portal areas to be 3 1/2" caliper at the time of planting. A 3 1/2" tree requires a crane to install it. Therefore, they feel that size is excessive. 11. With regard to the service area perimeter plantings, plantings will be placed around the rear of the building, as well as screen walls. Staff is suggesting that the caliper size be increased to 3 1/2 ", which is large and costly. 12. Signs will be brought back before the BAR. 13. With regard to the exterior lighting, they have agreed to eliminate the floodlighting. Mr. Meryhew asked what the heights of the trees along the backside of the building will be at the time of planting and at maturity. Jeff Bourbon, Landscape Architect: He stated that the applicant is interested in providing a high quality landscape and maintaining it. The difference between a 2 1/2" and 3 1/2" is one or two growing seasons. The planting along the back of the building are cypress which is a fast growing plant and will eventually reach 20' -30' at maturity within five years. The buffering along the back is cedar. The initial planting size of the cedar will be 6' -8' and it will reach a mature height of approximately 40' -60' at a rate of about 3' per year. In the staff report it indicated that the landscape strip along the back is 10' wide. That is actually the minimum size; in some places it exceeds that to become 20' wide. At the corners of the building are spruce trees. The eventual height will be 30' -40' tall and is a slow growing tree. The initial planting height of the spruce and cedar will be 8' and the cypress will be 6'. The applicant has chosen to put the landscaping where people can enjoy it. Mr. Mauna asked where the 2" caliper is measured. Mr. Bourbon said that the industry standard is 6" above the ground. Mr. Malina asked how much a 2" Caliper tree measured 6" off the ground would weigh. Mr. Bourbon said that the root ball and tree would weigh approximately 150 pounds. Mr. Malina asked how much a 3 1/2" tree would weigh. Mr. Bourbon said it would probably be close to 350 pounds and would require a back -hoe to be installed. Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 June 24, 1993 Mr. Meryhew asked how the surface water would be handled. Mr. Warren stated that as a part of the SEPA, they are providing a biofiltration along the front. It's a function of the sloping nature of the site. Mr. Clark asked if there would be recycling containers. Mr. Warren said that they would be providing two dumpsters per tenant. One of the containers will be for cardboard. Mr. Clark asked what the color of the tile accents would be. Mr. Warren said they would be a maroon color. Mr. Clark asked if the central portion of the building was asymmetrical or symmetrical. Mr. Warren said that it is asymmetric. Mr. Clark asked if there would shopping cart bins. Mr. Warren said that there would not be any shopping cart bins. Mr. Clark said that he is concerned with the traffic flow onto Andover. Mr. Warren said that they have studied this extensively and they will be entirely re- constructing the frontage on Andover and Strander. There will be a center turn-lane as a part of this project. In addition, the entrances to the project have been pulled back as far as possible. They will also be constructing over half the width of Trek Drive. Mr. Haggerton noted that a comment from the Lamb letter is that the project is not inviting to pedestrians and he said that he would have to agree. Mr. Knudson suggested that the second item on the agenda be continued to the next meeting since this project is taking so much time. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO CONTINUE ITEM L93 -0084: BLUE STAR MOTEL TO TIM JULY 15, 1993 MEETING, THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE WORK SESSION. MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Meryhew called for a five minute break. Mr. Clark asked how they would feel about putting in a circular sidewalk with a few benches Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 June 24, 1993 near the sign area at the corner, that would be more pedestrian inviting. Mr. Warren said that his concern would be from a maintenance standpoint. He said that he would like to have time to consider this and perhaps bring it back to the Board with the signage. Mr. Malina asked if there would be a maintenance schedule provided for the landscaping. Mr. Warren said that they have a full -time maintenance crew that does nothing but maintain the landscaping. Ann Nichols, Project Manager, Segale Inc.: Ms. Nichols stated that she would be the project manager for this site. She said that there was a maintenance plan. During his rebuttal Mr. Pace noted that the applicant had provided slides of "Costco ", and that the Board needed to keep in mind that "Costco" was built in a warehouse area, and this project will not be located in a warehouse area. He added that staff did not have a problem with the concrete tilt -up material or the plant materials, but they were concerned with the height and the breaking up of parking areas. He reminded the Board of their requirement on the Mervyn's project at the Southcenter Mall to break up the parking area with landscaping. When reviewing the applicant's slides, the Board needs to keep in mind the context of those projects. For example, the slide of the Home Depot' project was one that was approved in Tacoma, not Tukwila. Mr. Pace continued by saying that the applicant has already agreed to conditions 13 and 12 of the staff report. The applicant agrees to the second paragraph of condition 2. With regard to condition 3, the applicant agrees that the columns need to be shallower. With regard to condition 4, staff feels that condition can be removed based on the slide presentation showing the aggregate material. With regard to condition 1, staff would like to see the building "step out" more to provide more modulation. With regard to the facade design, this building will be visible from all angles. There needs to be emphasis on design detail. In the past the Planning Commission has said, "Don't landscape blank walls - instead incorporate design elements into the walls ". an example is the nearby Target building which is a taller building with landscaping taller than the building and yet improvements are included in the walls because of the visibility. Mr. Flesher stated that the Target building is smaller and that except for the triangular accents, the Target building is actually lower than the proposed Segale project. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 June 24, 1993 With regard to condition 6, staff agrees to delete this condition based on test With regard to condition 7, given the size and scale of the project, the concern 2 1/2" caliper tree would not have an immediate impact. Secondly the City is d CBD street tree plan and the intent is to have this project comply with that an project's impact. With regard to condition 8, staff is requesting some sort of focal point. With regard to condition 9, staff is looking to break up the parking area with landscaping, while not decreasing the amount of parking available. The ar provided examples of what can be done to accomplish this. With regard to condition 10, amend the wording so that instead of requiring a 3 tree at planting, require the trees to be a minimum of 6' -8' tall at the time of With regard to condition 11, amend the wording so that the minimum tree size of planting be as follows: spruce and cedar 8' and cypress 6'. Jack Pace clarified that staff needed direction with regard to the focal point, the the back of the building. Mr. Clark said that the HVAC issue still had not been resolved. Jack Pace said that staff did not feel it was an issue because it can only be seen buildings and the hotel above the site. Mr. Warren offered to paint any units which would be visible. Mr. Meryhew closed the public hearing at 11:35 p.m. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to omit condition number 1 heights. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus that the arcade columns i number 3 be shallower in depth by 2 feet. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to omit condition number arterial perimeter landscaping. The Planning Commission agreed by consensus to delete condition number arterial street trees due to lack of clear understanding on tree sizing and diver on other existing sites. A City standard needs to be developed for sizing both ev ony given. was that a veloping a soften the additional hitect has /2" caliper lanting. t the time omers and om office on building n condition regarding regarding ity allowed rgreen and Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 deciduous trees clarifying height and /or caliper measurements and locations. Page 12 The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to amend condition number 8 so that the schematic triangle, plus the two adjacent parking spaces shall be re- designed to incorporate public amenities at the applicant's discretion, but subject to BAR review. This could include benches, architectural concrete on the ground, and low shrubbery. The Planning Commissioners agreed by a majority to omit condition number 9 regarding parking aisle landscaping due to the extensive landscaping provided at other locations on the site and the potential maintenance problems as experienced on other existing locations, however, Mr. Haggerton did not agree. The Planning Commission agreed by consensus to change condition number 10 to require portal plantings be identified by height (6 -8' at time of planting instead of by caliper. The Planning Commission agreed by consensus to change condition number 11 to require service area perimeter plantings be identified by height (spruce and cedar trees to be 8' and cypress 6' at time of planting) instead of by caliper. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to paint the HVAC units the same color as the roof where visible. The Planning Commission agreed by consensus to have condition number 5 modified to include a re- design of the southwest and northeast corners to incorporate repetitive geometric patterns. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to require that the applicant re- design the southeast facade to incorporate some horizontal banding or modulation to break up the back of the building and this would be subject to BAR review (condition number 2). MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE L93 -0016: SEGALE RETAIL CENTER BASED ON MODIFICATIONS TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: CONDITION 1 WILL BE DELETED; MODIFY CONDITION 2 TO SHOW THAT THE SOUTHEAST FACADE WJLL BE RE- DESIGNED TO INCLUDE SOME KIND OF A BAND OR 'MODULATION (SEE DRAWING FOR EXACT LOCATION) AND TO BE REVIEWED BY BAR; 1'H1 SECOND PARAGRAPH OF CONDITION 2 TO REMAIN AS WRITTEN; CONDITION 3 WILL REMAIN AS WRITTEN, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE COLUMNS WILL BE SHALLOWER IN DEPTH TO TWO FEET; Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 CONDITION 4 WILL BE DELETED; Page 13 CONDITION 5 SHALL BE AMENDED SO THAT THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE RE- DESIGNED TO INCORPORATE REPETITIVE GEOMETRIC PATTERNS; CONDITION 6 WILL BE DELETED; CONDITION 7 WILL BE DELETED; CONDITION 8 WILL BE AMENDED SO THAT TWO PARIONG SPACES ARE ELIMINATED AND PUBLIC AMENITIES SUCH AS BENCHES AND LOW VEGETATION BE ADDED AND TO BE REVIEWED BY THE BAR; CONDITION 9 IS DELMED; CONDITION 10 HAS BEEN AMENDED SO THAT THE MINIMUM SIZE OF THE PORTAL PLANTINGS IS 6' -8', ELIMINATING THE 3 1/2" CALIPER REQUIREMENT; CONDITION 11 HAS BEEN AMENDED SO THAT THE SPRUCE AND CEDAR TREES WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 8' AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AND THE CYPRESS WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 6' AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AND ELIMINATING THE 31/2" CALIPER REQUIREMENT; • CONDITION 12 WILL REMAIN AS WRITTEN; CONDITION 13 WILL REMAIN AS WRITTEN; ADDITION OF CONDITION 14 WHICH STATES THAT THE HVAC EQUIPMENT WILL BE PAINTED THE SAME COLOR AS THE ROOF. JIM HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Jack Pace stated that there is a ten -day appeal period. Mr. Meryhew adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. Prepared by, Sylvia Schnug t• City of Tukwila Department of Community Development PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 24, 1993 John W. Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director Chairman Meryhew called the meeting to order at 8:06 p.m. Members present were Messrs. Meryhew, Malina, Haggerton, Knudson, Clark, Flesher and Mrs. Craft. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Diana Painter, and Sylvia Sclmug. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 27, 1993. MR. MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. There were no citizen's comments. L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center: Jack Pace presented the staff report. He entered into the record a letter from Nancy Lamb. Mr. Pace noted that to notify citizens that the meeting was continued, the site was posted, a notice was put in the Seattle Times, and notices were sent to adjacent businesses located within 300 feet of the site. Mr. Pace said that the site is located at Strander and Andover and the proposal is for an approximately 200,000 square foot building. There will be approximately 500 parking spaces. The building heights range from 26' to 36', the landscape area ranges from 10' to wider around the perimeter of the site, as noted in the landscape plan. The setbacks vary from 29' to 20'. Across the street from the site is Southcenter Plaza. Mr. Pace noted that many of the comments included in the staff report reflect direction that the Board has given staff on past decisions. Taking the design review criteria, staff has made comments based on direction given by the Board in the past. This is probably one of the more visible sites compared with past projects. Staff and the applicant have come to the point where they have agreed to disagree. One of the concerns of the staff is the dominance of the vast parking lot. The Code requires 300 parking spaces, however, that is recognized as too small. The second issue is the focal point. This corner will be a dominant focal point and there is nothing to create that focal point except for the potential sign. Thirdly, staff is concerned because this 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 Page 2 structure does not have a back side. The project is at the corner of Strander and Andover and office /warehouse businesses face the back of the project. In the staff report, staff highlights the concern of how visible the site is and how the building can be modulated and improve the visibility of the corners. The model depicts heavy landscaping, however, this probably would not occur for 15 -20 years. The landscape material will be much smaller at the time of planting. The walls are from 26+ feet high and nursery material will not cover the blank walls. Looking at other projects, such as Southcenter Plaza, a variety of techniques have been used to break up the blank walls such as landscaping, building materials and patterns /detailing. Another concern of staff is the dominant color. Given the other types of building around there, staff is concerned with how to give the project richer color or richer design. Mr. Pace continued by saying that additional landscaping is needed to break up the parking areas and blank walls. A question staff has raised, is whether larger plant materials should be used to do that. The Southcenter Plaza project, in many areas, have 4 1/2" caliper trees in the front to have the immediate effect of breaking up the wall. With regard to building design, this building will be viewed from 360 degrees. Other comments noted in the staff report, deal with the detailing of the walkway within the arcade area, as well as dealing with lighting and focusing more on the entries; making these a more dominant element than they are. This is a fairly long building and the question is how to provide more of a focal point so that it doesn't read as a low, flat building. Mr. Knudson asked where 4 1/2" caliper trees were required on other projects. Mr. Pace said that 4 1/2" caliper trees were placed along the front of Southcenter Plaza in front of the Target store. The model does not depict what the project will look like when it opens, but how it will look several years down the road. The issue is how to deal with certain restraints of the site, demands that the tenants have and at the same time, improve the visibility of the site since it can be viewed from 360 degrees. Mr. Pace indicated that in looking at the report, the Board has four alternatives: 1. Approve the project as submitted; 2. Deny the project as submitted; 3. Approve the project with conditions; or 4. Modify the project requesting that it come back before the Board and specifically give direction on modifications they would like to see. Staff is recommending that the project be modified and have noted 13 conditions. Given the degree and the types of conditions, staff felt it would be appropriate for the applicant to come back before the Board. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 June 24, 1993 There are five conditions that deal with building design. In the conditions, there may be other alternatives, but the key point is how to look at the site from all sides and ask what can be done to improve some of the facades. Staff is not suggesting any one technique, but rather give the applicant direction and let them come up with solutions. With regard to landscaping, staff is suggesting that the parking area be broken up. There are five conditions dealing with landscaping. The intent is to look at ways to improve the project, and at the same time, balance the needs of the applicant. Finally, there are three miscellaneous conditions. In summary, staff and the applicant have come to a point where they agree to disagree. The Board has several options before them. Staff has tried to articulate concerns and requirements given by the Board on past projects and implement them on this project. Mr. Knudson said that in the past, they did not want large building walls close to the street, and this project is set back from the street. Mr. Pace said that the issue is whether the Board wants the wall and the parking areas broken up. There are a variety of ways of accomplishing that. Because there is so many parking spaces, losing one or two spaces will not be critical. The bigger issue is how to provide a focal point to the building. Mr. Malina asked if the proposed 3' -4' hedging in the front of the project would screen the additional landscaping in the parking areas that staff is requesting. Mr. Pace said that a combination of hedging and additional landscape islands could be used to break up the parking areas. Mr. Knudson asked what staff is recommending for an arterial focal point in the front of the project. Mr. Pace said that they do not want to come up with specific design solutions, but to get direction if this is important to the Board. Mr. Meryhew asked if that was the corner where the sign will go. Mr. Pace said that there is a proposal for a sign and a planter, but they have not submitted the details yet for that. Mr. Knudson asked if the design of the sign would provide the focal point. Mr. Pace stated there are a variety of techniques. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 June 24, 1993 Mr. Haggerton asked how the height of the Target store compared with this project. Mr. Pace said that it is generally the same height. The height of the Target store varies a little because the building steps back. Mr. Meryhew asked the height of the Marriott Hotel. Mr. Pace said that he thought it was a little less than 40 feet. Mr. Haggerton asked if staff had received comments from neighboring businesses. Mr. Pace indicated that they did not receive any written comments and that the verbal comments were general comments as to what the project will look like and no comments were either for or against the project. One individual expressed concern for looking at the back of this building. Dana Warren, Project Manager, Segale, Inc.: Mr. Warren said that this project started last March. Mr. Warren said that when the staff report came out, he was quite disappointed because the tone of the report had a certain bias. He asked the Board to step back and pretend like they are seeing the project for the first time. He added that his job was to be financially responsible. He also has used examples of surrounding projects and projects that have been recently approved, and in many cases this project not only meets those standards, but exceeds them substantially. Mr. Warren then presented a slide show. He stated that Southcenter is considered a super regional mall. Costco has changed the way shopping takes place. Costco is successful because they sell their products cheaper than anyone else because they sell a number of the same product. They sell on a low margin, have low overhead, pay low rent, and have set a new standard for retailing across the U.S. They have no landscaping and minimal facade elements. The smaller retailers who use to operate in the 1500, 2000, 3000 square foot range are no longer in business. The new trend retailers generally take over warehouses, make minimal improvements, and have minimal landscaping. Mr. Warren stated that Segale tends to go with what has worked in the past. They have always designed straight - forward, timeless buildings using natural materials and enhanced them with greater than average landscaping. A unique thing about their landscaping is that they try and stay away from deciduous trees because six months out of a year, a deciduous tree is virtually invisible. Entrances to warehouse buildings have been flanked with evergreen materials. Mr. Warren added that they build concrete buildings, not masonry or wood structures and enhance them. One example, is a concrete building with a significant, deep reveal or a concrete stain. These reveals can add significant cost to a building. He stated that the site has frontage on Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. A retail Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 June 24, 1993 expert was hired to create three designs of the building. He came back indicating that there was only one design for the building due to the way the site sits, the way the view is obstructed. When driving down Strander Blvd. this building won't be seen until they get to the intersection. The building was designed so each tenant has their own identity. This was done with entry elements that are 35' high. One of the tenants has the option of having a mezzanine. This project provides an overhead arcade that connects Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. The Code requires ten feet of landscaping along the frontages, five feet of landscaping on the sides and no landscaping across the back. The total of the required landscaping is 15,000 sq. ft. (approx. 1/3 of an acre). He stated that they have proposed 54,000 of landscaping (approx. 1 1/4 acre), which is four times what is required. A landscape hedge has been created along the entire frontage of the building which is composed of evergreen landscaping. All of the landscaping, except for deciduous street trees, are evergreen. Junipers have been proposed for around the base of each of the planters. The plantings behind that have been scaled up to rhododendroms which will be kept trimmed to car hood height. Tanyosha Pines have also been planted because they have a canopy. On either side of the entry elements cedars are proposed. Where the building affronts the Marriott, they have proposed 20' of landscaping when the Code only requires five feet. Where the building fronts an office building, they have proposed a double row of landscaping that is 20' wide and second level of landscaping up against the building. Mr. Warren stated that he has had discussions with people from the Marriott and they are very much in favor of the project. The loading area will be located in the back of the building where it fronts the railroad tracks and warehouse buildings. The detailing, as shown on the model, on the back of the building have been taken off for economic reasons and a level of landscaping has been added. Screen walls have also been added near the loading areas. Scott Clark asked where the dumpsters were located. Mr. Warren said next to each loading area. He went on to say that the coloring near the signage areas will be coordinated with each tenant and brought back before the Board when the signage is reviewed. A significant cornice runs across the top of the building that is detailed. In addition to that, there is a soffit with steps which provide relief. Ornamentational lighting appears on each column to create rhythms and patterns on the front of the building. On the back side of the building is the security lighting on horizontal pendants so that the light shines down and not out. Mrs. Craft asked what material the roof was made of. Mr. Warren said the roof is built -up roof and the underside is a steel bar joist. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 June 24, 1993 Mr. Clark asked where the tile detailing would be located. Mr. Warren said they are located on each of the columns; one high, one low. Mr. Knudson asked if there would be a sign at the corner. Mr. Warren said that there would be a low, 18" sign which reads "401 Strander Blvd." The tenants will have their own signs at their entry ways. The tenants who have two frontages will have two signs. He continued by saying the glass by the end -cap tenants is continued around the side of the building and the corner has been softened with a significant planter. Mr. Molina asked if the four compact parking spots would be reverted back to full size. Mr. Warren said that those are the areas where they had standards for the lights. The ones that do not have light standards in them will be reverted back to full size. Mr. Haggerton asked if there would be HVAC on the roof. Mr. Warren stated that there would be HVAC on the roof -top. There is a parapet which sticks up above the height of the roof and serves as a screen for the HVAC. Mr. Haggerton asked why it wasn't shown on the model. Mr. Warren said because it hadn't been designed yet. Mr. Haggerton said that is one of .the things they have been most critical of in the past. Mr. Meryhew asked if the entry ways on the color display was to the same scale as the model because they seem to stand up higher. Mr. Warren said that they had built a larger model and realized if there was no difference in height, but brought one element out, it automatically is perceived to be taller. He said that the Code requires a maximum height of 35 feet and they are at 35 feet. Jack Pace said that height limitation is not accurate. This is in a height exception area, therefore they can go to an unlimited height. By going through BAR, they automatically get the height exception. Mr. Meryhew asked if Mr. Warren understood that before this meeting. Mr. Warren indicated that he was aware of that. He added that they did not need any extra height and that 35 feet was more than adequate. The fact that the elements come out from the building, they appear to be higher. The only difference between the model and the Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 colored drawing is that the last step is four feet rather than two feet. Mrs. Craft asked if there was sufficient room for a mezzanine currently. Mr. Warren indicated there was. He went on to say that he was tight on parking and it would be disastrous to lose any parking stalls. Mr. Malina asked where the handicapped parking would be located. Page 7 Mr. Warren stated that they would be located perpendicular to the face of the building. Also, employee parking is located at the rear of the building, as well as an employee lunch area. There is a minimal amount of lawn. Mr. Pace asked if they had already agreed to change the colors. Mr. Warren said they have changed the colors. Mr. Warren then commented on staff's conditions: 2. Mr. Warren said that staff suggested that they use the triangular parapets, but they felt they have been over used. 3. He said that they did not agree with staff's suggestion of making the arcade columns more slender. 4. With regard to the sidewalk area, they are proposing a combination of light brushed concrete and exposed aggregate. 5. With regard to the arterial corners, they've brought the glass around as much as possible and landscaped as much as the "Men's Wearhouse ". In addition, they've added 20 feet of landscaping. 6. With regard to the arterial perimeter landscaping, staff is suggesting they put in an evergreen screen along the parking lot. He said that they have provided a hedge and rhododendrons. They have gone above and beyond what is typical. 7. With regard to the arterial street trees, staff is suggesting that they place the trees at 20 foot spacing and make them 3 1/2" caliper. He stated that the only area in town where the trees were spaced 20 feet apart was at the Double Tree Inn. Retail lives and dies by visibility. The combination of 3 -4' screen wall and 20 foot on center trees will create a barrier. They have resisted the spacing, the caliper and the height of the evergreen hedge. 8. With regard to the arterial focal point, they have gone to great lengths to keep the corner of the building open so the building is visible. They are trying to gain pass -by trips. 9. With regard to parking aisle landscaping, they feel they have provided significant planters around the parking area to screen it. They have exceeded the Code by five times the required landscaping. Significant landscaping has been placed elsewhere Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 on the site as well. There is a full time groundskeeper to take care of the plantings. 10. With regard to portal plantings, staff is asking them to have the cedars in the portal areas to be 3 1/2" caliper at the time of planting. A 3 1/2" tree requires a crane to install it. Therefore, they feel that size is excessive. 11. With regard to the service area perimeter plantings, plantings will be placed around the rear of the building, as well as screen walls. Staff is suggesting that the caliper size be increased to 3 1/2 ", which is large and costly. 12. Signs will be brought back before the BAR. 13. With regard to the exterior lighting, they have agreed to eliminate the floodlighting. Mr. Meryhew asked what the heights of the trees along the backside of the building will be at the time of planting and at maturity. Page 8 Jeff Bourbon, Landscape Architect: He stated that the applicant is interested in providing a high quality landscape and maintaining it. The difference between a 2 1/2" and 3 1/2" is one or two growing seasons. The planting along the back of the building are cypress which is a fast growing plant and will eventually reach 20' -30' at maturity within five years. The buffering along the back is cedar. The initial planting size of the cedar will be 6' -12' and it will reach a mature height of approximately 40' -60' at a rate of about 3' per year. In the staff report it indicated that the landscape strip along the back is 10' wide. That is actually the minimum size; in some places it exceeds that to become 20' wide. At the corners of the building are spruce trees. The eventual height will be 30' -40' tall and is a slow growing tree. The applicant has chosen to put the landscaping where people can enjoy it. Mr. Malina asked where the 2" caliper is measured. Mr. Bourbon said that the industry standard is 6" above the ground. Mr. Malina asked how much a 2" Caliper tree measured 6" off the ground would weigh. Mr. Bourbon said that the root ball and tree would weigh approximately 150 pounds. Mr. Malina asked how much a 3 1/2" tree would weigh. Mr. Bourbon said it would probably be close to 350 pounds and would require a back -hoe to be installed. Mr. Meryhew asked how the surface water would be handled. Mr. Warren stated that as a part of the SEPA, they are providing a biofiltration along the front. It's a function of the sloping nature of the site. Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 June 24, 1993 Mr. Clark asked if there would be recycling containers. Mr. Warren said that they would be providing two dumpsters per tenant. One of the containers will be for cardboard. Mr. Clark asked what the color of the tile accents would be. Mr. Warren said they would be a maroon color. Mr. Clark asked if the central portion of the building was asymmetrical or symmetrical. Mr. Warren said that it is asymmetric. Mr. Clark asked if there would shopping cart bins. Mr. Warren said that there would not be any shopping cart bins. Mr. Clark said that he is concerned with the traffic flow onto Andover. Mr. Warren said that they have studied this extensively and they will be entirely re- constructing the frontage on Andover and Strander. There will be a center turn-lane as a part of this project. In addition, the entrances to the project have been pulled back as far as possible. They will also be constructing over half the width of Trek Drive. Mr. Haggerton noted that a comment from the Lamb letter is that the project is not inviting to pedestrians and he said that he would have to agree. Mr. Knudson suggested that the second item on the agenda be continued to the next meeting since this project is taking so much time. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO CONTINUE ITEM L93 -0084: BLUE STAR MOTEL TO THE JULY 15, 1993 MEETING, THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE WORK SESSION. MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Meryhew called for a five minute break. Mr. Clark asked how they would feel about putting in a circular sidewalk with a few benches near the sign area at the corner, that would be more pedestrian inviting. Mr. Warren said that his concern would be from a maintenance standpoint. He said that he would like to have time to consider this and perhaps .bring it back to the Board with the signage. Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 June 24, 1993 Mr. Malina asked if there would be a maintenance schedule provided for the landscaping. Mr. Warren said that they have a full -time maintenance crew that does nothing but maintain the landscaping. Ann Nichols, Project Manager, Segale Inc.: Ms. Nichols stated that she would be the project manager for this site. She said that there was a maintenance plan. During his rebuttal Mr. Pace noted that the applicant had provided slides of "Costco ", and that the Board needed to keep in mind that "Costco" was built in a warehouse area, and this project will not be located in a warehouse area. He added that staff did not have a problem with the concrete tilt -up material or the plant materials, but they were concerned with the height and the breaking up of parking areas. He reminded the Board of their requirement on the Mervyn's project at the Southcenter Mall to break up the parking area with landscaping. When reviewing the applicant's slides, the Board needs to keep in mind the context of those projects. For example, the slide of the Home Depot project was one that was approved in Tacoma, not Tukwila. Mr. Pace continued by saying that the applicant has already agreed to conditions 13 and 12 of the staff report. The applicant agrees to the second paragraph of condition 2. With regard to condition 3, the applicant agrees that the columns need to be shallower. With regard to condition 4, staff feels that condition can be removed based on the slide presentation showing the aggregate material. With regard to condition 1, staff would like to see the building "step out" more to provide more modulation. With regard to the facade design, this building will be visible from all angles. There needs to be emphasis on design detail. With regard to condition 6, staff agrees to delete this condition based on testimony given. With regard to condition 7, given the size and scale of the project, the concern was that a 2 1/2" caliper tree would not have an immediate impact. Secondly the City is developing a CBD street tree plan and the intent is to have this project comply with that and soften the project's impact. With regard to condition 8, staff is requesting some sort of focal point. With regard to condition 9, staff is looking to break up the parking area with additional landscaping, while not decreasing the amount of parking available. The architect has provided examples of what can be done to accomplish this. Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 With regard to condition 10, amend the wording so that instead of requiring a 3 1/2" caliper tree at planting, require the trees to be a minimum of 6' -8' tall at the time of planting. With regard to condition 11, amend the wording so that the minimum tree size at the time of planting be as follows: spruce and cedar 8' and cypress 6'. Page 11 Jack Pace clarified that staff needed direction with regard to the focal point, the corners and the back of the building. Mr. Clark said that the HVAC issue still had not been resolved. Jack Pace said that staff did not feel it was an issue because it can only be seen from office buildings and the hotel above the site. Mr. Warren offered to paint any units which would be visible. Mr. Meryhew closed the public hearing at 11:35 p.m. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to omit condition number 1. Mr. Haggerton said that it needs to be clarified whether they should be requiring the sizes of trees by their height or by their caliper size. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to omit condition number 7. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to amend condition number 8 so that the schematic triangle, plus the two adjacent parking spaces shall be re- designed to incorporate public amenities at the applicant's discretion, but subject to BAR review. This could include benches, architectural concrete on the ground, and low shrubbery. The Planning Commissioners agreed by a majority to omit condition number 9, however, Mr. Haggerton did not agree. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to paint the HVAC units the same color as the roof where visible. The Planning Commissioners agreed by consensus to require that the applicant re- design the southeast facade to incorporate some horizontal banding to break up the back of the building nd this would be subject to BAR review. MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE L93 -0016: SEGALE RETAIL CENTER BASED ON MODIFICATIONS TO STAFF'S CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 June 24, 1993 CONDITION 1 WILL BE DELETED; MODIFY CONDITION 2 TO SHOW THAT THE SOUTHEAST FACADE WILL BE RE- DESIGNED TO INCLUDE SOME KIND OF A BAND OR MODULATION (SEE DRAWING FOR EXACT LOCATION); THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF CONDITION 2 TO REMAIN AS WRITTEN; CONDITION 3 WILL REMAIN AS WRITTEN, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE COLUMNS WILL BE SHALLOWER IN DEPTH TO TWO FEET; CONDITION 4 WILL BE DELETED; CONDITION 5 SHALL BE AMENDED SO THAT THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE RE- DESIGNED TO INCORPORATE REPETITIVE GEOMETRIC PATTERNS; CONDITION 6 WILL BE DELETED; CONDITION 7 WILL BE DELETED; CONDITION 8 WILL BE AMENDED SO THAT TWO PARKING SPACES ARE ELIMINATED AND PUBLIC AMENITIES SUCH AS BENCHES AND LOW VEGETATION BE ADDED AND TO BE REVIEWED BY THE BAR; CONDITION 9 IS DELETED; CONDITION 10 HAS BEEN AMENDED SO THAT THE MINIMUM SIZE OF THE PORTAL PLANTINGS IS 6' -8', ELIMINATING THE 3 1/2" CALIPER REQUIREMENT; CONDITION 11 HAS BEEN AMENDED SO THAT THE SPRUCE AND CEDAR TREES WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 8' AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AND THE CYPRESS WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 6' AT THE TIME OF PLANTING AND ELIMINATING THE 3 1/2" CALIPER REQUIREMENT; CONDITION 12 WILL REMAIN AS WRITTEN; CONDITION 13 WILL REMAIN AS WRIT IEN; ADDITION OF CONDITION 14 WHICH STATES THAT THE HVAC EQUIPMENT WILL BE PAINTED THE SAME COLOR AS THE ROOF. JIM HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS '•`. Planning Commission Minutes June 24, 1993 UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Jack Pace stated that there is a ten -day appeal period. Mr. Meryhew adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. Prepared by, Sylvia Schnug Page 13 WEST ELEV WEST ELEV NORTH ELEV STRANDER Atim1a'.L+Y. 4.44X!4 4w42, JIUYe uku4,.Xvn:.^.4%,1M5x,t4t.: CJ: �YiY: �JFGa, �.+ 4'. ii} y: 1t( ttKd�' Sl CtYY, ItF': e°: iP! AJ. 7. Y.' t4RY. 719L. itnlns+ kl es�umr ..o.m+�.. «..w.....v...�,.w..+ yowew +wuwanwrst.Maas+ia+e ATTACHMENT D -1 31i ;i.1' 1-TAFRtD . t,. EgvAL HORiz, VERT, SPPcl NC - -see aLEv, d 0. REVEAL 10 `ATTACHMENT F =1 TUKWILA CBD STREET TREE PROGRAM GATEWAYS Evergreen Trees 1. Sequoiadendron giganteum /Giant Sequoia 2. Cednts deodara/Deodar Cedar 3. Thuja plicata/Western Red Cedar Deciduous Trees 1. Cornus kousa /Kousa Dogwood 2. Cercis canadensis /Eastern Redbud 3. Acer circinatum/Vine Maple 4. Cercidiphyllum japonicum/Katsura Tree 5. Prunus yedoensis /Yoshino Flowering Cherry MAIN STREET (NW side of Soutlicenter Parkway) 1. Fraxinus oxycarpa/Flame Ash 2. Fagus sylvatica/European Beech 3. Aesculus hippocastanum/Horsechestnut MAIN STREET (Southcenter.Parkway' 1. Quercus rubra/Red Oak 2. Liriodendron tulipifera/T'ulip Tree 3. Fraxinus oxycarpa /Flame Ash MAIN STREET (Andover West) 1. Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolata'Marshall'/ Marshall Ash 2. Quercus robur /English Oak 3. Liriodendron tulipifera/Tulip Tree MAiN STREET (Andover East) I. Liriodendron tulipiferaf Fillip Tree 2. Quercus rubra /Red Oak 3. Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolata 'Marshall'/ Marshall Ash SECONDARY STREETS 1. Acer ntbrum/Red Maple 2. Ginkgo biloba/Maidenhair Tree 3. Liquidambar styracifiva/Sweet Guni STREET TREES AT THE PARK 1. Cladrastis lutea /Yellowwood 2. Cercidiphyllum japonicum/Katsura Tree 3. Amelanchier laevis /Serviceberry PEDESTRIAN LINK TREES 1. Acer circinatum/Vine Maple 2. Acer griseum /Paperbark Maple 3. Amelanchier alnifolia/Serviceberry NODES: 1. Magnolia kobus /Kobus Magnolia 2. Crataegus phaenopyrum /Washington Thorn 3. Malus'Snowdrift' /Crabapple NODES: 1. Crataegus lavallei /Lavalle Hawthorn 2. Cornus kousa /Kousa Dogwood 3. Pyrus calleryana 'Bradford'/Bradford Pear NODES: 1. Pyrus calleryana'Bradford' /Bradford Pear 2. Prunus yedoensis/Yoshino Flowering Cherry 3. Strax japonicas /Japanese Snowbell .1�. r•. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor June 25, 1993 Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Dana Warren Segale, Inc. P.O. Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98138 RE: Notice of Decision by the Board of Architectural Review L93 -0016: Segale Retail Center Dear Dana: The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) approved the project based upon the attached conditions presented on June 25, 1993 (Attachment A). The BAR modified the findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated June 17, 1993. Any changes to the specific design approved by the BAR will require BAR approval. Minor, incidental changes may be administratively approved by the Director of Community Development. - The decision of the BAR is not final until the appeal period has elapsed, which is in ten calendar days after the above date of decision. Appeals must be filed in writing to the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on the final day of the appeal period. Where the final day of an appeal period falls on a weekend or holiday, the appeal period will be extended to 5:00 p.m.on the next work day. If you should have any questions regarding this project please feel free to write or call. Sincerely, Jack Pace Senior Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ATTACHMENT A CONDITIONS L93 -0016: SEGALE RETAIL CENTER 1. , Facade Design. In order to incorporate visual harmony with neighboring developments, redesign the southeast facade to include banding or modulation of some type, to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. 2. Building Color. Require predominant wall colors to be warm (beiges, taupes) rather than cool (grays, blues). 3. Arcade Columns. For building components to have good proportions and relationship to one another, redesign the shafts of the columns to appear relatively shallower (eg 2' -0" or less) when seen in comparison to their base and their top. 4. Arterial Corners. To provide visual interest along these arterial streets, redesign the facades at the southwest and northeast corners of the building to incorporate repetitive geometric patterns. 5. Arterial Focal Point. To strengthen important axes, require a redesign of the site's northwest planter area adjacent to the intersection of Andover Park West and Strander by removing two parking spaces and including public amenities such as benches and low vegetation; to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. 6. Portal Plantings. To enhance architectural features, require the cedars in the portal areas to be a minimum of 6' -8' tall at the time of planting. 7. Service Area Perimeter Plantings. To be effective in winter and summer and to screen the service areas, require cedars to be a minimum of 8' tall, spruces to be a minimum of 8' tall, and cypress' to be a minimum of 6' tall at the time of planting along the eastern, southeastern, and southern planting areas. 8. Signs. Signs are to be approved by separate application to the BAR. Background colors for each of the panels at the five entries are to be approved at that time. 9. Exterior Lighting. To maintain harmony with the rest of the project's lighting design, eliminate floodlighting of the building's facade. 10. HVAC Equipment. Roof -top HVAC equipment shall be painted the same color as the roof -top. City of Tukwila Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT to the BOARD of ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared June 10, 1993 NEARING DATE: PROJECT / NUMBER: APPLICANT: OWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE: ZONING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: June 17, 1993 93 -0016 Dana Warren M.A. Segale, Inc. • John W. Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director Construct a 123,051 square foot retail center, with parking for 499 cars. Southeast corner of Strander Boulevard and Andover Park West. 9.39 Acres C -2 (Regional Retail Business) Commercial MDNS issued June 2, 1993 Jack Pace & Robert S. Betts A. Applicant's response letter of June 1, 93, plus enclosure showing tile detail B. Landscape Plan dated June 9, 93 (Berger) C. Architect's Plans: Site Plan 6/3, Walkway Plan 6/3, Floor Plans 6/3, Roof Plan 6/3, Night Lighting Plan 5/26, Elevations 5/27, Wall Sections 5/12, Ramp/Dock/Wall sections nd. (Mueller sheets A1.1, A1.2, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A2A, A3, A4.1, A4.2, A4.3). D. Color board (available at hearing) E. Model of building (available at hearing) F. Graphic key to Staff Recommendations 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Board of Architectural Review FINDINGS VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION Page 2 Project description: This is a proposed shopping center, located at one of the city's prime retail corners. It will consist of one large structure, containing four retail users. The building's 123,051 square feet will be primarily at ground level, with less than 10% in a mezzanine location. The structure will range from 26 to 35 feet in height. Materials will be of tilt -up concrete panels stained grey. Parking will be for 500 cars, of which less than 30% will be for compact -sized vehicles. Nearly 400 cars will be parked between the building and the arterial streets. The balance will be behind the structure, in the loading and service areas. The 500 stalls being proposed is considerably above the 308 spaces required by code. Landscaping will consist of perimeter planting as well as at the entries to both the building and the parking aisles. The applicant has stated that all such areas are to be irrigated. This retail center will sit at the back of the parcel, away from the prime southeast corner of Strander Boulevard and Andover Park West. The site will have two access points from Strander Boulevard and two from Andover Park West. One driveway on each arterial is for retail customers. The other is for service vehicles. The building will have only one free - standing sign, located in an 18 inch high planter at the intersection of Strander and Andover. Site Description: The site consists of a level, 9.39 acre property, surrounded by five streets or rights of way. The previously mentioned arterials border the site on the north and on the west. A private drive is at the northeast side of the site, and serves the adjoining Southcenter Professional Plaza. A railroad easement marks the southeast part of the site, and connects Treck Drive and the Professional Plaza. Treck Drive will provide access to the building's service areas from Andover Park West. This access will be constructed by the applicant as part of the proposal. Treck Drive will consist of two lanes of road plus curb, gutter and sidewalk along the north side. Surrounding land uses include the Marriott hotel to the south; Target retail center is to the west. The Fur Exchange warehouse is to the north. Kelly Goodwin Hardwoods and an office structure (Southcenter Professional Plaza) are to the east. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review BACKGROUND L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 3 State Environmental Policy Act. A mitigated determination of non - significance was issued on June 2, 1993. Mitigations for the project address traffic and drainage issues. DECISION CRITERIA The Board of Architectural Review relies on the following guidelines. The applicant's response and the staff's summary of relevant facts follow. Review Guidelines (Tukwila Municipal Code 18.60.050) 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. (A) The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movement; (B) Parking and service areas should be located designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas; (C) The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to its site. Applicant's Response: "The building is designed so that each tenant's entry is visible from the intersection, this avoids the necessity for excessive signage. The public parking area is located in front of the building for ease of circulation and safety. The loading, service and dumpsters are located behind the building to screen them from view. A covered pedestrian walkway links Andover Park West to Strander Boulevard diagonally through the site. Extensive perimeter landscaping both softens the building facade, and screens the parking from view." Staff's Response: Criteria A. Transition from major arterial streets consists of a strip of landscape generally ten feet in width between the parking area and the street. Arterial landscaping generally contains low- growing ground cover, with an occasional street tree. A strip of lawn on either side of the corner of Andover Park West and Strander Boulevard provides biofiltration of stormwater from the parking area. This is at or below the grade of the sidewalks. Transition from the easterly private drive and from the railroad easement is by landscaped planters 10 feet in width. Plantings here will contain cedar trees and Serbian spruces to screen the view from adjoining properties. The trees are Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 4 Board of Architectural Review located in clusters, with open areas ranging up to 120 feet between them. Transition along the future Treck Drive will be by a 20 foot wide landscaped area. The applicant intends to install 6 -foot high Leyland Cypress trees at the north edge of the landscaped area. These are intended to screen the building's 26 -foot high blank facade. Criteria B. In this design parking is provided for heightened arterial visibility. Extensive lawn areas and low- growing shrubs such as juniper are proposed, and will be complemented with an occasional street tree. These features can not moderate the visual impacts of the large parking lot, which is approximately three acres in size. Criteria C. The building consists of wings 26 feet high and a main section 35 feet high. The 26 -foot height is similar to structures to the west and to the north but it is less than those to the south. 2 Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. (A) Harmony in texture, lines and masses is encouraged (B) Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided; (C) Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character; (D) Compatibility of vehicular and 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. Applicant's Response: "The vehicular access points are located as far from the intersection as the design will allow in order to maintain traffic flow. A center turn lane will be added on. both Strander and Andover to improve turning movements both in and out of the project. The rear loading areas are screened from adjoining properties by evergreen trees and shrubs. The height and scale of this project is similar to that of adjacent buildings." Staffs Response: Applicant has not addressed criteria A or B. The Segale Retail Center consists of stained, smooth concrete panels. There is no apparent similarity in texture or mass between this design and the Target Center across the street. There is little similarity with the warehouses to the north (Fur Exchange) or to the Southeast (Kelly- Goodwin). All of these buildings, including the adjacent Southcenter Professional Plaza, use different textures in their concrete panels, primarily Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 5 Board of Architectural Review exposed aggregate alternating with smooth elements, in the form of either columns or spandrels. Criteria D. Traffic studies were done for this proposal, followed by mitigation measures for both on and off -site improvements. The present plan reflects sufficient and compatible circulation patterns. Criteria E. The proposal creates pairs of access drives from Strander and Andover. Other forms of compatible access are possible. For example, breaking up the building into several structures, located next to the arterials could have combined the proposed four driveways and simplified circulation. 3. Landscape and Site Treatment. (A) Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development they should be recognized, 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 axes, 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 encouraged; (F) Screening of service yards and other places which tend to be unsightly should be accomplished by the 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 landscape. 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 Applicant's Response: "All the finished grades are designed to be relatively flat for easy handicap accessibility. The landscaping is predominantly evergreen in nature providing year round foliage. Large planters flank either side of each tenant's entry to provide both relief in the building facade as well as the ability for seasonal color. The exterior parking lot lighting will be similar to the adjacent retail center to the west in both type of fixture and light level." Staff's Response: Criteria A & B. Staff concurs that the site's level topography provides for easy Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 6 Board of Architectural Review handicapped accessibility. Criteria C. Landscape treatment proposes to enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and provide shade by: Arterial focal point. The proposed landscape design provides a low (under 18 inches) planter, roughly triangular in size at the corner of Andover and Strander. Entries. "Ornamental stones" are shown for the large (approximately 20 x 30) planters adjacent to the facility's entrances. These are intended to provide a Northwest look and feel and to complement the facade's stained concrete panels. Ten -foot high weeping Alaskan cedars will provide scale at the 35 -foot high main shopping entrances to the structure. They, juniper and salal are intended to create an inviting, shade - producing environment. Concrete benches at these planters are for the comfort of customers. Street Trees. Seven pairs of trees are proposed for over 800 feet of arterial street frontage. The applicant's plans show their canopy at a 20 foot diameter. The plan, however, specifies a 2" caliper tree, much too small to create such a canopy in any near term. Criteria D & E. Perimeter and interior islands in the parking areas are shown with plantings. Aisle planters, however, have no landscaping. Aisle planters measure about 4 feet by 16 feet, and are spaced at such distances (generally at 100 feet, but up to 120 feet apart) they fail to create any visual axes. Some will support light poles. Other such islands are unidentified, except to mark stalls for compact cars. Criteria F. Screening of service areas meets code requirements. Criteria G. The proposed 800 foot long arcade sidewalk area shows two types of materials. Concrete with scribed marks will be flanked by narrow bands of exposed aggregate. There is no demonstration of how the pattern relates to the adjacent concrete wall panels or the entry windows. There are no accent or relief details proposed in the sidewalk, such as accent tiles or brick pavers. Criteria H. Parking lot fixtures consist of "shoe -box" type luminaires with horizontal cutoffs. Rectangular "wall- pack" lights are shown for all other parts of the building. In contrast, most fixtures at the entrance side of the facade consist of round, disc - shaped sconces. Floodlights are proposed to shine on each entry way. They will be located on 20 foot standards in the parking lot. Staff Report to the . Board of Architectural Review L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 7 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; (B) Buildings should be appropriate in scale and be in harmony with permanent neighboring developments; (C) Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets, should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary pans 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 exposed accessories should be hamionious with building design; (G) Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects should be avoided, Variety of detail, form and siting should be used to provide visual interest. Applicant's Response: "The building facade is modulated in both plan and elevation to provide architectural interest. The mechanical equipment is located behind the parapet wall above each entry to screen it from view. Exterior light fixtures along the columns on the front of the building provide light as well as architectural ornamentation. The surface of the concrete is articulated with reveles [sic] to create shadow lines of patterns. The building will be painted in predominantly neutral colors with muted accent colors denoting each tenant's entry." Staff's Response: Criteria A & B. The proposal reflects neither the materials nor the colors used in the Target Center across the street. It has no similarity with the design of the Marriott facility to the south. Blank, smooth stained grey concrete walls face adjacent neighbors. Older buildings such as the Professional Plaza to the east contain textured concrete. Even the Kelly Goodwin building presents distinctive arches in its exposed aggregate panels. The Segale facade presents the same blank walls where it meets abutting arterial streets. These critical arrival points are without a hint of the retail activity in the building. This is an opportunity for the design to announce, by geometry, or in materials and details, the facility's life and activity. Criteria C. Columns are proposed to be three feet in cross section, with no change in their proportions from ground to parapet. These are along an 800 -foot long arcade whose width is 7 feet. Drawings do not show how these columns relate to the proposed storefronts. The nearby Target Retail Center uses columns Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 8 Board of Architectural Review that are 2 feet in width, and breaks up the arcades with a modulated facade. Criteria D. Proposed colors are all variations of greys. The applicant has changed earlier plans and is specifying "conformal stains," rather than paint for the facade. The one exception is that colors of the three background panels for each individual entry. These will be the subject of a subsequent application for BAR approval. Criteria E. Architectural drawings (sheet A4.2) shows that the building's parapets will adequately shield mechanical equipment from public view. Criteria F. Contradictions in the design of the exterior lighting have been addressed in 3 H, above. Criteria G. Variety in detail 'is confined to pairs of diamond - shaped accent tiles on some, but not all columns in the facade. Each such accent measures approximately 18 inches on a side. They are proposed to be the same color throughout the structure. Their scale in relationship to the facade is of concern. The tiles appear to be "lost" in the larger expanse of the facade. Additional architectural elements which provide a hierarchy would reinforce this feature, in addition to relieving the scale and expanse of the facade. S. Miscellaneous Structures & Street Furniture (A) Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architectural 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. Applicant's Response: "Pedestrian seating is provided along the planting areas adjacent to each tenant's entry. An employee lunch/break area with picnic tables has been provided in the southeast corner of the site amongst the trees." Staff's Response: Seating is restricted to concrete walls for customers, and to an employee break area behind the building. Lighting has been reviewed in 4 F and 3 H above. Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 9 Board of Architectural Review CONCLUSIONS General Review Criteria Given the past history of BAR requirements for other recent projects in Tukwila's CBD, and given the prime retail visibility of this site in Tukwila, the staff has devoted considerable time attempting to resolve the differences between Board policy and the present proposal's design. As submitted, the Segale Retail Center counters past BAR policy expressed in the design of diverse commercial facilities such as Home Depot, Target Retail, Mervyns, Marriott Courtyard, and Computer City. 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. Even though this is at one of the prime retail corners of the city, the design creates the impression of a huge, ground- hugging facility. It sits at the back of the site, presenting a low horizontal silhouette to its retail traffic. There is insufficient vertical relief in the facade or its silhouette. The overall appearance is without life or variety, especially when compared to the Target Center. Because a significant part of the Segale building is as much as 400 feet from the adjoining arterial streets, even its 35 foot high entries appear squat and uninviting. Heights of the five entries could be increased substantially, with important benefits to the appearance of the structure. 2. Relationship of Structure & Site to Adjoining Area. The project design appears to have been designed without consideration of its neighbors. For instance it ignores the sloped roof and triangular accents that create distinguished silhouettes on the Marriott, Target and Computer City facilities. It also presents blank facades to the Marriott, to the Southcenter Professional Plaza and to the older warehouses nearby. The building's' predominant grey color does not repeat or complement the red and black accent colors in the Target Retail Center. It also ignores the tans and browns in the adjoining Marriott Hotel. And it does not provide contrasting textures such as found in the Computer City building. 3. Landscaping and Site Treatment. The Board of Architectural Review has not viewed the role of landscaping to screen, but to complement or enhance a building's design. However, a significant portion of the applicant's landscape design is based on the premise that the building's blank facade is suitably "designed" if the adjoining landscape "screens" it. Given the intent to install 6 foot high trees adjacent to 26 foot blank walls, the proposed design will fail to "screen" anywhere in the near term. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 10 Another conclusion is that a different landscape design, one with a strong vertical emphasis would create greater visibility for the retailers, and would complement proposed signage. Lastly, it would reinforce the visual edge and could be used to create a significant focal point at the intersection of Strander and Andover Park West. Screening of the parking areas is the third area of concern. It is non - existent, especially when viewed from Strander and Andover Park West. The proposed landscape design accentuates the dominance of parked cars rather than diminishes it, given its emphasis on lawn, an occasional street tree, and so on. An evergreen screen here would be an effective alternative. The large expanse of parking needs to be broken up with landscaping as well. As designed, islands within the parking lot have no landscaping in them, and are spaced at up to 100 feet apart. Similar retail designs approved by the BAR this year (Home Depot) require such landscaped islands spaced as close as 40 feet on center. At the Segale Center, tall columnar trees installed in the eight internal 4 x 20 planters would emphasize the site's monumental qualities, and they would add a vertical component to the site. Leyland Cypress are a possibility, as they have been proposed elsewhere in this project. 4. Building Design. The proposed project does not respond to the presence of public views from all around the structure. The "back" (southeast) side will still be visible, given small initial plantings, and up to 120 foot spacing between trees. This area is treated as if it belonged to a warehouse. The "side" (east and south) walls are equally blank. They and their corners are prominent when approaching the structure from the major arterials, or when seen from the adjacent Marriott or Professional Plaza buildings. These blank walls provide an opportunity for geometric designs, or to use different textures. Either would create visual interest. A possibility would be to repeat the diamond motif proposed for the columns. The resulting change would make the building's design more appealing, both for neighbors and for the general public. On the retail entrance side, the 800 foot arcade contains a repetition of the same sidewalk design throughout. This overlooks the opportunity to be creative and to provide interest such as using pavers or other materials. Again, occasional use of the diamond pattern here could create visual interest. The proposed nighttime lighting may be very dramatic with its different intensities or patterns. However, proposed exterior floodlighting of entries can compete with the other arcade's design, and will create unnecessary glare. Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Page 11 Board of Architectural Review Entries are 35 feet in height or less. If they were higher, they would have a more distinctive appearance, one which could visually balance the massiveness of the building. If their roof line silhouette were triangular in shape, they would add visual interest as well. Such a detail would also serve, as repeat patterns found in the Marriott, the Target Retail Center and Computer City building. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends Segale Retail Center's approval should be revised per the following conditions and returned to the Board for its concurrence. Building Design: 1. Building Height. To increase variety and compatibility of scale, increase the overall height of each set of the three principal entries in order to visually "anchor" them as the dominant focal points. Consider adding a triangular parapet silhouette at all entry points. 2. Facade design. In order to incorporate visual harmony with neighboring developments, show a consistent facade design around the entire structure. Such a theme could include a band of rough - texturing, or it could contain scoring that simulates a masonry pattern. Require predominant wall colors to be warm (beiges, reds, browns) rather than cool (grays, blues). Incorporate large - scaled designs, such as arches or rough - textured patterns along the presently blank east, southeast, and south walls. 3. Arcade columns. For building components to have good proportions and relationship to one another, redesign the shafts of the columns to appear relatively slender (eg 2'4" or less) when seen in comparison to their base and their top. 4 Arcade sidewalks. In order to provide an inviting and stable appearance, require pavers or other masonry accent points in the covered sidewalk area. Require them at minimum intervals of once every two bays. 5. Arterial corners. To provide visual interest along these arterial streets, redesign the facades at the southwest and northeast corners of the building. The resulting design shall contain: A. Pedestrian scale: Provide at least one row of storefront windows along the westerly 100 feet of the south - facing facade that parallels Treck Drive. Provide a similar set of windows along the northerly 100 feet of the building where it faces the private drive at Strander Boulevard. Use windows of a similar scale and Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review Page 12 L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. proportion to those used to flank entries in the northwestern facade. If functional requirements for adjacent interior space dictate that these windows can not be installed, then alter the facade design to replicate the general pattern and location of such storefront windows. B. Arterial identity: Provide distinctive features at these corners. Locate such features high on the facade where they are easily seen from the street, specifically when approached from the south or east. These could be geometric features such as a larger version of the diamond - shaped tiles used in the northwestern facade. An equivalent alternative could be the use of transparent features i.e., openings in the arcade or the parapet. Landscaping: 6. Arterial perimeter landscaping. In order to screen the impact of large paved areas, and consistent with sight -line restrictions in the zoning code, install a solid evergreen screen along the parking lot's frontage with Strander Boulevard and Andover Park West. Locate the screen west of the Strander retail access driveway, and north of the Andover driveway. The screen is to be three and four feet in height at time of installation. 7. Arterial street Trees. To strengthen vistas and important axes, require arterial street trees along the arterials at a maximum 20 foot spacing. Install them along at least 60 % of the frontage between each retail driveway. Require such trees to be a minimum 3 1/2 inches caliper at the time of installation. Tree types shall be determined at time of issuance of building permit. 8. Arterial focal point. To strengthen important axes, require a redesign of the site's northwest planter area adjacent to the intersection of Andover Park West and Strander. Require permanent vertical elements up to 35 feet in height, such that they visually anchor this part of the site and its relationship to the intersection. A Flag Pavilion is one example of such a desirable feature. 9. Parking aisle landscaping. In order to moderate the visual impact of the parking areas, require the present eight aisle planters to be planted and to be enlarged to a full 16 x 38 feet. Specify trees with a definite columnar form and a minimum of 2 1/2 inch caliper at the time of planting in all such aisle -type planters. 10. Portal plantings. To enhance architectural features, require the cedars in the portal areas to be 3 1/2 inch minimum caliper at the time of planting. '. 'M'�.?:7:Iiui..u.:j:F�kit:V.;sY �TR'�� ,. nYCf �f9, S�'. �+l Y$. ti! �` ilY:: �✓`. �d' 7n,. w: w. ww..n..��.......�...�...�...... �...�.M.. • Staff Report to the L93 -0016: Segale Retail Ctr. Board of Architectural Review Page 13 Miscellaneous: 11. Service area perimeter plantings. To be effective in winter and summer and to screen the service areas, require 3 1/2 inch minimum calipers at the time of planting for cedars, cypress and spruces along the eastern, southeastern, and southern planting areas. 12. Signs. Signs are to be approved by separate application to the BAR. Background colors for each of the panels at the five entries are to be approved at that time. 13. Exterior Lighting. To maintain harmony with the rest of the project's lighting design, eliminate floodlighting of the building's facade. OPEN SPACE ATTACHMENT F .141 • 1•■•■ -.... SEGALE CONIMERCIAl. SITE "!.. .....--.t....- 1.14.•• A NORTH ELEV WEST ELEV EAST ELEV PEDESTRIAN SEGA LE BUS /NESS PARK Bob Betts Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Response to BAR questions Strander Retail Center 6/1/93 Dear Bob, Listed below are the responses to your questions from our meeting on 5/27/93 related to design issues for your staff report to the BAR. LANDSCAPE 1. Planting Plan & Specifications Attached is a copy of the landscape plan showing the species of each plant as well as the installed size. 2. Street Tree Selection & Location Our street trees are specified to be Liquidambar. This tree is on the list which you gave me on 5/27/93 although the street tree plan that you referenced in our meeting has not yet been adopted by the City of Tukwila. 3. Size Landscaping On Model The plantings presently shown on the model are depicting a 5 to 10 year maturity. This is an industry standard for landscape drawings and models. I will agree to have the landscape architect scale down the size of the trees before our presentation to the BAR, although I do not feel that the ATTACHMENT A P.O. BOX 88050 • TELEPHONE: (206) 575 -3200 • FAX: (206) 575 -3207 • TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98138 installed size is appropriate. 4. Parking Lot Landscaping 1 ft...:/ Section 18.52 of the Tukwila Zoning Code, Landscaping Requirements, requires 10 feet of landscaping in the front yard, 5 feet of landscaping on the side yards, and no landscaping in the rear yard. Our landscaping plan far exceeds these requirements and far exceeds the standards of the retail industry as a whole. Section 18.60.050 of the Tukwila zoning code, BAR Review Guidelines, states "Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged ". Although we have provided extensive plantings elsewhere on the site we have in addition chosen to provide landscape islands of significant size to sustain larger plant material at the ends of each parking row. We feel that our landscape plan exceeds the landscape code and intent of the BAR guidelines. Extensive landscaping within the parking lot requires expensive irrigation to be successful, blocks tenant signage, and creates a maintenance problem. For these reasons we feel that fewer larger landscape islands are superior. ARCHITECTURAL 1. South & East Facade The South and East facades have been extensively landscaped. Section 18.52 of the Tukwila zoning code requires 5 feet of landscaping along these two frontages. We have provided 20 feet. This additional landscaping will both soften and screen the building on those two facades. For this reason we do not feel any additional architectural ornamentation is necessary. 2. Size Of Columns The size of the columns have been selected based on the relationship of their height to width. We feel in our professional opinion that this is the appropriate size in order that the columns do not appear spindly and to be consistent with the architectural style of the building. 3. Exterior Finish The exterior finish on the concrete will be a concrete stain most likely "Conformal ". I have attached a brochure of this product. The colors will be mixed to match those a shown on the original color board. 4. Tile Detail Attached is a drawing showing a detail of the tile insert. 5. Trash Enclosure Detail The dumpsters are screened by 8 foot high concrete walls as shown on the building elevations and plans. The ends are concealed by steel doors. The steel doors are off set so that employees can walk in and out with out having to open the gates. We feel this lessens the probability of the gates being left open. 6. Rear Elevation The rear of the building has been designed to function as the service side of the building. For this reason we have chosen to screen this entire side of the building with evergreen plantings. In addition each of the loading docks and dumpsters are hidden behind their own screen wall. We feel that this is an appropriate balance between the service function and the appearance of this side of the building. Enclosed is a final set of drawing elevations dated 6/2/93. Any discrepancy between these drawings and any of the previous drawings or the study model these drawings are to control. Very Truly Yours, SEGALE BUSINESS PARK Dana Warren Enclosures 1IL fi.��l L. 4 1 , 17 -t- iy nce tea sOlagi sr° Itecta ale 1110 laissisio • 4.440.114 4•714401.111171.111 • MS. 326 11063 STRANDER RETAIL SIT( /ER BOULEVARD AT ANDOVER PARK WEST TUKk'r•LA. WASHINGTON 71CISIMILI bigt d,••■■•■n hooked ft 11.72 dot. r4w, rowleion ad* SOUTHEAST ELEV ----''---------`------ -- SOUTH ELEV STRANDER RETAIL NORTH ELEV WEST ELEV WEST ELEV NORTH ELEV STRANDER RETAIL ATTACHMENT B 0, 0.eN s••0e • • •. 000 ANPO VC4 ••••C •• Cr••t• rtimikisivaveigmaissnu, , 2 S 111110.0i: ss 'AN 6 7 SE(;:11.1-: (1)NINIF.12CIAl. • . . /1 6 ( 11 1- n STRANDER « ^ rn cs 1011111.11)1111/11111004 ",""°,~C" ,^",,""P / \ =""~"~~^°"""°` INERIMAIME L-1 AM MII=V SEGALE COMMERCIAL ' Landscape Plac.; MST ~~~~ /UT MT 7.87.011 1110 WWWWW •11101111111111•1101.111111/14 0111/•1,11 a " NORTH ELEV WEST ELEV WEST ELEV NORTH ELEV STRANDER RETAIL w w SOUTH ELEV STRANDER 4 OPEN SPACE NOV WV. CUNO FAST FOOD ANDOVER PARK WEST ShfOr'emNG CENTER • • - • • • • - • • Or I le(1.11,• „ . • Anrs 0.-e- PO* MENLO NO, Mt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SOLLSI.LVIS aim 130 lok•slas • soothe wash. 911122. 206 325 2553 STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER BOULEVARD AT ANDOVER PARK WEST TUKWILA. WASHINCITCIN job no. drawn 3.14.93 SHOPPIND cenEn OPEN SPACE FAST FOOD J NI. IMO --5.,--m•-•227,TA;.imlimuunniumrun Iiinumunmifillall 1 1 001, •00,1 •AO" .007 ••,0U l ••44 5.0.• •0 CC••:• 1 ; .3! E(;.\1.1!: CONINIKIWIMC • 4'1' • .„ • • 0 • 4251 S. 139th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 June 16, 1993 Board of Architectural Review c/o City of Tukwila DCD 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Board Members: RECEIVED JUN 1 71993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: Project 93 -0016, Segale Retail Center Upon learning that the long -vacant corner of Strander and Andover Park West is now the subject of a development proposal, I asked the DCD about it. I took a look at the model (but was informed that it was not exactly to scale as of June 15) and read the Staff Report dated June 10. Please accept this letter in lieu of my in- person comments as a Tukwila citizen during the hearing on the above -named project. This space is probably the last great area in the CBD still vacant. It lies at an important intersection and is within a short walking distance of other major retail centers, professional offices, hotels, etc. It has the potential to be a new focal point at that intersection, to encourage a new wave of commercial and office restructuring to the south -east of that site, and to become a model for the urban look which, I feel, is what Tukwila Tomorrow envisions for the CBD relative to the Growth Management Act. The property deserves better than the typical "quick -and - dirty" treatment shown in the proposal. Unfortunately, the applicants have presented a sprawling strip mall, the likes of which unnecessarily waste the potential of the site. Pedestrian needs haven't been adequately considered. We need to get away from mall- hopping in our cars, but that seems about the only option for anyone to get to the Segale Retail Center from Southcenter, for instance. There's little chance someone at Zoopa or Marriott or the professional center would be enticed to walk over and do business there, uninviting as it seems. The backs and sides resemble warehouses, a look which everyone is rather tired of, I hope you agree. The colors and described surface treatments seem cold; the tilt -up construction appearance is less aesthetic than even the Kingdome. Nobody I know enjoys a sterile - looking strip mall; enough already! Acres of parking at the corner do nothing to enhance this major intersection. (Is the park- ing to provide for airport overflow? Are its landscaping and array of stalls designed so people can prominently park and advertise their for -sale used cars ?) Instead, why not take part of an acre away from parking and provide a modern "village green" look, perhaps a place for casual noontime concerts with a bandstand, or possibly a grand shelter for public transportation (e.g., an energy - efficient shuttle through the CBD). Or why not bring the building(s) closer to the corner, improving visibility of its tenants and inviting pedestrian access at the same time. I wish the principals would envision the possibility of being "heroes ". This could be a golden opportunity to begin exploring mixed -use development (retail, offices, and condominiums). With foresight, they could set the pace for the CBD's entry into the next century rather than falling into the same old pattern of a dehumanized warehouse with a few windows and a sea of cars up front. Thanks for considering my comments. I hope that the BAR will direct further design work, with a "pedestrian- friendly" environment and urban ambiance going hand -in -hand. Sincerely, Nancy Sa>dine Lamb Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide Color Slide this side toward screen Color Slide Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide Color Slide Color Siic, this side toward screen Color Slide this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide • • • ' ,57455.:,,,,ger.ri‘firatronlVAL.A5Mi•5544fr..0102. Color S!k!e '5,T,`,5 • — ry4dre■rierk544:44;irierirr Color Slide 55 • „..; ,5-52r Color Slide lirrlAter& ... 151,,V4k=7.5.27rrstre55.••■■,....,.., • • aP!s P.O. eox 607639 • ORLANDO, FL 32960 • (407) 906.3100 ASSIGNMENT: .„.. 1.4.zete.n.,railigti.,AtiKeint$11411112oilitikliit&roWy1.", INSERT EMULSION SIDE DOWN r4,-W 3 -opt y ;.44.04.A.Vii.frAMIIMS61CLUMNYOUTIatsissAdi ,----,-- 1 .,e STYLE NO. 2x2-205 FILE NO.: :xV .014 9JYT2 :.01.13.81 this side toward screen NWOn iOl2 NOI2JUM3 T332IiI r this side toward screen this side toward screen this side toward screen Color Slide , oorc. ee (TOP} •068V5 Ji ,OONAJAO • 856t08 X08 .0.9 this side toward screen !WA* AA :T143M110122A Color Slide Color Slide this side toward screen 2113V93i3QI9 JNHIH313A•; :3TA0 Color Slide Color Slide • this side toward screen this side toward screen . • , .. • • • X., -..••77., • = • • • „. 4.1.14 trira 47N 0 Ai. I o • '. : ''' ''''''..:" .0/01'41' 'II 1,61"0/;■■■ 1111011111 IF " , ...i........... ...L: ...:'! S. OstsoCiatet3 . . - - ,'. '. ' ' '' 7, , • 32 , ,, _Iti In. : k-.e-ri, la5ii 1 i0; • ii-3-‘4; a.a.rserek* , r c.-I -isk t2i tit.8tt3li.- ■e, w. ciiiii• Tilfs ibt 'fin-913ii i -7; -..ic1 p a — b54---.__ i i 1 i s . 1 , , , • , 1 ; ; , , , ! , 1 : , . , • : 1 , . 1 , . : ; , , ,,. , , 1 . ____I ., .....,_ ..__ ..........-.1...„ 1 I 'i 1 . . . . j..._, I 1......_1... 1 $ i 144A)1-16j„-- acy .zP.•E -4 . i . I 1 ; i • . 1 , ! • • • 1 , , 55 S•f.. 1 1 f i i t —r --1---.41-1,---i----1*---i-- , . 1 . _s. ..._, __I _...i____._..._.L__..—i. . • . 1 . _ • - --I. , • . ' - ----I------I--- ----1----,-; I 1 i ; ', ,,,,....._1_•..i.... , - ........4.......T_.....7......_ , i ., i, •• i •-) I -,, ... J •_. , , .......„_,.. . , , , • , I ' j - 1 T $ ! ! i , 1 ! ; i . , :......,..,.........„/.____,..___ -.,—,..f...........• ,....„....s.--- , ; 1, 1 Ni/6 60—; I i A,‘ ,.... ............. l•••• I I • 1 i i $ • • 11* MAY -20 -1993 14:14 FROM TA TITLE — RECEPTIONST TO .v320 108th Avenue Nonheaat Bellevue. WA 98004 Telephone 206.451.7301 Fax 206.646.8S93 Fax 206.646.0594 TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY May 28, 1993 Bill Arthur M.A. Segal °, Inc. P.O. Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Transamerica Title Commitment No. 861559 Puget Western / M.A. Segale, Inc. Dear Bill: 95753207 P.02 t R.1 2 8 i893 • Pursuant to our telphone conversations of this morning, this is to confirm that Transamerica Title Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as "the Company ") will not show the easement for standard guage railroad tracks as particularly described in Parcels 11, 13 and 14 of said easement recorded under Recording No. 7504210345. The Company will continue to show that portion of said easement as particularly described in Parcel 10 of said instrument being the railroad tracks running along the Southeasterly boundary of the property described in the above - referenced commitment. Attached hereto for reference purposes is that portion of said railroad easement that describes Parcels 10 through 14. Please call if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, David Campbell Title Officer ®Reliance A Rcliancc 0:oup Moldings rnmpan■ 7504210345 MAY -20 -1993 14:14 FROM TA TITLE- RECEPTIONST TO • Commencing at the southeast corner of said Section. Twenty -six (26); thence North two de- grees, twenty-two minutes, twenty seconds (02° 22' 20 ") E,. t along the east line of said Section six hundred forty -tour and sixty -three 41 hundreaths (644.63) feet; thence North eighty- 's eight degrees, twelve minutes, thirty -one seconds VI (88° 12' 31 ") West, one hundred forty -four and - tort;; -night hundredths (1411.48) feet to the True ^4 Point of Beginning; thence North twenty -six do- grees, fifty -eight minutes, five seconds (26° 58' FAR 05 ") East, fifty (5')) Peet; thence along a curve to the left roving a radius of three hundred ninety -seven and twenty- four hundredths (397.24) feet, an ere distance of one hundred seventy - Pour and fifty -six hundredths (174.5L; feet through a central angle of twenty -five degrees ten minutes, thirty -seven seconds (25° 10' 37 "S; thence North one degree, forty -seven minutes, twenty -eight Seconds (01° 47' 28 ") East, one thousand, five hundred ten and ninety -two hun- dredths (1,510.92) feet to the southeast corner of said Tract No. ti. Plat of Andover Industrial Park No. 5, being the end of raid centerline description. PARCET, 10: A strip of land in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SE' NEW and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE% 5E1) of Section Twenty-six (26). Township Twenty-three (23) North, Rgnge Four (4) East, W.l1., being twenty -three and five - tenths (23.5) feet in width and adjoining the westerly edge of said Tracts 5 And 6, 'end the westerly and northerly edge of said Tract 4, said Plat of Andover In- dustrial Paris No. 5, in said Sections Twenty - five (25) and Twenty-six (26). EXCEPT that portion described in Parcel 3 above. PARCEL 11: A strip of land in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast tarter and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SEA NE and NEk SEA() in said Section Twenty -Six (26), being thirty -four (34) feet in width. having seventeen (17) feet or said width on either side or the following described centerline: Commencing at the northwest corner or said Tract No. 5, Plat of Andover Industrial Perk No. 5; thence southerly along the westerly Loundary of said tract a distance of eleven 5. 95753207 P. i MAY -20 -1993 14:15 FROM TA TITLE- RECEPTIONST TO 9575320'7 Li P.04 and ninety-four hundredth= (11.94) feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence along a curve to the right having a radius cf four hundred ten and twenty -eight hundredths (410.28) feet an arc distance or six hundred twenty -four and eighteen • hundredths (421..16) feet through a central angle or eighty -seven degrees, ten minutes (87° 10' 00 ") vl d to the end or said centerline description. r-: EXCEPT that portion described in Parcel 10 above. MOM :N. wo • i PARCEL 12: A strir Jr land in the Southwest Quarter or the Northeast Quarter (S164 N164). Section Twenty -five (225), Township Twenty -shrew (23) North. Range Four (4) East, W.M.. in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (ZEN UEW) and in the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NEW SEW), said Section Twenty -six (26), said Township and Range. being twenty -seven (2 7) feet in width and adjoining the easterly ooundary of said Tract 8, the southeast- erly boundary of said Tract 7 and the southerly boundary of Tract 1. said Plat of Andover Industrial • Park ;to. 5. ?ARCM 13: A strip of land in the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SEW HEI) of Section Twenty - oix (26). being twenty -seven (27) feet in width and adjoining the southwesterly boundary of said Tract 5, chid Plat of Andover industrial Park No. 3. EXCEPT thsst portion described Ln Parcel 10 above. PARCEL 14: A strip of land in the Southeast Quarter or the Northeast Quarter (SEW NEW). Section Twenty -six (26). being thirty (30) feet in width and having fifteen (15) feet of said width on either side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of said Tract 5,•,said Plat of Andover Industrial Park No. 3; thence South fourteen degrees. thirty - nine minutes, thirty seconds (14° 39' 30 ") East a distance of thirty (30) feet to the True point or Beginning; thence along a curve to the right having a radius of four hundred ten and twenty - eight hundredths (410.28) feet an sue distance or three hundred ninety-four and seventy -four hundredths (394.74) reot through a central angle of fifty-five degrees, coven minutes, thirty -four seconds (55' 07' 34 "); thence South forty degrees, twenty -sight minutes, four seconds (40° 28' 010) float a distance of an hundred twenty -Your and eleven hundredths (1214.11) feet, being the end of said centerline description. EXCEPT that portion described In Parcels 3, 10 and 13 above. 6. 07180 /CHE BuyLine 4922 CHEIVIPROBE CORP. Conformal Stain penetrating water repellent stain OP /Overall Product, In Place PRODUCT DESCRIPTION CONFORMAL STAIN is a modified fumed silica fused with an acrylic resin that penetrates deep into the pores and bonds tenaciously to concrete and masonry without disturbing the natural texture. Unlike paint, it is integrally locked into the substrate and develops into an effective water barrier. The use of only non - fading inorganic pigments assures years of lasting beauty. ADVANTAGES • Retains the natural texture • Deep penetration, will not peel or flake • Allows release of moisture vapor • Repels water, thereby resists stain damage, freeze /thaw spelling, loss of natural insulation value, efflorescence and resists fungi and mildew USES CONFORMAL STAIN provides an alternative to integrally colored material to give the ulti- mate in uniform color and maintenance -free waterproofing, without disturbing the natural texture. Use CONFORMAL STAIN on above grade stucco, concrete block, split faced block and rib units, brick, precast panels, stone and concrete. SEE LIMITATIONS. APPLICATION AND COVERAGE The best coverage and penetration is ob- tained by using airless spray equipment. • Atomize at lowest possible pressure. A brush or roller may be used. One coat application at 100 to 150 square feet per gallon usually achieves the desired results. MANUFACTURER'S GUARANTEE Chemprobe will provide a five -year written warranty with the conditions stated therein on request. TECHNICAL DATA Flash point: Above 100 °F. TCC Normal Cure Time: @77F 50% R.H. 1 Hour Solids Content: 25 ±6% depending on color Weight per Gallon: 8 ±.5 lbs depending on color Pigment Type: Inorganic Oxide Complexes Color Fade Rating: Excellent, non - sensitive ACIAVAILABILITY, COSTS CONFORMAL STAIN is available in 1, 5 and 55 gallon drums from distributors throughout the United States and Canada. Color charts and samples are available on request. CONFORMAL is also available in clear; which offers the same qualities in a satin tone that enhances the natural color and texture of architectural con- crete, exposed aggregate, stone and other masonry surfaces. Material cost is dependent on container size and geographical location; however, CONFORMAL STAIN is much more economical than integrally colored material. LIMITATIONS When used to stain porous concrete block, one coat of Prime A Pell 200 must be applied as a first coat to provide adequate protection from water intrusion. A test application should be made to deter- mine the color and coverage rate. 3 Corporate Headquarters 2805 INDUSTRIAL LANE • GARLAND, TEXAS 75041 • 214 - 271 -5551 ' Conformal Stain Product Data CONFORMAL STAIN CHEMPROBE COLOR SYSTEM Color permanency and effective water repellency for block, precast panels, brick and smooth or textured concrete. DESCRIPTION AND USE: Conformal Stain is a solvent base acrylic formu- lated with hydrophobic silica and colored with nonfading inorganic oxide pigments. Conformal Stain colors concrete and masonary surfaces without disturbing the natural texture. Effec- tively repels water from dense surfaces and from porous surfaces, such as smooth or architectu- ral concrete masonry units, when used with Prime -A -Pell 200. Forms breathable film which allows release of water vapor. COVERAGE: Conformal Stain may be applied in a one or two coat application depending upon the porosity of the substrate and the depth of color desired. A one coat application at 100 sq /ft/gallon on porous surfaces and 150 sq /ft/gallon on dense surfaces usually achieves the desired results. NOTE: See LIMITATIONS for application on concrete block units. APPLICATION: The surface must be clean and dry. Remove all dirt, form release agents and efflorescence. Conformal Stain may be applied by airless spray brush or roller. For airless spray application, use a .015 or.018 fan spray tip or reduce pressure to a point of minimal overspray or fogging to produce a wet application. Do not apply to a cold or damp surface. The wall and air temperature should be above 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Application at lower temperatures may substantially reduce coverage. Products of APPLICATION PRECAUTIONS: Use only in well ventilated or open areas. Keep away from open flame or extreme heat. Avoid breathing vapors, repeated contact with skin and contact with eyes. The use of an organic mask and eye protection during application is recommended. TECHNICAL DATA Flash point Cure Time Solids Content Weight/gallon LIMITATIONS: Above 100 F. TCC @77 F. 50% R.H. 1 hour 30% minimum 8 ( +/ -.5) lbs. Conformal Stain was developed to retain the beauty of the texture, it does not close the open pores in concrete block units, therefore when used to color architectural block (i.e. split face and fluted units) where the aesthetics of the natural block is desired, a coat of Prime -A -Pell at 75 -100 sq /ft/gal must be applied as a first coat to produce water repellency from the open pores. To waterproof and color smooth block units or highly porous units, where the natural block look is not required, we recommend a block filler to be used to fill the pores and a coat of conformal stain for color. If the aesthetics of the texture is desired on these units, a first coat of Prime A Pell at 75 sq /ft/gal and a coat of Conformal Stain for color is effective under most conditions. A test applicaiton should be made to determine the best system to seal the block units and for color approval. Paratron'" Chemistry AVAILABILITY: 1 Conformal Stain is available in 1, 5, 55 gallon containers from Chemprobe distributors throughout the United States and Canada. There are ten standard colors. Custom color matches can be provided. Color charts, samples and literature are available on request. MANUFACTURER'S GUARANTEE: Complete warranty is available on request. Chemprobe stands behind the performance claims of its,;Jducts when used by competent persons in accordance with its directions. Chemprobe cannot be responsible for difficulty caused by other materials and conditions, or by inferior workmanship. Chemprobe reserves the right to have the true cause of any difficulty determined by accepted test methods. Chemprobe products are setting new standards in the industry. Our advanced technology incor- porates a new concept in the water proofing field. Ask your dealer about other Chemprobe products or call us for your specialized needs. DISTRIBUTED BY: WATER REPELLENTS 1. PRODUCT NAME Water Repellent for Concrete, Masonry and Stucco Prime -A -Pell 200 2. MANUFACTURER Chemprobe Corporation 2805 Industrial Lane Garland, TX 75041 Phone: (214) 271 -5551 3. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION Basic Use: Prime -A -Pell 200 is a clear, filmless, penetrating water repellent for virtually all concrete and masonry above grade vertical walls and structures. The treat- ment does not alter the color or texture of the surface nor affect the vapor transmission qualities of the substrate. The treatment creates a very powerful and long lasting water repellency and therefore resists the following: • Water intrusion • Stain damage • Freeze -thaw spalling • Efflorescence • Fungi and mildew Prime -A -Pell 200 is compatible with caulking and sealing com- pounds. Limitations: Prime -A -Pell 200 overspray on adjacent material such as metal, glass or wood is not harmful and can be removed immediately with a clean cloth and a mild solvent. If allowed to set, an abrasive cleaner or a mild rubbing compound may be needed to remove the overspray. Prime -A -Pell 200 must penetrate into and react with the substrate; therefore, it will not repel water from a painted surface. If color and water repellency are desired, see Conformal Stain literature. Prime -A -Pell 200 is one of the few products that will not discolor The lenpoint Spec.Ota fotmat has been reproduced from publications copyrighted by CSI, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, and used by permission of The Construction Sped. fications Institute, Alexandria, VA 22314. limestone, but it does not repel water from all limestones; there- fore, a test application should be made to assure repellency. Prime -A -Pell 200 is not formu- lated for use below grade or on horizontal surfaces. Composition and Materials: Prime -A -Pell 200 is a modified polysiloxane in a mixture of naph- tha and alcohol solvent. It is a proprietary product manufac- tured under a patented process. This novel process incorporates desired chemical and physical properties to produce Prime -A- Pell 200. When Prime -A -Pell 200 is applied, the solution penetrates the substrate and reacts to create a powerful energy against water penetration that is not sensitive to deterioration like other water re- pellents. Applicable Standards: Prime -A- Pell 200 has been successfully tested under Federal Testing Standard 141 and meets or ex- ceeds applicable requirements of Federal Specification SS- W -110C (GSA -FSS), and complies with Rule 66 (k) of Los Angeles County This Spec -Data sheet conforms to editorial style prescribed by The Construction Specifications Institute. The manufacturer is responsible for technical ac- curacy. Air Pollution Control District. Prime -A -Pell 200 has been ac- cepted by USDA for application to structural surfaces where there is a possibility of incidental food contact in official establishments operating under federal meat and poultry products inspection program. The final granting of authorization to use such products, which do not come in direct contact with edible products or packaging ma- terials, is the responsibility of the inspector in charge of the official plant. 4. TECHNICAL DATA The Atlas Twin Arc weather - ometer test machine is used throughout the industry to de- termine the deterioration of ma- terials under severe accelerated climatic conditions. Various con- crete and masonry surfaces treated with Prime -A -Pell 200 were subjected to this test, and the results substantiate the stated guarantee. Refer to Table No. 1 for various chemical and physical properties of Prime -A -Pell 200. Table No. 1— Prime -A -Pell 200 Chemical & Physical Properties Color: Solution Treatment Freeze Temperature Freeze Harm Boiling Point Flash Point (Closed Cup Method) Chemical Solids By Weight Weight Per Gallon Solvents for Clean -Up Purposes Frosty Neutral — 8 °F None 250 °F 102 °F 7% 6.8 lbs. Naphtha Mineral Spirits 07180 n to frt N 0 0 Z < o ro 3 0 (D C--0 a) C) Co 7-7 Div O 3 w 0 S1N3113d321 2131VM 5. INSTALLATION Preparatory Work: Remove dirt, stains, efflorescence, excess mortar, etc. before application. Substrates cannot be acid washed after application. The acid will not penetrate and may cause dis- coloration. All cracks, beeholes and voids must be filled and pointed. Moisture content should not exceed 15% as registered on a moisture meter. The wall tem- perature must be above freezing. New concrete or masonry should cure a minimum of seven days be- fore application. Methods: Apply Prime -A -Pell 200 evenly until the surface is sat- urated. ONLY ONE COAT IS RE- QUIRED. The best coverage is obtained by using a low pressure re- circulating gear or roller pump. Use a fan spray tip large enough, .04 to .06, to obtain a soft liquid flow to the substrate. Keep the pressure low enough at the pump to prevent the liquid from mis- ting. DO NOT FOG OR MIST. A commercial pump -up spray tank can be used for small jobs. Apply concentrated solution only, do not dilute. Stir well if the product has set more than thirty days and if you are not using a recirculating pump. Precautions: Prime -A -Pell 200 is provided in a hydrocarbon sol- vent which is combustible; how- ever, it should never be sprayed into an open flame or on surfaces above 200 °F. Avoid repeated con- tact with skin. Do not take intern- ally. Avoid contact with eyes. If solution does come in contact with eyes —flush immediately with water and contact a physi- cian for medical attention. Do not breathe vapors. All containers should be kept properly closed and free from water. Protect shrubs and plant life when applying. Equipment should be cleaned immediately after use. Cleanup can be achieved with any of the Table No. 2— Coverage for Prime -A -Pell 200 Material No. of Coats Approx. Cov. (s.f. per gal.) Concrete Smooth Concrete Textured Concrete Block -Lt. Wt. Concrete Block -Heavy Stucco Brick - Porous Brick -Dense 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 250 -300 200 -250 75 -100 100 -150 100 -125 100 -150 200 -250 Note: Test application must be made to determine exact coverage rate. cents listed in Table No. 1. 6. AVAILABILITY AND COST Availability: Prime -A -Pell 200 is available in 1, 5 and 55 gallon drums from dealers throughout the United States. Contact manu- facturer for nearest dealer or dis- tributor. Cost: Material cost is depend- ent on container sizes and geo- graphical location; however, Prime -A -Pell 200 on a unit price ba- sis is more economical than any other quality water repellent prod- uct. For specific price information contact the nearest distributor, dealer or the manufacturer. 7. WARRANTY Chemprobe will provide a five year written limited warranty against product failure. Also, Chemprobe warrants that its products are free from defect in materials and workmanship. Lia- bility of Chemprobe under all warranties, expressed or implied, shall be limited to the replace- ment of product. 8. MAINTENANCE Not required. 9. TECHNICAL SERVICES Complete technical assistance and information are available from any Chemprobe dealer and distributor, or write to: Chemprobe Corporation Technical Services Department 2805 Industrial Lane Garland, TX 75041 10. FILING SYSTEMS Electronic SPEC -DATA® SPEC -DATA® II Chemprobe brochures are avail- able upon request from Chem - probe dealers, distributors, or the manufacturer. 2805 Industrial Lane • Garland, Texas 75041 • (214) 271 -5551 Form No. 9276 Printed in U.S.A. 11 -90 -2349 " c!" 0 RTO L,(56,4(.6) A decorative wall luminaire designed for energy efficient light sources. Equipped with opalescent white lens in stabilized shatterproof polycarbonate. Single-sided and double-sided bollard versions for driveways, flowerbeds, etc. The luminaire and base are in Poly Sealed aluminum and available in black, white or any of the ten RAL colors. 611/16 11S3 170 Luminaire shipped with concre- ting anchor set. Other anchoring options available on request, see page 176. --11716- 8101t,- --- 14 3 4 301 223 375 90 75 60 45 Bollard 13 W MI M2 Bollard 13 W. h=3' .5 12! 9 • 611.5. 5 6 5 12 15 COMPACT LI MN 1 11993 !LIT IITY WHEN ORDERING, PLEASE SPECIFY: Model/Bracket Luminaire color Light source/VV Voltage Accessories For complete ordering instructions, see supplement 93-1)0. 29 u s 0 v 280 I t I 280 -- 5 7 8 -- 148 For terminal box for recessing in a wall, see under Accessories on page 176. LIGHT SOURCES, COLORS AND OPTIONS Wall 13 W 6C 1� 15 'S 12 9 6 60 3 0 3 5 6 9 12 K 30 15 0 30 Wall 13 W, h =6' ft 3 6 9 12 15 ICESl11yATTAGES LUMINAIRE FAMILY: 950XXX BOLLARD FAMILY 905XXX Soarce Max W S M1 M2 P1 P2 Lens Luminaire leasidescent • Compact fluorescent 60 200 070 073 N/A N/A PL13 200 070 073 N/A N/A OoaI 28 Note: When ordering bollards. an equal amount of mounting plates (995073) and luminaires must be ordered mow colors ` ' HP.Sodken 50 N/A 070 073 N/A N/A *op. 12) Metal halide 50 N/A 070 073 N/A N/A 28 Note: When ordering bollards. an equal amount of mounting plates (995073) and luminaires must be ordered ...14. 1;',,, :,, ,or....x vr a :10, ::.2.,NY'.... ^ir.:W:iii..,,^r ,,V12o 4,,C9,SW:11 ;»rinz^r.-a•o. ,T,,_T:m. ,.. s,.. .ww..».........._.«........ -.__ .._...__._..__._ »_.. .,.,...,........n.v�,�...x..o.. ARBELLA A decorative wall luminaire designed for energy efficient Tight sources. Equipped with opalescent white Tens in stabilized shatterproof polycarbonate. Single -sided and double -sided bollard versions for driveways, flowerbeds, etc. The luminaire and base are in PolySealed aluminum and available in black, white or any of the ten RAL colors. Vkki t9t MOM UP(11406/) Luminaire shipped with concre- ting anchor set. Other anchoring options available on request, see page 176. - -11 7:0- 301 90 75 60 45 1015 - 8 318 - 212 — 137,16- 352 Bollard 13 W 93 75 60 45 MI 15 12 9 3 M2 Bollard 13 W. h =3' :t I ft 3 6 9 12 IS WHEN ORDERING, PLEASE SPECIFY: Model /Bracket Luminaire color Light source/W Voltage Accessories For complete ordering instructions, see supplement 93 -110. 1- 25 COMPACT LINE 90 75 ----- 14 318 365 LIGHT SOURCES, CC _ORS AND OPTIONS - 5 7/16 -- 137 Wall 13 W ella bA-1104 30. 15 0 IS' 30 90 15 75 12 9 60 45 3 0 3 6 9 12 Wall 13 W, h=6' ft 3 6 9 12 15 • AGES LUMINAIRE FAMILY: 950XXX BOLLARD FAMILY 905XXX - .. • • -,e. - Se!!r"" Max W S M1 M2 P1 P2 Lens 1 Luminaire *--iial;descant — 60 340 070 073 N/A N/A Opal Bk White RAL colors 1. eompact fluorescent :%.13 340 070 073 N/A N/A 11.P. Sodium . 50 NIA 070 073 N/A N/A Miiii hada • -' 50 N/A 070 073 N/A N/A 24 Note: When ordering bollards. :•qual amount of mounting plates (995074) and uminaires must be ordered .�.rt:;:tR:"J. °�C7air.�!dz >.�., .., .,, ?at?.'^Lxla:�a;tv'ut>. x..^.sn�:•,e.,..,.�,.. GRANAD ((AVEC i3S 014t4. PAG1C.) A decorative wall luminaire designed for energy efficient Tight sources. Equipped with opalescent white Tens in stabilized shatterproof polycarbonate Single -sided and double -sided bollard versions for driveways, flowerbeds, etc. The luminaire and base are in PolySealed aluminum and available in black, white or any of the ten RAL colors. Luminaire shipped with concre- ting anchor set. Other anchoring options available on request, see page 176. 41 1I 16 1178 -- -85'16- 301 207 1056 — 13 1i2 — 343 Bollard 2x13 W 30 15 0 IS 30 MI 15 12 9 M2 Bollard 2x13 W, h =3' 160 3 9 12 IS WHEN ORDERING, PLEASE SPECIFY: Model /Bracket Luminaire color Light source/W Voltage Accessories For complete ordering instructions, see supplement 93 -110. COMPACT LINE 41 4 Note: When ordering bollards. an equal amount of mounur • a!aces (9`15075) and luminaires must be ordered 40 8 q a Wall 2x13 W Wall 2x13 W, h =6' 15 2 O 58 — 3 5 LIGHT SOURCES, COLORS AND OPTIONS 1258 315 0 3 6 5516 132 12 30 15 0 15 30 lc 3 6 9 1215 RCESIWATTAGES LUMINAIRE FAMILY: 950XXX BOLLARD FAMILY 90SXXX COLOR 1 Source Max W S MI E M2 P1 P2 Lens Luminaire leiandescent 2x60 400 070 073 N/A N/A Opal 1 Black 4 Why RAL colors (see p. 12) Compact fluorescent 2xPL13 400 070 073 N/A N/A P. H.P. Sodium 50 N.A 070 073 N/A N/A Metal halide 50 N.A 070 ! 073 N/A N/A v Aroa Ughtirig. Pe A' g'. s Arm - t:ounted Rec(ilinear Cutoff lighting 0 Wet Location Use for car lots, street lighting, tennis courts ORDERING SEQUENCE ` ) CATALOG NUMBER High Pressure Sodium Metal Halide :1 WA lep 141.0, :)'I: i):):,i�)'t C 1 'j» H! )ft4: ?!rjili lfijiitult;4ra01ldjrfil. :ai;))Ait: )6;;.i1:1j ; ijniitli►i)I;.ity roi...∎ Yl)itytifi li<: :ta f�tai�r! s:ifrt {c11(t Arifmio ' =$s4;15ot ):(:ft!.iH)t'cf jrrrl 1!IP /.tali 7tt t1'ielot >;t!j9tE :i).J!)ihtrtl ' i'l t19ii�)rt:)f ari6 )it: �;iI i• ?t ; )fii►5 • tt,•tlisli)(�. )!i'flla atiri�lt::pt.;Irlt, it)'IfrF liylrii,It!{cl•'S •10jra11 . •I:199060100 ;1610114 4114% rjji rli i;f0At.P;:W.;). An)411J 'ja)ri; lj;t;).! it ;)1i:b- ty :)14 Idr!)'!:.:lt)aja� r)tl:!ii )rlilt:lt;fijr'jtair;a►J, ?' r.; ►;Ft)r.:111!)iii)r9. 'i;i 1r.1Ii 1:111;)k1; .1:ditii.iriyiitrtityr (; ?rirux11'.)l )l)i1 &ItI 1ftt'I0ii'i?11 aiu):(1Sr.')11r):10 '.ls,ritl{ ;t.{l': s'!tr.. :!r,lirt' ,ii:((nl t3r•I`1tl:'.; 1 :j,,,,!ia;;n',:)11rot Mercury Vapor TYPE II DISTRIBUTION 70 KAS1 70S R2 100 KAS1 100S R2 150 KAS1 150S R2 200 KAS1 200S R2 250 KAS2 250S R2 400 KAS2 400S R2 175 KAS1 175M R2 250 KAS1 250M R2 400 KAS2 400M R2 100 KAS1 100H R2 175 KAS1 175H R2 250 KAS1 250H R2 400 KAS1 400H R2 TYPE III DISTRIBUTION High Pressure Sodium 70 KAS1 70S R3 100 KAS1 100S R3 150 KAS1 150S R3 200 KAS1 200S R3 250 KAS2 250S R3 400 KAS2 4005 R3 1000 KAS3 1000S R3 175 KAS1 175M R3 Metal 250 KAS1 250M R3 Halide 400 KAS2 400M R3 1000 KAS3 1000M R3 Mercury Vapor 100 KAS1 100H R3 175 KAS1 175H R3 250 KAS1 250H R3 400 KAS2 4001i R3 1000 KAS3 1000H R3 TYPE IV DISTRIBUTION 70 KAS1 70S R4 100 KAS1 100S R4 High 150 KAS1 150S R4 Pressure 200 KAS1 200S R4 Sodium 250 KAS2 250S R4 400 KAS2 400S R4 1000 KAS3 1000S R4 Metal Halide 175 KAS1 175M R4 250 KAS1 250M R4 400 KAS2 400M R4 1000 KAS3 1000M R4 Mercury Vapor Hi+ Pre Sodi 100 KAS1 100H R4 175 KAS1 175H R4 250 KAS1 250H R4 400 KAS2 400H R4 1000 KAS3 1000H R4 TYPE V Square DISTRIBUTION 250 KAS3 250S R5S e 400 KAS3 400S R5S 1000 KAS3 1000S R5S Metal Halide 400 KAS3 400M R5S tfre ;6:* c' trete sir Cram RE_.CE3�.� .�..? AFR 5 1993 COMMUNI I Y DEVELOPMENT () �� ARCH /TECTURAL OUTDOOR __�� Pt 61w Ma= 1.1604. in Beam, 70/250W HID, &Net Locations Use for car Tots, security areas or signs. ORDERING SEQUENCE �i+,Ifti1!1►I:��Ihltf.,�,� ::.,aft {,,,: • 11C:}'i'fri3(q;!S<hr•pi131: iiFts1,0 :r fir (x�y 410riE:;)t +�1:fi .;lit i a�i +lll6�t�4 # i(:Il: +a�IL' /('. lIGti0.11i i4c ;441440lit ;f :li • I(11'' #1�!)';i" till(' t•�t('as �11't�it�i(:i!ii(.•. f:J1' +ti�[[s{ s:L•t!t(+it(,fii.tli��a;tit:i• Ss,:;;. �rt %:It;�it11 ;airlila' +! t'.I(! �11r tt i�' t'ji4•14t;111t: „+t?14; {Irtt::.{i11h1til +t' 1 !.F1 {�.iSi +ltijtll!c1�:1: {(i!ts '; 41.1i1 3-31;i: • 4x +hi(:giili.,li3i • • lat.t:/I46/.i. Tai ('ii;•�' • Fitt till!cO.:liii:lll {. +1,r1,110pi∎ iit".fit i![ islat�lltUEtitl _Iafillt�i4riyq(r:iipj:tjk. a1i;: ►: {1u;11 %i.ltRr; {iIL lj tj1. �EilihE•:_.51iE,,.� ,�laljt:ei :,' {i Iii i _ ;''t. 4000; ' lti�it .Y . +ci:t(! ?:It:f.lii(:tit Irj(AjA 14.4YI:+ 11i4ti8+ r',; •.5 {yili, i0. ; ;;11 i flu j.n i 1: ;Atifii!f: • - : cif; ���1�y:`�'�I!1��:1,ar,���ttii:� • liki11.10i'.�1i t: ,41111.0114 1'( +i:(:;l!A'jj)t7li +(U•iii�, ,i11, 4,AtJ!i:(in= 11;1111:[: iiljlllll(! (-Y:YIt;'ii• • 1411, :; 1•li l:tl>t:):11:1i1$I.ra. I(i5i.�:ti • l��,ili�'�.. %� ` ;f�:•_''it�ti•:i��rli�Nit 4(11 -(+{ i1: 1$i:1i4 1i(1(1u1a11:�i"•t!tatC) f+riit, ("Ajtit1 i t:!f�ir•.1iG;,alit:t ttnil;:ti,.�r!, aitiil:(• . y,.;tYYr•/Fi >Yiilti':.!1; =:11U1!.[: ir!til. ICATALOG NUMBER i I VOLTAGE I I OPTIONS j 1 70 TFL 70S TA2 120' 70 TFL 70S TB2 208 100 TFL 100S TA2 240 100 TFL 100S TB2 277' 150 TFL 150S TA2* 480 150 TFL 150S TB2* TB' 200 TFL 200S TA2 200 TFL 2005 TB2 High Pressure Sodium Metal Halide 175 TFL 175M TA2 175 TFL 175M TB2 250 TFL 250M TA2 250 TFL 250M TB2 Mercury Vapor 100 TFL 100H TA2 100 TFL 100H TB2 175 TFL 175H TA2 175 TFL 175H TB2 250 TFL 250H TA2 250 TFL 250H TB2 • Uses 55V Tamp std. 100V available - specify on order. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Weight Beam Spread Wattage Ballast Lbs. Kg. H' it V° High Pressure Sodium - Mop/Clear 70 TA2 70 TB2 100 TA2 100 T82 150 TA2 HX -HPF 150 TB2 200 TA2 200 T82 22 10 22 10 23 10 23 10 25 11 25 11 26 12 26 12 Metal Halide - Mog/Clear 175 TA2 25 175 T82 CWA 25 250 TA2 26 250 TB2 26 Mercury Vapor - Mog /Coated 100 TA2 20 100 TB2 20 175 TA2 CWA 22 175 TB2 22 250 TA2 23 250 TB2 23 147 X 113 137 X 101 148 X 119 128 X 100 154 X 112 136 X 101 149 X 120 137X109 Shipped installed In Fixture SF Single Fuse (120/277V) n/a TB DF Double Fuse (208,240,480) n/a TB ORS Quartz Restrike System (lamp not included) QRSTD ORS Time Delay (lamp not included) PER NEMA Twist -Lock Photoelectric Receptacle 15 Integral Sliptitter (2 3/8' to 2 7/8' OD tenon) LS Lamp Support -70F Reduced Ambient Operation ( -70 °F) C62 2' of 16 -3 SEO Cord Pre -Wired Cd2 2' of 14 -3 SEO Cord Pre -Wired C22 2' of 12-3 SE0 Cord Pre -Wired DC Architectural Colors - Specify Letter Codes CR Corrosion- Resistant Finish (polyester) CRT Corrosion- Resistant Finish (teflon) CF Charcoal Filter EY 'Extended Yoke Shipped Separately3 WG Wire Guard VG Vandal Guard (polycarbonate shield) UV Lipper Visor FV Full Visor (upper & side) TS Tenon Sliptitter (2 3/8' to 2 7/8' OD tenon) CRA Cross Arm Adaptor (horizontal) CRA45 Cross Arm Adaptor (45° from horizontal) PWB Wood Pole/Wall Mounting Bracket (incl. CRA) FMB Pipe Mounting Bracket (includes CRA) WPB Wall Pipe Bracket PE1 NEMA Twist Lock Photocontrol (120,208,240V) PE4 NEMA Twist Lock Photocontrol 480V PE7 NEMA Twist Lock Photocontrol 277V ACCESSORIES (Field Installed) 11 145 x 111 Ordered Separately. 11 128 x 101 See Flood Options Section. 12 145 x 120 12 132 x 111 9 9 10 10 10 10 140 x 117 126 x 106 143 x 129 137x129 146 x 131 138 x 122 EPA = 1.3 ft.: H = 157/e (40.3) W = 15' /i (39.4 cm) o = 6'Ii (16.5 cm) NOTES: ' 150W and below provided with dual tap (120/ 277V) ballast when ordered as 120V or 277V. S Multi -tap Ballast (120,208,240,277V). ' May be ordered as accessory. MUST see Flood Accessories Section for ordering information. fa H/ Taim ►Gaon rPI ' E' - DOW410: RECESSED ROUND: 100 and 175 WATT MEDIUM B 1' 4. 4r;i WO inconspicuous - 68% Efficiency • :,:r J.;.1:: ' . . 1 f- Ari 6-3 14,000 Lumens - 64% Efficiency c!- • 66% Efficiency Optional Reflector Colors Champagne Gold Alzak Option -16 1 Black Alzak Option -72 •t Umber Alzak Pewter Alzak Option -92 Option -93 TAL HALID RR50605 RR50606 RR50707 Ellipsoidal ' own ights: High Efficiency Features Lamp • 100 watt clear E/ED -17 for RR50605. • 175 watt clear E/ED -17 for RR50606, RR50707. • See Option -43 for optional lower wattage. • Option -23 for Mercury, Option -24 for HPS. Socket • Vertical. Medium base. Pulse rated: RR50605. • Glazed porcelain. • Nickel- plated brass screw shell. Silicone leads. Reflectors • Upper: Compound ellipsoidal specular Alzak• aluminum. • Lower: Low brightness parabolic specular Alzak aluminum, self - flanged. Lens • UV absorbing tempered Industrix mounted to upper reflector. • Optional UV absorbing tempered prismatic amass (Option -15). Seamless Black OptiGroove Option -OG Performance at a G RR50605, RR50606 CJ D �j DI 16-116 O HIj 1- • 6-15116'01•. Metric: Inches x 25.4 = Millimeters. R1150707 ,,.7 14.5/6 • nce 1300 2600 3900 0° 15° ......111350605 �. 111150605.15 3000 6000 9000 0° 15• 30' L7.1rs or� 111150707 S/MH 1.0 6y6.0;• 81150707.15 S/MH 1.1 • Dia. (n ft.) shown Is where FC value is hall the FC at nadir. •• Based on RCR2; ceiling 70 %; wall 50 %; floor 20 %. Use S/MH shown for each fixture. 90• 75• 60' Ballast Assembly • WhisperPack' fully encapsulated 180° C rated HPF ballast. • Premium Class H high reactance; 5:12 regulation (100 watt) or CWA 10:10 regulation (175 watt). • Capacitor (and ignitor for 100 watt) supplied. • 120 volt standard or see optional voltages. • Cool, quiet, long -life. Silicone leads. • Visible and easily serviced in all ceilings including dry wall. Fuse • Fused primary. Renewable. Aids servicing. Housing • Acrylic enameled aluminum. • Cool: Dissipates heat across entire surface area. • Rustproof: Exceeds 1000 hour ASTM 5% salt spray test. • Entire luminaire serviced through removable reflector. • Built -in plaster frame. Outlet Box • Prewired 14 GA (NEC) galvanized steel, UL listed. • Removable insulated cover. • 1/2' and 3/4' knockouts. . Installation • 27' galvanized channel bar hangers supplied (2). • Fully adjustable universal mounting brackets supplied (2). • Recesses indoor or outdoor in covered locations. UL Listing • Wet, damp, or dry locations, covered ceilings. • Through- branch circuit conductors (6 #12). Three Year Limited Warranty • Complete standard fixture. Thermal Protection • Per current NEC. Cone of Light' Cone of Light' O Ft. FC Ole. 6 106.1 5.7 8 60.8 7.6 10 38.9 9.5 45' 12 27.0 11.4 14 19.9 13.3 16 15.2 15.1 RR50605 30• S/MH 1.0 S/MH 1.0 90' 75' 60' Ft. FC Dia. 6 101.4 5.7 8 57.0 7.6 10 36.5 9.5 12 25.3 11.4 14 16.6 13.3 18 14.3 15.2 81150605.15 O O Ft. FC Dia. 8 232.9 5.8 8 131.0 7.8 10 83.6 9.7 45' 12 58.2 11.7 14 42.8 13.6 16 32.7 15.6 R1150707 Ft. FC Dia. 6 206.4 6.1 6 116.1 8.2 10 74.3 10.2 12 51.6 12.3 14 37.9 14.3 16 29.0 16.4 111150707.15 For Plan View, see page 7 Detailed Photometric Data begins on page 52. CP Distribution 90' 2300 �,\ ; 75• B �, 8 4800 ���, 10 45' 12 6900 LI4 14 0° 15° 30° 16 R1150606 SANH 1.0 - R1150606.15 S/MH 1.1 Cone of Light* Cone of Light* Cone of Light Key Ft. Mounting height FC Footcandles Dla. Circle of light at 50% of FC Estimated Color Multipliers: See Options- 16,- 72,- 92, -93 and -OG. O FC 198.1 111.4 71.3 49.5 36.4 27.9 R1350606 Dia. 5.7 7.5 9.4 11.3 13.2 15.1 O Ft. FC Dia. 6 143.1 6.9 8 80.5 9.2 10 51.5 11.5 12 35.8 13.8 14 26.3 16.1 18 20.1 18.4 RR50606 -15 Multiple Fixture FC Calculator" mummem•U•wMis ■ \1 \tall ■alamatwm ANNIMMIIIIRMEMMI WIIINVOMMEMEXIIIM ROIMISMIIIMMEMMIR ■ ■.1111f\. 111Ilal111al111 ■ual••a mmiammi • 80 100 140 180 220 260 Ana P■r Flxtur• In Square Fw1 81150605 •■RR50606 111150707 Options -15 UV absorbing tempered prismatic flat glass. Spread distribution. -16 Champagne Gold anodized Alzak lower reflector, self - flanged. (CP x .95) -23 Mercury ballast instead. 100ME standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. -24 HPS ballast instead. 100ME (RR50605) or 150ME (111150606, R(150707) standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. -31 White reflector flange. -43 Lower wattage medium base - specify voltage and wattage for: Metal Halide: 70, 50, 32 (GE Halarc°' electronic ballast - minimum 50' F) (RR50605) or 150, 100 (RR50606, 111150707); Mercury: 75, 50; HPS: 70, 50, 35 (RR50605) or 100 (111150606, RR50707). -45 Gasket above reflector flange. Stops dust streaks on ceiling. -49 Extra circuit DCB socket. (100 watt max.) Must not be energized simultaneously with main source. -58 277 volt 60 Hz. ballast instead. -65 Relay and DCB socket. (100 watt max.) With fixture energized, provides immediate light during HID outage. Also see Option -66. -66 Time delay relay and DCB socket. (100 watt max.) When energized, provides light until HID reaches 70% output. -72 Black anodized Alzak lower reflector, self - flanged. (CP x .67) -92 Umber anodized Alzak lower reflector, self - flanged. (CP x .75) -93 Pewter anodized Alzak lower reflector, self - flanged. (CP x .90) -94 Custom color lower reflector. Consult factory. -97 Other voltage ballasts. Consult factory. -99 Special modification. Consult factory. -LP With lamp. Specify source, wattage, color temperature, and clear or coated (3200'K standard for MH.) Consult factory for other color temperatures. -03 OptiGroove black seamless tapered aluminum. White trim, self- flanged. (CP x .72) Alzak• is a registered trademark of ALCOA. • 0 Z Z 0 20' POLE 30' POLE ARM MOUNTED ® 20' 20' POLE RECESS SOFFIT DOWN LIGHT 0 uJ % 250 WATT METAL HALIDE 400 WATT METAL HALIDE 250 WATT METAL HALIDE 250 WATT FLOOD LIGHT 150 WATT METAL HALIDE ci) LU cc X LL SYMBOL If : 1r T -*- FIXTURE 00000 . Rhododendrcy. 'Madam Masson' Otto Lu ken our : • • odendron 'PJ erbian • ruc oral Beaut otoneas e - • iterranean Pink eat e A . - , - 7 • . •, A • • '.. 1. ; '._;?...., lregon rap-, Rhododendron 'Belle Heller' 1:7 Rhododendron 'Jean Marie de Montegue' Armstrong Maple yl mot` �, .. 4. r •r an osho Pin • h • dodendro i '11.1 . City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development 0 Rick Beeler, Director December 24, 1992 Mr. Dana Warren. P.O. Box 88050 ' Tukwila, WA 98138 t Re: Proposed Commercial Development at Strander Blvd. & Andover Pk West Dear Mr. Warren: At the November 5, 1992 pre - application meeting, you indicated that your desire for this project was to begin construction in April, 1993. Because of the development issues identified by staff, we strongly recommended meetings as soon as possible with staff to resolve those issues prior. to the formal Design Review submittal. It was also suggested at the pre- application meeting that as the project evolves in its design, we would be provided conceptual plans for review. We were told that perspective drawings had been prepared and would be provided to us. To date, we have not received these drawings and can not assist you in meeting the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) decision criteria. Further, we can not commit to a specific processing timeline. In general, the design does not reflect the expectations of the City. Because we have not reviewed additional conceptual development schemes, we can only offer the following elaboration on our earlier comments which are based on the pre - application design proposal: PARKING. The amount of required parking is based on specific uses. Parking requirements differ for commercial tenants and restaurant tenants. Therefore, gross square footages for identified uses must be provided with your project submittal. DESIGN. a. The BAR expects a high level of design quality. The BAR has been adamant about moving away from the "strip -mall mentality" and focusing on pushing buildings closer to streets. They will also pay particular attention to the site plan which includes the building orientation, parking lot layout, site access, the integration of landscaping, building architecture, and compatibility of design with the surrounding area. b. Given the visibility of this project from three streets (including Treck Drive), architectural detailing must be incorporated on all building elevations facing streets and internal parking areas. c. The Target and Mervyn's projects have set a significant design precedent in the immediate vicinity (both from within the site boundaries and as viewed from the street), Each project reflects an innovative approach to design, uncommon to what is typical for a Mervyn's and Target store. These projects have added and created character to the 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 City's commercial core. It was implied at the pre - application meeting that the exterior material being considered is tilt -up concrete. Tilt -up concrete with no texture, pattern or relief would not be acceptable. Other building materials exist such as Dry-Vit, which offers .tremendous flexibility in application and can easily be combined with other materials. d. Lighting and signage plans should also accompany the Design Review application. Signs and lighting are expected to be consistent with eachother and with the architectural theme of the project. e. Screening of dumpsters, utilities and service areas is mandatory. This includes roof - mount mechanical equipment as well. These items should be situated and screened so as not to be a visual or physical impediment. Screening should be accomplished by use to a durable, attractive structure and dense landscaping. LANDSCAPING STREETS Parking areas should be broken up with landscaping. The BAR typically requires landscape islands placed every 10 parking stalls. The City will require that Treck Drive be continued to Andover Park West and the Right -of- Way be dedicated to the City. OTHER a. A SEPA Checklist and SEPA determination will be required for this project. b. The site plan shows improvements within the rail -road easement. Vacation of the easement should be addressed. Note that parking would not be permitted within the rail- road easement. c. Four loading areas are required per the City's Zoning Code. d. Please refer to all other comments provided to you on the checklists following the pre - application meeting. I urge you to set a meeting with us as soon as your conceptual plan(s) are available for our review. The BAR will critically judge the quality of the project and look for a creative design solution. They will evaluate how building materials, color and building scale compliment eachother as well as how the project fits into the emerging design context of the area. I look forward to hearing from you and can be reached at 431 -3663 if you have additional questions. Sincerely, Denni Shefrin cc: Rick Beeler Ross Earnst Pre - Application File No. 92 -027 • "iii - 1E +saus BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGLyEVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: 109,000 sq ft retail center 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) SE corner of Andover Park West & Strander Blvd. Quarter: NE Section: 26 Township: 23N Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT:* Name: Dana Warren Address. P.O. Box 88050, Tukwila , WA 98138 Phone. 575 -3200 Signature: ILL /. Date: * The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. 4. PROPERTY Name: OWNER AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP M. A. Segale, Inc. Address: P.O. Box 88050, Tukwila, WA 98138 Phone: I /WE,[uignature(s)] 575 -3200 swear that I /we are fhe owner(s) or c in this application and that the foregoin application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. trac purchaser(s) of the property involved tements and answers contained in this C Date: 1 8 i J3 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC: "TION 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. 1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian movement. B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to it site. RESPONSE: The building is designed so that each tenant's entry is visible from the intersection, this avoids the necessity for excessive signage. The public parking area is located in front of the building for ease of circulation and safety. The loading, service and dumpsters are located behind the building to screen them from view. A covered pedestrian walkway links Andover Park West to Strander Blvd. diagonally through the site. Extensive perimeter landscaping both softens the building facade, and screens the parking from view. 2. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged. B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. 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: The vehicular access points are located as far from the intersection as the design will allow in order to maintain traffic flow. A center turn lane will be added on both Strander & Andover to improve turning movements both in and out of the project. The rear loading areas are screened from adjoining properties by evergreen trees and shrubs. The height and scale of this project is similar to that of adjacent buildings. , BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC;e-TION r� 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: All the finished grades are designed to be relatively flat for easy handica• accessibilit . The landsca in is redominatel ever•reen in nature providing year round foliage. Large planters flank either side of each tenant's entry to provide both relief in the building facade as well as the ability for seasonal color. The exterior parking lot lighting will be similar to the adjacent retail center to the west in both type of fixture and light level. 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. B. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and be in harmony with permanent neighboring de- velopments. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLtG ^ TION 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: The building facade is modulated in both plan and elevation to provide architectural interest. The mechanical equipment is located behind the parapet wall above each entry to screen it from view. Exterior light fixtures along the columns on the front of the build- ing provide light as well as architectural ornamentation. The surface of the concrete is articulated with reveles to create shadow lines of patterns. The building will be painted in predominately neutral colors with muted accent colors denoting each tenant's entry. 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: Pedestrian seating is provided along the planting areas adjacent to each tenant's entry. An employee lunch /break area with picnic tables has been provided in the SE corner of the site amongst the trees. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVI DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC" TION INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DI W The following six criteria are used in the development of this area, to up compatible uses, to recognize and to ca the Green River and nearby recreatio oriented use, and to provide for dev= describe how your proposed develop response space, if necessary. TRICT Page 5 e special review of the Interurban area in order to manage rade its general appearance, to provide incentives for • italize on the benefits to the area of the amenities including al facilities, to encourage development of more people - lopment incentives that will help to spur growth. Please ent relates to the goals for this District. Use additional 1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. 2. The proposed development use hould demonstrate due regard for the use an of public recreational areas and facilities. njoyment 3. The proposed development should provide for safe and conve i' it on -site pedestrian circu- lation. 4. The proposed property use shod to the district in which it is loca e with neighboring uses and complementary 5. The proposed development s - ould seek to minimize significant adverse environmental im- pacts. 6. The propose • development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features in the are 5.112. FM. L4 z 0 M lqqU it q qt ; I WYkiSto,to, PARTIAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SEGALE RETAIL SITE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 1511 SN`d1d M.A. SE&ALE INC.. 18010 SOLITHCMVER PKWY • 'TUKWILA, WASHINGTON WTI I111 I. 1002/116.0 MIN 01: IV 2111.104 121: 72 PIM MTN SIM 01 Woof. MOSIPUI MIDOIACI MATGHLIN>• SEE SHEET LI 40 0 i6 ..sn xi.nn L3 III nwn. .uo■ PARTIAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SEGALE RETAIL SITE SEATTLE. WASHINGTON M.A. SE6ALE INC.. 10010 SIUTNCENTER PKWY. TUKWILA, WASHINEEToN tun. NM 10.314111[.. ox.n . r: . . n n nm ..m . •1 -113 Alk r 9, EB ° PIM ',MIR L2 JOS XVIII. 112.06 ANDOVER PARC. WEST MATCHLINE SEE SHEET LE PARTIAL LANDSCAPE PLAN STRAN DER RETAIL TUKWIIA, WASHINGTON M.A. SE6ALE I1210 501/THOENTER PICKY. 11/KWILA, WAS44IN5TON OAR OWN •T: Mr 111.IVIVID oRf��40/6)• y _r._ ' 1-. tea.✓ ANDOVER PARK WEST 0 El SIRT xv+ao L1 Mil /AVM att.n PARTIAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SEGALE RETAIL SITE SEATTLE. WASHINGTON hrl.rnL,, .5. MATGNLING 555 S•GET L5 M.A. SEGALE INC. 1 113010 SOUTNCENTER PK/NV TUKNIILA, WASHIN5TON ='7 ctn. WO. I. unmsau. u.e n. mraro n. u ■.1 4. '.."`• . e ; • -Z, ! z FEW ci; • i it T 15 e. (1% th 1*- „.1.1 CZ) Ell ' :Oa st 4. • • AD „ j. -- • ammo ewe. MM.. • Soe a.* STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER BLVD. Al ANDOVER PARK W. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FAME- RRIREF.— WEE — PRE 111 0101034110* •i'.�+.�,d.vK V x....4.5 Zi F r th 2 KAKI maw... • WPM. wM. MW • .G.'Jl..Mi STRANDER RETAIL STRANGER BLVD. AI ANDOVER PARK W. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON •' • ,4 - - -- -. ---- �+s•va- wnirxyr • Apt 911122.204.32S tfe) STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER MVO AT ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA. WASHINGTON OFfM SPACE —/ •••T Platlt7 •m0•I•1■■• LIfk71:• AND010.411 •ARR ••••7 •O, •MI }}Y• 11S0I4 SEGALE COMMERCIAL SITE Landscape Plan • ..• 01 NOI1YA313 1S3M r. MEI LEVATIONS 1, • - - r x m NOILVA313 1S3M cn z x m , m < . z = @ e r z o 130 1k.11. • a•at.• .1,12 ,41) Ve., TRiLNDER RETAIL lob me. revision I MM..,...., OPEN SPACE n !yQ l� ra FAST FOOD ii.,.VJ, .i1. o =n _nom_ m n.� • • / SHOPPING CENTER -- AfbOVEFi PARK WEST i �• ...... w i -- -- — — ! u,1.. o. nor. . — -- -- -- I1III111111111IIII1 -h • H -4 • FE - �Yr._ ppgg k��� I���j�•1 15g t 44 a CC`iI� 7�Z YisktV3YWili - 'il r b `f°; a,. 1 a. l�T, k � .4 i = 5 cii...t �t A 4 s s `a �" ��i5 !! �lel lglll�l . �laEl fprigl iailFI Iii Li t IP l°iffril! k oll lYitittlri,i;lll! i .. ieig s t 1; tip. o lC ; ! a 1 ]Le.lY 2 1l:- =1E!'YyYC:lYl :!lytll ! ! A•• L!•4.4Y A'•t:,7cL�ZYYS• -.Y 'ii Yyi iO Y Y Y Y ' .Y y � ! Y:4 ii1 yy «r.t; i #:4 � � ��l������Nl�l`��9N�1 gg��g;�leY�:�gi 6i?tjaY Lr`i S1 i $ !!;!Ifi i Try ! : 1 ! ! : = 1 Y Y!: A 1lt,1�1 1'11.;1 ! AN ll ! `i Pell 4 . / 0:I,.. 1 e v 1 1 1 E1;1 �``�a��a :1,1:4111!;151111! Ei Y i` •A S' Y Y i llY Y Y ... Y! 1 Y= 1 44:1 M !!! 5 ;11 tgl+ ii!q'.Y o� AFl�a�ii�i iii �� 100�0������j9 1�y�'t`�!!Iiiii!!!i '�L���4 di t ' ! 1�p44QiYtS 6tfi6 ;i5ti6i5LYL9 =cl� tt Y ? ` li 1 :! i G a G 6 !. YG �a G '6i� 1 t 1 11 SITL PLAN 1 IIUI•••• •.w$% .W. *1111.1011111111 1 STRANDER RETAIL SIRANDER BLVD. AE ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA. WASHINGTON tf) r n. I > 7 I- o r 0 0 Orb.- m 4') i 1 • k Al. • • r Z 0 m -m 0) G) 0) -1 c 0 0 0 0 0 c m z era Itacits ale 100110,* • moss. voitot, 00100 • SOS 310 MM. STRANDER RETAIL STRANDIR Hoi(). Al ANDOT/ER PARK W. THKwILA, WASHINGTON 0 • Ea n` •0+ • • o A if g it !VS{ ---t ..1 --- 0.1 Pt.. 1 t..) ...I: ale .A Yr.. • ....r weal. an • o Mai .11.1 • e o" al 0' n- STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER RLVO. AI ANDOVER PARK W. TUKWIU, WASHIND1ON A/' � • - • 0 <'e <, its co N -. F F • •• ' • ' ____..___ htnioN two .1.111rie tan,ZAUrgrat tato 1)0101..1. • tos•Ile ••••• 2011 315 2553 STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER BLVD. Al ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA, WASHINGTON . > ; r 0 0 5 › -1 vo- r i ri vc -$ P 0 ,c! r; ! I. 6 I t li- : A 1 1 11 (j) m ',•<,,, ,..:: ' '''i o . z 03 . 1. A tr " f: 5 • • . % t t,1 i AI I * '- 1 : .. 1 ' I - - *..-.. xF ,..: . - r 2 ! m ” • 0 m 0) , • - , rt,, •;', o• r -.. CO m -. 0 ''' ,&? 1 IiiD -1 -I C -‹ 0 0 0 m m 0 c =6 K m . 1 . • ... f n Sii h„;,i ' „ r G 0. ! I I 1 Z kl. — 0 o r • 0 . ; ''''''• '. ''' '• i: ..,1 . ,i.• .• ,,,,, t ... 1 i: ; . i t . , ____, . m ••• — ...,I,' • . ) .,..... ......: . . .:,.. .• •• .• • 0 0— z m Vo - 1 I — 1 ■o'• 1 •Co' I 1 o 2 o ' •.• ■ i • la 0. - i 1 r ,d P - i d * •' > r Cn j; ill. • " • •“/ 1:u; 11:? ',..1)•,$ i -1,:),Zi. i i ■ ; I, . • g I 1 ii A • • Z , C STRANDER RETAIL STRANGER BLVD Al ANDOVER PAHN W TUKWILA. WASHINGTON .1■■ 1 telsircr=t; arcnitacts to ,.......,..,....,..t.....„....,.....o......ala... [in ') .... W IIlnae mc tieter arcritect. ale ao r..... • ....w...n. saws woo man eena STRANDER RETAIL SliaNDER OLVD •1 aNDOVCR PARK CAST TUVWitA• WASN:NGTON F ti .;.R • LI• • I I UOR I'1. AI'! 111,“ "! .0.0.- 111+4• N110 lo..... • •on• .•n 121112,• 20G 12S 2]]1 N• •11 I.i 'RI • ■ !J: I+} '•V: 7 I- • }f. • .I :I • O • ft / 7.1%. • 1b; STRANDER RETAIL SIRANDER BLVD. Al ANDOVER PARK EAST IUKWIIA, WASHINGTON Oroon 0 O 0 0 0 D 2 C • r (1•) v • `� �o) / /v \ ��� . \`\ is 1 \\ 0 / • I 47) I I ) IN) lit) (J (�l 0. c• 4 0 ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ a.11 ` • 1..0l,a.; 0unL • • • (') • :) 1\ • f L00R PLAN a 1 hiru-Lo, u(1,r IN, I v.% 11.20111Attcolui - 110.0.2.. • team...... 1112, 20. 225 051 STRANDER RETAIL STRANDER BLVD. Al ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA. WASHING1ON .0...N > t#nce mtastlir CP) arottecte ala .1.30 is■Nwale • soot. woo. ••■•• • IWO WAS ISM" STRANDER RETAIL STRANGER OTVD. Al ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA. WASHINGTON I I -• • 17 4. drown phOpli. eV, •sK0 •:1 STRANDER RETAIL STRANOER BLVD. AT ANDOVER PARR W. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON :" ,.... 1+(101 1'1 AN AND D1 I All S N • (a 110 10...41. • ..nm..n.n 00101• rob 125 real STRANDER RETAIL SIRANIA 3 I(Lvi■ Al ARUCJI 1t I,AhR 1ASI URA II A. WA`.IIiNGI(IN architect. • we.. NTH • • OHM MN .43 STRANDER RETAIL STRANGER BLVD. AT ANDOVER PARK W TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Super Software Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 1,144.00 sf 50.76 sf Actual Sign Area 40.00 sf super odRivam Barnes & Noble Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 6% of EBF max area 50% incr. for setback (40') 50% incr. for setback (80') Actual Sign Area 2,44E 92 V 14E 14C 18E Barnes ' Noble Bookstore 14E �_ ► 1i a 11.1 I Li +4I WEST ELEVATION Olympic Sports Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area Actual Sign Area 5,736.00 51 150.00 s' 150.00 s Barnes & Noble Starbucks Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 6% of EBF max area 50% incr. for setback (40') 50% incr. for setback (80') Actual Sign Area 2,446.00 sf 93.38 sf 146.76 sf 140.07 sf 186.76 sf 146.76 sf Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 6% of EBF max area 50% incr. for setback (40') Actual Sign Area 754.00 sf 35.16 sf 45.24 sf 52,74 sf 40.68 sf ympic Sports Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area Actual Sign Area 5,736.00 sf 150.00 sf 150.00 sf 754.00 sf Sign Area 35.16 sf area 45.24 sf etback (401 52.74 sf Smiths Ex. Bldg. Face 9,612. Base Allowable Sign Area 150. 6% of EBF max area 576. max area allowed 500. 50% incr. for setback (20') 225. 50% incr. for 'setback (40') 300. 50% incr. for setback (60') 375. 50% incr. for setback (80') 450. 50% incr. for setback (100') 525. • Actual Sign Area 500. 2 s4 s Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 6% of EBF max area max area allowed 50% incr. for setback (20') 50% incr. for setback (40') 50% incr. for setback (60') 50% incr. for setback (80') 50% incr. for setback (100') • Actual Sign Area 9,612.00 sf 150.00 sf 576.72 sf 500.00 sf 225.00 sf 300.00 sf 375.00 sf 450.00 sf 525.00 sf 500.00 sf 2 signs 12 r' NORTH E • Blockbuster Music Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area 50% incr. for setback (20'). Actual Sign Area 2,940.00 sf 108.20 sf 161.00 sf )22.00 sf MiglIDNEE 12 NORTHELEVATION 2, 940.00 sf ■rea 108.20 sf (20'). 161.00 sf 00 sf Et2 1 • TO n 11 l[ ih • m-1r-1.- 1 gct \CAD \BF \STRAtdD \A3 I7� Super Software Barnes & Noble Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Ar Actual Sign Area i• Barnes Noble Bookstore E • i i i LJ I Zo 14 NORTH ELEVATION I• 1 176,1 Super Software Barnes & Noble Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area Actual Sign Area 3,120.00 sf 112.40 sf 112.40 sf 2 signs Barnes & Noble Bookstore Wel Li • JIMI■Ot. 11 111 IM■ p•-•••••,( I 2c2I ON , . . ; L = • 61. ri v + ■ '.�w y. ? ak4�.. home furnishings 1 NOF Bloc • �MITH'r • electronics r-� � 1 Li • 13 NORTHWEST ELEVATION Blockbuster Music Ex. Bldg. Face Base Allowable Sign Area Actual Sign Area 2,912.00 sf 107.36 sf 625.aysf 1. 1 16 WEST ELEVATION i BU STEER 1 rioN ; r 1 (2' • • t3LU sH g 1 - 1 1--117 1 Vr171_1__T 1 L L- v► M G{- t-INEL L- 1 T 7 . w 111-t Vlz." i - vl i_ -1 l M c /z-) ir-o LAN c, . �x7�tZto�- �Idrt•IA6-s, B1A3R. APPROVED DATEC..a_LAfil INITIAL SYc-L :yArchitects, inc. 3es- 4-21 N . SuiT ZOO Scale Date Drawn By A-162L P roj . No. — 94l o Project Sheet No. 0 2- S/ffPLL 3L(J -sHT Mt.._. /-#b. • • • I t-07 M -1 . w W ►-t-I-1 I7Z." - VINTL_.-fist M C e•c '-) , L. L- ,a4e.o (J -4 t ' . AL -/1 • iz1,2 . fix' fi"�'iZ low a5 i Er+1AErm. B.A.R. APPROVED DATE i26 INITIAL Svc. Winsor/FaricyArchitects, Inc. -_ 4-Z 1 N . to "ZT. SLIt`M 2.00 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 612.227-0655 Scale Date Drawn By ¥—k ? Proj. No. IcrOs3-94to Project 552542 1jt3cxMo d' 11' - 3 1/2" TL CO FF 71 0" E' STARBUCKS COFFEE HALO LIT LETTER W/ ILLUM'D FACE VARIES )1& TubeArt SIGN MANUFACTURER 800 - 562 - 2854 SEATTLE, WA. B R APPROVED DATEINITIALS SPECIFICATIONS: MANUFACTURE & INSTALL ONE SET OF HALO UT LETTERS W/ ILLUMINATED FACE LETTERS TO BE INTERNALLY ILLUM'D BY NEON RETURNS TO BE STD. BLACK CHANNELUME FACE TO BE WHITE ACRYLIC WITH GREEN SCOTCHCAL SCOTCHCAL TO BE HOLLY GREEN 230-76 W/ WHITE SCRATCH BORDER �I 11'-31/2" Tit,\ i\2 p o F F 710! STARBUCKS COFFEE rOFF6�r. HALO LIT LETTER W/ ILLUM'D FACE VARIES lubeArt SIGN MAIIUFACIURER 800 - 562 - 2854 SEATTLE, WA. B.A.R. APPROVED DATES%INITIALSyc SPECIFICATIONS: MANUFACTURE & INSTALL ONE SET OF HALO LIT LETTERS W/ ILLUMINATED FACE LETTERS TO BE INTERNALLY ILLUM'D BY NEON RETURNS TO BE STD. BLACK CHANNELUME FACE TO BE WHITE ACRYLIC WMI GREEN SCOTCHCAL SCOTCHCAL TO BE HOLLY GREEN 230-76 W/ WHITE SCRATCH BORDER 32'-0" BKGD AREA EQ. 0.4 22'-9" NN EQ. OLYMPI SPORTS 118 SO FT SCALE1/4=1'-0" ONE NEWSETOF40"& 32" SELF CONTAINED LETTERS &" DARK BRONZE ALUMINUM RETURNS 2793 PLEX FACES CLEAR RED NEON ILLUM AS REQ FLUSH MOUNTTOCONC WALL AS REQ a�•a Ro DATEiZ S APPROVED yc-. 1IS ORIGINAL DESIGN(S) IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF DWINELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS & PROTECTED BY FEDERAL COPYRIGHT 1WS. ANY REPRODUCTION, OR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIGN SIMILAR TO THE ONE EMBODIED HERE IN, IS EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN. 1OULD SUCH CONSTRUCTION OCCUR, DWINELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS IS DUE $500 AS COMPENSATION FOR THE TIME & EFFORT IN lEATING EACH INDIVIDUAL DESIGN(S). MNELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBSTITUTE PRODUCTS OF LIKE KINDS & QUALITY AS IT DEEMS 'PROPRIATE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID D)SPLAY(S)! THE PROPOSED DISPLAY(S) IS CONTINGENT UPON VERIFICATION OF .L CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS & IS SUBJECT TO LOCAL ORDINANCES. NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY WARRANT INSTALLATION EXTRAS. JOB NAME LOCATION SALESPERSON DATE CLIENT APPROV. OLYMPIC SPORTS TUKWILA, WA. C. BARR 2/15/94 DESIGNER PH DESIGN NO DATE CHUCK/OLYTUKR1 • 1 8'-0" BKGD AREA 40" 32" i..1 3..CO(6 32'-0"BKGD AREA EQ. NN 22'-9" MN EQ. OLYMPIC SPORTS 118SQFT SCALE1/4=1'-0" ONE NEWSETOF40"& 32" SELF CONTAINED LETTERS 8" DARK BRONZE ALUMINUM RETURNS 2793 PLEX FACES CLEAR RED NEON ILLUM AS REQ FLUSH MOUNTTOCONC WALL AS REQ B.A.R DATE�z APPROVED �- INITIALSyc-, Uw,inept VISUAL SYSTEMS THIS ORIGINAL DESIGN(S) IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF DWINELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS & PROTECTED BY FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAWS. ANY REPRODUCTION, OR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIGN SIMILAR TO THE ONE EMBODIED HERE IN, IS EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN. SHOULD SUCH CONSTRUCTION OCCUR, DWINELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS IS DUE $500 AS COMPENSATION FOR THE TIME & EFFORT IN CREATING EACH INDIVIDUAL DESIGN(S). DWINELL'S VISUAL SYSTEMS RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBSTITUTE PRODUCTS OF LIKE KINDS & QUALITY AS IT DEEMS APPROPRIATE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID DISPLAY(S)I THE PROPOSED DISPLAY(S) IS CONTINGENT UPON VERIFICATION OF ALL CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS & IS SUBJECT TO LOCAL ORDINANCES. NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY WARRANT INSTALLATION EXTRAS. JOB NAME LOCATION SALESPERSON DATE CLIENT APPROV. OLYMPIC SPORTS TUKWILA, WA. C. BARR 2/15/94 DESIGNER DH CH UCK/ OLYTU KF DESIGN NO DATE 23'-9" 111111�T� >NTAINED LETTERS AND CUSTOM S/F CABINETS .DG. FRONT/ ENTRANCES. SCA. 3/811=1 ' 26' TWO SETS REQ. 4' HEATH LETTERS.(CHANNELUME) 8-1/4" DK.BRNZ. WITH GREEN 2108 ACRYLIC FACES. SELF CONTAINED TRANSFORMERS, ILLUM. WITH GREEN TUBING, 30ma. ONE EACH S/F CABINETS. ALUM.FACES .125 ROUTED . FLUOR ILLUM. COPY IS FORMED LEXAN, INSIDE PROCESSED GREEN 349 (TO MATCH 2108). PROTRUDES THROUGH ROUTED OPENINGS. CABINET PAINT MATTE FINISH TO MATCH BLDG. (EXACT COLOR TO BE VERIFIED). some furnishings SUPPORTS PAINT SAME 26' electronics DAT B.A.Q. PPROVED INITIALS kc& HEATH 4644 SE 17 Ih Por4and, Oregon 97202 503 232 2620 This is an oci inal design created for the exclusive use of the customer. Until transfered by sale cdi rights are reserved and it is not to be reproduced in any mare r without permission from Heath Signs DATE 1/31/94 CUSTOMER APPROVAL DATE BY REVISIONS 1 DRAWN BY W AC SALES STAFF SMITH'S HOME FURNISHINGS TUKWItA,WA PO-391-93 1 END 4' 23'-9" rill Till SEL CONTAINED LETTERS AND CUSTOM S/F CABINETS END FOR BLDG. FRONT/ ENTRANCES. SCA. 3/8"=1' BLDG. FACIA 3' 18" to 24" 26' TWO SETS REQ. 4' HEATH LETTERS.(CHANNELUME) 8-1/4" DK.BRNZ. WITH GREEN 2108 ACRYLIC FACES. SELF CONTAINED TRANSFORMERS, ILLUM. WITH GREEN TUBING, 30ma. ONE EACH S/F CABINETS. ALUM.FACES .125 ROUTED . FLUOR ILLUM. COPY IS FORMED LEXAN, INSIDE PROCESSED GREEN 349 (TO MATCH 2108). PROTRUDES THROUGH ROUTED OPENINGS. CABINET PAINT MATTE FINISH TO MATCH BLDG. (EXACT COLOR TO BE VERIFIED). home furnishings SUPPORTS PAINT SAME 26' electronics 18t END 03 -ceIb DAT B.A.R "PPROVED. INITIALS kA 4644 SE 1: Poland. 503 2332 2 -this is an ail aeated for use offhec Unfit harnfei al rights are and It is not reproduced mauler wtth from Heath DATE 14 CUSTOM DATE BY R E V DRAWN SALES SMITH' HOME FURNI: TUKWII „..„..„...........ta,. ,.....,t; „..,..:.: :„ HEATH';. and company EXCELLENCE IN SIGNAGE NATIONWIDE TYPICAL ONE LINE LAYOUT LJ33 -ccI(c . rtz37...+aQ^wFr�a?fC'•3?rdY !lLaavpRmlr+rz� � •qr t�»3iCREi9t96 Po s 7 0.` a'„�, a u yri�.+-,Wiii' .;`� 1 K' '1 3.4/"i ♦ ii +�--�. '4"f�;��. JAf�+"�. r .i �:y, r'ZT.�l�!J C'n�d 777�i'/� .X +. r.�. .45r���r�.+'1/�.'.a�i1 t�� .iYl. S :+irl �i'•f Fes• l�•1� M� r V f c . J )� ' ♦ v v •r �.•- IYr�?'� �� i��(!• a�� f1�1} +''.�+.�i�'�f.1t�i��..ii Ye.. �a3 .�'Rjr1�= a'i�������:lttc���' :i lvA�,�� � �: Ui; �lx-;` �r��� l:,':^yiij���'�t.�'•:3�nl���i :�JGt- �:,�`•.Y ^l��ti. � ,.,��.id�'�li �/A;3 ���t�'+�+' :rs+,�•,!r!' i if , t y.' + ✓. � 'Si:7 f C •A%�” 1e 7�k 1 '1erd i;:taa i.�e? nes o rBtrYi'*sto APFFC.2.VED • :44 • 1, 4.;,g4.,A0 --.,-114--:tW:i-zi;`-i'...--,:-..!•-:44.k.,-,74,1/4.- I 1,•■••!..k.„,,..11.484,,,, ',A ,,,''', ,e4.-'-`•1','''.'..,"::''','...".. • 1"! , • ,.4r; ■ • CC �Q w • 1■ niminiminu IUIUI�1■ MI 1 NJ of IN 1 I1 t Q) v } U V qr CONTROL SEASONAL PLANTI NCI 42GCK WAL L GONGRMTE PAVING ROCK. PL.."71:15r7RM STRANDER RETAIL CORNER SITE DEVELOPMENT RGLOCA T CON T hO! LAW N JUNK CONTRO SEASONAL , -ONCRMTE. 'Av NCB i20GK IvL.ATt 7RM STRANDER RETAIL. CORNER SITE DEVELOPMENT LAWN MOLLY N ORTH