The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit L92-0043 - HC BLOSS - CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUM DESIGN REVIEWl92-0043 15310 sunwood boulevard 89-14-dr crystal ridge condominium There were no citizen's comments. L92 -0043: Crystal Ridge Dale Schneider, Schneider Homes: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 25, 1992 MINUTES John W. Rants, Mayor Mr. Malina called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. Members present were Messrs. Malina, Haggerton, Meryhew, Flesher, Gomez and Clark. Mr. Knudson was excused. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Denni Shefrin, and Sylvia Schnug. MR. FLESHER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 28, 1992 MEETING. MR. MERYHEW SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Jack Pace presented the staff report. He noted that this was a request for a modification for a previously approved project. Approximately two years ago the proposal was to build apartments. At that time, the Planning Commission reviewed the project and made some changes. The project has been issued a building permit and the project was sold to another developer. The new developer is requesting changes to the project. The issue before the BAR are the changes to the recreation facility and the sports facility around it. The most noticeable change is that the developer is proposing to eliminate the pool. They've also made the recreation building smaller and taking out the basement. The facility has been moved south and closer to the parking area. The applicant has provided a larger sport court facility, and it has been sunk down by approximately four feet. The building height is no higher than the original approval. The applicant meets and exceeds the recreational space requirements. Staff has requested some minor modifications and additional landscape areas. For example, staff is suggesting that landscaping be added along the retaining wall to soften the retaining walls. Staff is also suggesting adding three trees, ground cover, and ivy over the retaining walls. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 11100 e Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 L Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 June 25, 1992 Dale Schneider, Schneider Homes: He noted that the sports court surface would be painted concrete with a non - slippery finish. Mr. Malina asked if they would be providing anything in the sports court for children since some of the open space area has been omitted. Mr. Schneider stated that they had not planned to add anything particularly for children. With the type of buyer they expect to be getting, they are not anticipating a large number of children. Bernadette Wilson, President of Sunwood Board of Directors, 15249 Sunwood Blvd.: Ms. Wilson stated that the public notice for this meeting stated that the location of this project was 62nd Ave. & Park Blvd. This should have read Sunwood Blvd., not Park Blvd., and this is the reason for the poor attendance by Sunwood residents. She stated that she did not have an objection to the size of the recreation building. The swimming pool is an area of concern. When the property was purchased, the swimming pool was part of the plans. There is a concern that residents of Crystal Ridge will use Sunwood's swimming pool because Crystal Ridge does not have a pool. The pool area is fenced and has a lock, however if the gate is left open then others can get in. Sunwood does have a caretaker, he does not work all week and he has other duties and cannot always monitor the swimming pool. It may also generate unfair competition when a Sunwood resident wants to sell their condominium because Sunwood residents have to pay a high maintenance fees to maintain the pool, whereas the residents of Crystal Ridge won't have those maintenance fees. Due to the proximity of the sport court to Sunwood will generate noise for the Sunwood complex. If there is not sufficient landscaping between the two complexes, noise will be a problem. Greenery reduces noise and shields others' living quarters, thus Crystal Ridge should contain an abundant amount of landscaping. Fran Garillio, 15150 Sunwood Blvd.: She stated that she did not receive the public notice until the evening of the meeting. She stated that when she bought the condo, she was given a settlement agreement which was made based on lawsuit between Sunwood and the Citizen's Service Corporation. Ms. Garillio asked if that agreement is still binding and that Crystal Ridge have adhered to all of the stipulations in the agreement. Jack Pace stated that the City was not involved in that agreement and has no involvement in enforcing it. The Agreement is between two private parties and not with the City of Tukwila. He went on to say that the mailing for this public hearing took place on June 12th and a number of mailings were returned to the City. The addresses are obtained thru the Assessor's office. Mr. Codey said that there was not a lifeguard. Mr. Malina asked if there were any children at Sunwood. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 June 25, 1992 Alice Codey, 15236 Sunwood Blvd.: She stated that her concern was that Crystal Ridge residents will be using Sunwood's pool and would like to see the project completed as it was originally submitted. Mr. Flesher asked if there was a lifeguard on duty at their pool. Sandra Alt, 15119 Sunwood Blvd.: She state that her concerns were with the use of the swimming pool by Crystal Ridge residents, as well as the noise from the sports court. She suggested that the sports court be sunk even more than is proposed. Ms. Alt said that were 3 -6 children, some are only there during the summertime. During the winter it varies. Carl Bloss, 6510 Southcenter Blvd.: Mr. Bloss said that they've met with the Sunwood Home Owner's Association and met with Bernadette. He stated that they had every intention of meeting the road maintenance agreements. He went on to say that he didn't feel that there was a problem in eliminating the pool. The decision not to put in a pool was based on economics. They had agreed to suppress the sports court and add landscaping. Mr. Bloss said that he would be willing to meet with Bernadette again. Bernadette said that they did not want to have any misunderstandings between themselves and the builders. She said that they had had one meeting with Schneider Builders at which Schneider told her what they wanted to do. She had asked that they put those items into a letter so that everyone would have a good understanding of what went on at the meeting. She had never received that letter, so she wrote a letter to Schneider explaining everything they had discussed as she understood it. Carl agreed that her understanding was correct. She went on to say that at no time did Sunwood agree with removing the pool from Crystal Ridge. Mr. Meryhew asked if she thought they could meet with Schneider and come to some sort of agreement regarding the noise from the sport court. Bernadette said that she would be willing to try. Mr. Clark asked if there would have been a more substantial turn -out to this meeting had the public notice said "Sunwood Blvd." rather than "Park Blvd." Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1992 She said that she thought there would have been a larger turn out. Page 4 Jack Pace stated that it might be beneficial to add a wood fence with the additional landscaping. Landscaping will not be as effective in this instance in reducing the noise because there is a slope. Mr. Meryhew suggested that Sunwood Condominiums get a new security system for their pool. VERN MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE L92 -0043: CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS AS PROPOSED AND BASED ON STAFF'S REPORT, AND ADDING A CONDITION OF APPROVAL WHICH INCLUDES THE ADDITION OF A 6 FOOT NOISE SUPPRESSION FENCE BETWEEN THE SPORT COURT AND SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUMS OR SHRUBBERY WHICH IS MUTUALLY AGREED UPON BETWEEN SCHNEIDER HOMES AND THE SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION. MR. FLESHER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Malina called for a ten minute break. The meeting resumed at 9:20 p.m. P92 -0061: Parking Requirements for Places of Public Assembly and for Private Clubs: Denni Shefrin provided the staff report. She noted that this proposal was for a change in the Zoning Code to the existing parking standards for places of public assembly and private clubs. Currently, the Zoning Code refers to the Uniform Building Code's Occupancy Loads to establish parking requirements. Staff feels there is a significant discrepancy between establishment of parking needs and parking demands for places of public assembly. Staff went on to say that there was an error on page 3, second to last paragraph of the staff report. In the paragraph which outlines how parking is calculated, instead of the wording "multiplying by 4 ", it should have read, "divided by 4 ". The recommended change is an attempt to achieve a more accurate number of parking spaces which would adequately meet demand of a specific project and its intended use or uses. The discrepancy in the City's parking requirements came about during the review of the exhibition facility project. Occupancy loads are established for the specific purpose of providing safe exiting for buildings. There is no linkage made between occupancy, building size, use and parking demand. The change that staff is proposing would require that parking be based on a proposed building use. The change is proposed for uses which are unique, and are not frequently occurring within the City. Therefore, staff does not wish to impose a specific parking standard, as is commonly done with other jurisdictions. Staff is also looking at ways to encourage integration of parking, pedestrian traffic, bicycle traffic, etc. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 June 25, 1992 within the entire development proposal. Staff proposes requiring a parking study which would demonstrate that the use of the building and the parking demand correspond. The proposed change would: 1. avoid excessive parking; 2. eliminate unnecessary impervious surface area to better address surface drainage /storm water control concerns; 3. avoid potential environmental and visual impacts; 4. Encourage shared parking between a variety of surrounding uses where cooperative parking facility criteria cannot be met; 5. Ensure that pedestrian and bike traffic is addressed and well integrated into the overall site /parking plan. The recommended change is an attempt to achieve a more accurate number of parking spaces which meet the demand of a particular facility. Mr. Meryhew asked why in Table 4, the section which deals with places of public assembly... didn't just say, "Shall be determined by the Planning Commission" like the public facilities and outdoor sports areas sections do. Staff stated that the extra wording ensures, some reliability to the applicant in what it is staff is seeking to do. It assists staff in its review of each development proposal. It gives some guarantee so the applicant has a better understanding of what they are expected to provide and sets other criteria so that when the City Engineer reviews these parking studies or other technical information that may be provided, they have a better understanding of what is ultimately achieved. Mr. Meryhew suggested that the other two areas should also have criteria. Staff said the Planning Commission could recommend that in their motion. Mr. Malina closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m. MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE P92 -0061: PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY AND PRIVATE CLUBS BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS EXCEPT THAT ON TABLE 4 OF ATTACHMENT B, THEY COMBINE THE "OUTDOOR SPORTS AREAS OR PARKS" AND THE "PUBLIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING LIBRARIES, POLICE AND FIRE STATIONS" WITH THE WORDING FOR THE "PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY... ". MR. HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. PROPOSAL: LOCATION: ZONING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 STAFF REPORT to the BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared June 17, 1992 HEARING DATE: June 25, 1992 PROJECT: L92- 0043: Revision to Crystal Ridge Condominium (formerly approved as 62nd Ave. Apartments) APPLICANT: Mr. H. C. Bloss, Schneider Homes, Inc. Revisions to recreation facilities and landscaping previously approved by the Board of Architectural Review. Vacant land south of existing Sunwood Condominiums and west of 62nd Ave. South. Street Address is 6510 Southcenter Blvd. R -4 High Density Residential Not required Mark Cross A. B. C. D. F. F. G. H. I. J. K. :: . .. Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 John W. Rants, Mayor Proposed Revisions. Letter, May 27, 1992 . Approved Landscape Plan . Approved Site Plan, Sheet 31 Approved Site Plan, detail of northwest corner of site, sheet 2 Approved Recreation Building Floor Plan, sheet 26 Approved Recreation Building EIevations, sheets 27 & 28, Proposed Landscape Plan Proposed Site Plan, Sheet R1 Proposed Site Plan, detail of northwest corner of site, revised 5/12/92 • Proposed Recreation Building Floor Plan, revised 5/12/92 Proposed Recreation Building Elevations, revised 6/9/92 Staff Report to the Planning Commission BACKGROUND FINDINGS OF FACT "2 -0043: Crystal Ridge Paget The Board of Architectural Review approved the "62nd. Ave. S. Apartments" on August 9, 1990 under file number 89- 14 -DR. Since that approval, the project was sold to Schneider Homes. The name has been changed to Crystal Ridge and the project is now condominiums rather than apartments. Since the original approval by the Board of Architectural Review, the applicant has submitted minor design and material changes to be considered for administrative approval. Four changes were approved by staff. These changes included floor plan changes to some of the units, substitution of gas fireplaces for the previously approved wood burning units. This change will also have the effect of ei ;m'natina •:.some of the chimneys from the buildings. A change was approved to allow the substitution of steel handrails instead of aluminum handrails. Handrail color is to remain the same. Schneider homes are requesting two changes that require approval by the Board of Architectural Review. The first is to reduce the size and relocate the recreation building. The second proposed change is to eliminate the pool and spa from the previously approved site plan and substitute an enlarged sport court. (See attachments F and G). The recreation areas are broken down into eleven areas on the approved plan and the proposed plan. Four of the recreation areas both passive and active from the approved plan are changed on the proposed plan. See chart below. Approved Recreation Amenity Proposed Recreation Amenity Horseshoe Area Pool Area • Sport Court Passive open space by pool area 952 1788 1100 1220 TOTAL 5060 Horseshoe Area Patio Area Sport Court Passive open space by sport court TOTAL 1197 545 1920 1340 5002 The total recreation .area in the proposed plan is reduced 58 square feet from 17,753 to 17,695 square feet. The minimum required by code is 14,400 sq. ft. The percentage of required recreation space provided with recreational equipment drops in the proposed plan from 45.7% to 37.9% The recreation buildings in the approved plan and the proposed plan are not included in the recreation area calculations. DECISION CRITERIA The proposed modifications to the recreation areas and recreation building should Staff Report to the Planning Commission Recreation Building Design Recreation Facilities (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony on 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 established neighborhood character. d. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience slwuld be encouraged. e. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. L92 -0043: Crystal Ridge Page 3 be evaluated using the review criteria from the Zoning Code. The proposed modifications to the recreation building should be evaluated using review criteria (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area, and (4) Building Design. The proposed modifications to the recreation areas should be evaluated against criteria (3) Landscaping and site treatment. (4) Building Design a. Architectural style is not restricted; evaluation of a project slwuld be based on quality of its desi and relationship to surroundings; b. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and 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 an ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of 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 slwuld be screened from view. f. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design. The recreation building would be moved 10 feet to the south and 23 feet to the east from its previously approved location. Changes to the recreation building itself include elimination of the basement floor and a reduction in size from 2,100 sq. ft. to 1,542 sq. ft. See attachments. The basement would be eliminated and the recreation building would have a new exterior design. The architectural style is retained by the proposed structure. Exterior colors and materials would remain the same. The actual height of the recreation building would be the same and would be the same height when viewed from the adjacent Sunwood Condominium. Discussion Staff Report to the L92 -0043: Crystal Ridge Planning Commission Page 4 (3) .Landscaping and Site Treatment. • a. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they slwuld be recognized, preserved and enhanced. b. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces and other paved areas slwuld 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 he talcen. 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, slwuld be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination. 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 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. There are three aspects to the consideration of the proposed changes in the recreation facilities. The first, do the facilities meet the design criteria listed above. The Second, does the project meet the recreation space requirements of the Zoning Code, Section 18.52.060 and third are the impacts of the revised recreation facilities the same for surrounding properties? In evaluating the proposal in relation to the Landscaping and Site treatment criteria, some of the important features to consider are: the relative height of the recreation building to the adjacent Sunwood Condominiums; the surrounding landscaping maintained; screening along the north property line; lighting of the areas around the recreation building. The Zoning Code section 18.52.060 requires that there be 200 square feet of recreation area for each recreational unit. With 72 units proposed, the project should include at least 14,400 square feet of active and passive recreational areas. Note that Attachment B shows a listing of recreational facilities and their square footages. The proposed changes in the recreation facilities reduces the total amount of recreation areas both passive and active by 58 square feet from 17,753 to 17,695. The 58 sc uare foot reduction in recreation are results in an increase of 58 square feet of landscaping in the general area of the recreation building. The third issue is whether the revised recreation facilities are more or less intrusive to the adjacent residential areas. The major change is the elimination of the pool and spa area and the expansion of the sport court. This does have the effect of moving Staff Report to the Planning Commission L92 -0043: Crystal Ridge Page 5 more of the active recreation areas to the north nearer to the existing Sunwood development. The expanded sport court will be depressed an additional four feet from the previous elevation of the approved facility. Depressing the sport court elevation should help screen the neighboring property from visual and sound intrusion. CONCLUSIONS 1. The revised design for the recreation building meets the design review criteria (2) and (4) contained in 18.60.050 of the zoning code by continuing the design and materials of the previously approved building. The color and exterior siding remains the same. The height of the recreation building in relation to the adjacent Sunwood Condominiums remains the same. The reduction in square footage of the recreational building is accomplished by eliminating the basement. 2. The proposed recreation areas both indoor and outdoor are reduced in size under the proposed plan by 58 square feet. However, the proposed 17,695 square feet of active and passive area still exceeds the minimum of 14,400 square feet required by code. The recreation building is not included in these calculations. 3. The expanded sport court will have more year round recreational use than the previously approved pool. 4. The revisions to the recreation areas should not decrease the number of trees in the project. The patio area, south of the recreation building needs additional landscaping. 5. Reducing the elevation of the sport court by four feet should help screen the existing Sunwood development from the impacts of the expanded size of the sport court. RECOMMENDATIONS The Department of Community Development recommends approval of the expanded sport court as a substitution for the pool and spa and the redesign and reduction in size of the recreation building with the following condition. Staff Report to the Planning Commission };) . L92 -0043: Crystal Ridge Page 6 A. Add three of the flowering cherry trees along the west property line in the section next to the sport court. To soften the change of the pool area to a patio, add three flowering cherry in patio area and add a ground cover such as ivy that will help soften the area between the retaining wall and the patio and parking area to the south. .: :. , • January 14, 1994 Jack Pace Building Official City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Crystal Ridge Condominium Phase II Dear Jack: The archways, shown on the approved plans, leading from the parking area into the building, were not installed because of limited handicap accessibility and the fact that the peaks of the archways do not line up correctly with the peak of the buildings. The fence at the southern boundazry of the project was installed to screen residents' views of unsightly wild blackberries and weeds that were not on our property. It was also installed as a safety measure to keep children from falling off the retaining wall on that edge of the project and it also adds a measure of extra security and privacy to residents living in Crystal Ridge and for the property to the south of our project. If you have any questions, please contact me either at the project or through my office at 248 -2471. Sincerely, Mike Unmuth Project Manager MU /jc file Schneider homes, ! s, inc. 6510 Southcenler Boulevard •Suite I • Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248 -2471 •FAX (206) 242 -4209 . RECEIVED JAN 'i 81994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SC -HN•Et -245 P8 . RECEIVED JAN 1 01994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SC- HN•E1.245 P8 LANDSCAPE: Design N Construction N Maintenance January 6, 1994 Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Wa. 98188 To Whom it Concerns: el Richte Landscape Manager DGR:mj � VALLEY GREEN FARMS, .hi 6510 Soulhcentcr Blvd. 11 ' Tukwila, RA 90100 (206) 240 -2471 FAX I (206) 242 -4209 CONTRACTOR'S >i SCIINEI'245P0 RE: ),,,,,,,,,,,,, tp A /tOCIA110M IU:,51, CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS Sunwood Blvd., Tukwila, Wa. Landscape materials and the sprinkler system are under. warranty from date of install for one year. Replace or repair of all landscape items will be done from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994. Any correspondence should be addressed by letter to Schneider Homes. RECEIVED JAN 0 6 '1994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT > , Jeff Heintz Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: L92 -0043 and 89 -14 -DR Crystal Ridge Apartments Dear Jeff: This letter is in response to your request to modify the roof design for the 7 car garage on permit #6563. Base upon your submittal and my site inspection , I agree with your request to build a flat roof in lieu of the gable roof. Given the degree of the proposed and the location on the site , I aim approving this as a administrative minor change to the approved BAR plans. If you should have any further question regarding this issue, please feel fee to call or write. J ince ace for Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development John W. Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 . schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard •Suite 1 *Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248 -2471 •FAX (206) 242 -4209 June 22, 1993 City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Wa. 98188 Attn: Jack Pace Dear Jack: RECEIVED JUN 2 4 1993 This is to inform you that we propose to change the roof design for the 7 -car garage on permit #6563 located directly south of building A at Crystal Ridge. The reason for this change is to "open" up the area for the basement (1st floor) tenants. If you laook at the approved drawings, you will see how the garage roof line creates a claustrophbic feeling when you look out the base- ment (1st floor) windows. To alleviate this problem, we propose to build a flat foof (4" min. slope - see drawings) in lieu of the approved gable roof. This would not only better the situation, but allow more natural light into the lower units of the building. If you need any more information or have any questions, please call me at 248 -2471. Sincerely, Jeff Heintz Production Coordinator JH:mj Encl. r SC•HN•E1•245 P8 • . 1CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I .1) Recreation Building - The top of the ,Recreation Building needs to drop from elevation of ;: 5`'to 192.5% This can be done by either dropping the first floor elevation or reducing the foot height. 2) Trash /Recycle Area Sheet #3 - The screening detail needs to be revised to use the same siding materials as the garages. • 3) Landscape Plan - Due to the changes proposed, modifications are needed to the landscape plan. See redline plans for changes. CRYSTAL RIDGE # PERMIT FILE 89 -362 THRU 89 -368 'O : ^ROM: JACK PACE SENIOR PLANNER 1TE: DECEMBER 31, 199 INFORMATION ITEMS 1) BUILDING PERMIT CONDITIONS No more than 50% of the uncovered recreation space requirement may be located on slopes greater than four horizontal to one vertical slope: The slope of off - (street parking spaces shall not exceed five percent. Foundation locations and elevations will be checked by surveyor before construction begins. December 17, 1992 TO: Crystal Ridge File FROM: Jack Pace, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Summary of revisions MAJOR CHANGES The following changes were approved by the BAR on June 25, 1992. * Recreation Building; this building was moved 10' to the south and 23' to the east and square footage reduced from 2,100 square feet to 1,542 square feet. * Recreation Area; reduced 58 square feet from 17,753 to 17,695 square feet; minimum required is 14,400 square feet. MINOR CHANGES The following changes were reviewed by the BAR on November 18, 1992 and approved by staff. * Windows; substitute bronze aluminum frame windows with light brown vinyl trim to meet new energy code. * Railing system; substitute a steel railing for aluminum railing system painted the same color. * Interior walls; wall changes on A, B or C units to meet handicap accessible codes. * Fireplace; change wood burning fireplaces to heatilator gas fireplace - this removes the need for chimney. * Siding; change from cedar siding to "L.P. Interseal" beveled siding and fire treated. * Trash Area next Building F -1; relocated to northeast corner of garages with parking area moved 8 feet to the south. * Garages; 5 carport converted to 5 garages. * Carports; 3 carports converted to 3 parking spaces. (All carports eliminated) * Building changes: open trellis converted to skylights in stairways. Add sprinkler equipment building for buildings C, D, & E, Fl & F2. Decks widened on the second floor for buildings A, B, C, D, & E. Windows; change configuration of windows muttins and window location next to decks, and bedroom windows facing parking areas. Offsets; eliminate the one foot arrow design offset elevation for buildings. '. * Landscape changes; add landscaping in the following areas: in front of electrical panels. Along NE corner retaining walls. Along NE corner of trash screening. Along NW corner of retaining walls. At storm drain access aisle that was deleted. :.�w' ids": �; T' isii3�;• t: �l; t:<; 15.>•}'; m: �C: :r;�:::rx,..,.:rr.E.v ^.aunsza. Y:n: D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. / 101 • KIRKLAND, WA 98033 10604 N.E. 38TH PLACE, SUITE 2 (06) 827 -3063 • TOLL FREE (Washington State) 1 -800- 962 -1402 • FAX NUMBER (206) 827 -2423 December 2, 1993 Mr. Carl Bloss Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 _.,.._..........,........... �.. �r,. w,.. wr+ aw..«», a..:...... o.,.-...»..+......... �.. �..+.. w.. esu+ wnw+ w. aso+... �av+ w, e. r+ a., .,:........m.....,......w_.... ..........IC.nx.c< Re: Crystal Ridge Condominiums Recreational Building Roof Elevation Dear Carl: 92142 200 We are writing in regard to the above project and the roof elevation of the Recreational Building (Building G). At your request we have surveyed the elevation and determined that it is 192.19 at its highest point. We gathered and reduced the information today. We have performed this survey using the datum shown on the approved Project Plans. It is our understanding that this information is required as a condition of final project approval and that you will convey this information to the appropriate City staff or to any other interested parties. Sincerely, D.R. STRONG Consulti gineers, Inc. Donald J. DJH:pj 1, P.E. T :•V92192I421ROOFDOC • Gtiu:RRL1.Vvia:'u'G`lintf 46,1 Y.utig•/ • MRK /cc Enclosures cc: Rick Beeler (w /enc.) John McFarland (w /enc.) CRYSTAL.001 • «, .......• 4430;..4e w.ien ar:vrtcvxaaoxvonaae7a:y +w t.. rk+ v.. wirvnranraw acui .1w+.seti4MIT +ttlaa 62711P rem VJc.0.001,4J4ha.rAcodo +irtrie x.,rv. erilWIMIM?6Y. C_ City of Tukwila Office of the City Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Pace FROM: Michael R. Kenyon, City Attorney "ta RE: Robert Erickson /Crystal Ridge Condominiums DATE: November 23, 1992 John W. Rants, Mayor Michael 1Z Kenyon, City Attorney Attached is a copy of a letter received last Thursday from Brian Russell, an attorney representing Robert Erickson, the Sunwood owner who has previously expressed his dissatisfaction with the Crystal Ridge project. Please provide any comments that you have. RECEIVED NOV 2 51992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 4311867 • Fax (206) 433.1833 November 18, 1992 Mr. Michael Kenyon Tukwila City Attorney 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 BRIAN P. RUSSELL ATTORNEY AT LAW 142 S.W. 153rd SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98166 (206) 244-3200 Re: My clients: Mr. and Mrs. Robert Erickson Crystal Ridge Condominium Project RECEIVED w,Qy 1 1992 OV CF i GlC' i ICE CAW A'ITORMY S 0' ` Dear Mr. Kenyon: At the recent meeting between you, Mr. Erickson, Mayor Rants and myself, I indicated I would provide a letter to you outlining Mr. and Mrs. Erickson's claim with the City of Tukwila and the basis for this claim. I apologize for not providing you this letter sooner, but I have been in several trials recently which have delayed this letter. Mr. and Mrs. Erickson's claim against the City of Tukwila is that the Crystal Ridge Condominium project as constructed does not meet the conditions of approval by the City of Tukwila for the project. I don't feel that I need to go into great detail on the claim by Mr. and Mrs. Erickson since Mr. Erickson has discussed his claim with the Tukwila City Council on July 27, 1992 at which time Mr. Erickson was advised that a fact finding mission would be undertaken to address his concerns. At that time, Mr. Erick- son discussed the lack of flaggers at Crystal Ridge Condominiums; secondly, that the building'id not meet the proximity re- quirements; and, thirdly, that the condominiums did not meet . the elevation specifications. Mr. Erickson 'as on numerous occasions discussed this issue and claim with the City of Tukwila Building Department. The Erickson's basic claim is that the existing elevation of the Crystal Ridge Condominium project is in excess of what was approved by the City of Tukwila. On August 3, 1992, you informed the Council and Mr. Erickson that a letter with exhibits would be sent to Mr. Erickson and others that would show how the Crystal Ridge Condominium project deve- loped over time. Finally, at the August 10, 1992 Tukwila City Council meeting, Mr. Jack Pace made a presentation indicating that the BAR in 1990 had approved an elevation height limit of Buildings F1 and F2 of 201 feet. According to Mr. Pace and the developers' engineer and surveyor, these buildings stand at 201 feet. Prior to his purchase of his condominium in the Sunwood Condominiums, Mr. Erickson checked with Mr. Pace and the DCD to Mr. Michael Kenyon November 18, 1992 Page Two verify the height of the proposed buildings. Mr. Erickson's his condominium was based on the information provided QmvErchasLof which has now be en found to be in error Mr. Rick Beeler, Director of the Department of Community Develop- ment, provided Mr. Erickson a letter dated August 7, 1992 out- lining the City's position and history related to Buildings F1 and F2 of Crystal Ridge Condominiums. Mr. Beeler provided attachments to his August 7, 1992 letter referred to as Attach- ments A through F. Attachment F to Mr. Beeler's letter are the conditions of approval to the Crystal Ridge Condominiums by the Board of Architectural Review. The Erickson claim is that the Crystal Ridge Condominiums as constructed does not meet the conditions of approval outlined by the Board of Architectural Review and specifically that as constructed the Crystal Ridge Condominiums. Buildings do not meet the revised site design contained in Attachment EE3. As indicated in our meeting, I would like to cite to you the two recent Washington Supreme Court cases relating to land use regulations. The first case is Sintra, Inc. v. the City of Seattle, 119 Wn.2d 1 (1992). In the Sintra case, the plaintiffs brought an action against the City of Seattle alleging inverse condemnation. I won't try to summarize the entire case. In Sintra, the land use regulations by the City of Seattle consti- tuted a regulatory taking of a property right and a denial of substantive due process. Further, the plaintiffs made a claim under the 42 U.S.C. §1983 for civil rights violation by the City of Seattle in that the defendant's regulatory taking deprived the plaintiffs of a right protected by federal, constitution or statute and thus deprived the plaintiffs of a federal civil right. Next, in the case of Lutheran Day Care v. Snohomish County, 119 Wn.2d 91 (1992), the court citing RCW 60.40.020(1) stated that there is an action for damages for land use decisions made by a governmental agency which are arbitrary, capricious, unlawful or exceed lawful authority. I also indicated that I would advise you of the Erickson's claim for damages. Mr. and Mrs. Erickson's claim is based on the damage to the fair market value of their condominium caused by Mr. Michael Kenyon November 18, 1992 Page Three the excessive height or elevation of Building F of Crystal Ridge Condominiums. Mr. and Mrs. Erickson believe that the fair market value of their condominium has been diminished by $9,000 due to the excessive height of Buildings F1 and F2 of the Crystal Ridge Condominiums. I will attach hereto and incorporate herein by this reference a marketing flyer by the Crystal Ridge Condo- miniums indicating a difference in values in the condominiums on the second and third floor in Buildings F of $9,000 being the difference between $117,500 for a third floor unit and $108,500 for a second floor unit. The floor plans for the units on the second and third floor of Crystal Ridge Condominiums are exactly the same so the only basis for a difference in market value is the difference in view or elevation of the unit. In conclusion, Mr. and Mrs. Erickson believe that the City of Tukwila failed to enforce its own terms and conditions of permit approval as contained in Attachment F to Mr. Beeler's letter. As a consequence, Mr. and Mrs. Erickson have been damaged in diminu- tion in value of their condominium. Mr. and Mrs. Erickson would make a claim of $9,000. I would appreciate your providing your response to the undersigned at the above address. It cc: Mr. and Mrs. Robert Erickson Encl. MEMORANDUM TO: CRYSTAL RIDGE APT. FILE FROM:RSB DATE:9 /10/92 SUBJECT: SUMMARY & COMMENTS TO REVISIONS OF 3SEPT92 ***************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 1. CARPORT UNDER PERMIT 6575 & 6573 HAVE BEEN DELETED. 2. GARAGE UNDER PERMIT 6560 CHANGED FROM 5 -CAR TO 7 -CAR GARAGE. 3. CARPORT UNDER PERMIT 6576 DELETED. 4. CARPORT UNDER PERMIT 6574 DELETED. 5. RE: GARAGES UNDER PERMITS 6571 & 6572, MAX. ALLOWABLE AREA FOR THESE M -1 OCC. = 3000 SF. CONSEQUENTLY, THE TWO WALLS FACING THE 6 FOOT ACCESS YARD WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE OF ONE HOUR FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION. okL 6. NORTH & WEST ELEVATIONS OF BUILDING "E" : CHANGED LOCATION OF WINDOWS AT ONE ROOM - SIZE AND TYPE UNCHANGED. `Ij L' j .-_ __PR0P.ANE _SANK- INSTALLAT-IONS_AND_SECUR ITY EENCES==A " NE & SW CORNERS OF SITE ARE 8. SIDING MATERIALS ARE NOT CALLED OUT ON SHEET 22, '�=' TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION CALL -OUTS FOR BUILDINGS OR FOR GARAGES. WILL REQUIRE THIS TO BE NOTED! 9. REC BUILDING SIDING IS NOTED AS BEVELED CEDAR. O.K.? 10. SKYLIGHTS TO REPLACE TRELLIS OVER ENTRY STAIRS. SINCE BUILDER HAS EXTENDED THE TRUSSES OVER THIS AREA AS OPPOSED TO USING HEAVY TIMBER TRELLIS, THE SOFFIT OF THIS AREA MUST BE PROTECTED AS REQUIRED FOR FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIRED AT ROOF /CEILING ASSEMBLIES. WILL NOTE TO PLAN. 011. TRELLISES OVER EXTERIOR DECKS HAVE BEEN DELETED. 12. ALL FUEL BURNING FIRE PLACES HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY `4. DIRECT VENTED L.P. GAS BURNING F.P. UNITS, AND ALL EXTERIOR CHIMNEYS HAVE BEEN DELETED. 13. NOTE: DOOR MARKED "C" (UNIT ENTRY DOOR) WAS NOTED AS A ONE HOUR F.R. ASSEMBLY. REVISED PLANS HAS THIS NOTATION REMOVED. THIS REMAINS A REQUIREMENT. CRYSTAL RIDGE MEMO 9/10/92 PAGE 2 14. PROTECTION OF WINDOW AT NEW BDRM MUST BE INVESTIGATED. SHEET #1 SHEET #2 1. Index to Drawings: Index has been revised to simplify numbering system 2. Parking: Number of garages and surface stalls have been changed to get one garage per unit instead of shared garages 3. Area Calculations: Area calculations have been revised to reflect changes in garages 4. Site Plan: Unit Buildings have been revised slightly. Garages have been added, carports have been removed. Recreation Building has been revised. Sport Court has been revised. 2. 5 car garages has been increased to 7 3. Cross walk has been added SHEET #3 1. 8 car garages increased to 10 cars 2. Unit buildings slightly revised SHEET #4 - #7 1. Unit buildings has been slightly revised SHEET #8 RECEIVED AUG 1 81992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. Recreation Building and Sport Court have been revised 1. Foundation plan has been revised to coordinate with floor plan changes 2. Basement plan /1st floor framing - Building lines have been slightly revised - Framing has been revised to accomodate enlarged decks SHEET #9 1. 1st & 2nd floor framing plans - Building lines have been slightly revised 2. Roof framing has been corrected to reflect actual roof lines SHEETS #10 - #11 1. Same changes as sheets 8 & 9 2. New roof plans added for clarification SHEET #12 1. Unit A: - Floor plan revised per Fair Housing Act - Bedroom added SHEET #13 - #14 1. Unit B: - Floor plan revised per Fair Housing Act SHEET #15 1. Unit HC: - North wall slightly revised to reflect changes in units per Fair Housing Act SHEET #16 - #22 1. Elevations have been revised to reflect changes in floor plans per Fair Housing Act 2. Gables have been extended to corners of buildings 3. Sheets #17 - #21 have been eliminated as unnecessary SHEET #22A 1. #22A is now sheet 27; Roof slopes have been revised SHEET #22B 1. Has been eliminated SHEET #23 1. #23 is now Recreation building foundation plan • SHEET #31 SHEET #32 1. #32 is now sheet #28 SHEET #24 1. #24 is now Recreation building floor plan SHEET #25 1. #25 is now Recreation building elevations SHEET #26 1. #26 is now Recreation building sections SHEET #27 1. #27 is now building & garage sections SHEET #28 1. #28 is now garage floor plan 2. Garage have been given private access to each stall SHEET #29 1. #29 is now sheet #31, no revisions 2. Sheets #29 - #30 have been eliminated SHEET #30 1. #30 is now sheet #34 - cabinet elevations have been eliminated - Door & Window schedules have been revised to reflect changes per Fair Housing Act 1. #31 is now sheet R1 with changes reflecting those of Site plan 2. New sheet #32 is retaining wall elevations (old sheet #31) SHEET #33 1. #33 is now sheet #32 (retaining wall elevs.) 2. Sheet #33 is now Site sections, no changes SHEET #34 1. Site sections now sheet #33 2. Sheet #34 is now Door & Window Schedules SHEET #35 1. Has been eliminated (was carport details) August 7, 1992 Robert Erickson 15209 Sunwood Blvd. #B -24 Tukwila, WA 98188 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Subject: Crystal Ridge Condominiums Dear Mr. Erickson: This letter is in response to your concerns as to whether the building heights of Crystal Ridge buildings F1 and F2 comply with the approved set of building permit plans. I would like to respond in detail to your concerns by first reviewing the history of this project. As I and others have done already, let me again assure you that nobody on staff is attempting to do anything but see that this project is built according to the plans approved by the Board of Architectural Review. To that end we have reviewed the extensive file on this development and found that the building setbacks and heights substantially conform to that approval and the approved building permit. We also found that erroneous building crossections understating the approved height by 3 1/2 feet, were included in the building permit application. These crossections are what Jack Pace reviewed with you prior to approval of the building permit, but were not the buildings F1 and F2 total height dimensions relied upon for that permit. The crossections had not been revised by the architect to conform to the Board of Architectural Review's approval and the rest of the building permit application. BACKGROUND: John W. Rants, Mayor When this project (Crystal Ridge Apartments) was originally proposed and heard by the Board of Architectural Review, buildings F1 and F2 were one building. Attachment A is the staff report prepared for that public hearing. Based upon public comments, Attachment B June 28, 1990 BAR minutes, the hearing was continued to provide an opportunity for the applicant to respond to public comments. The addendum staff report attachment C noted on page 3 that the peak elevation for building F would increase from an elevation of 197.5 to 201. Attachment D contains Sunwood's response to Attachment C, in which no concern was raised about the new 201 foot building elevation of building F. Based upon the comments by the consultant representing Sunwood Condominiums, the applicant moved 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Page 2 building E to the west and separated building F into two buildings. The BAR approved the changes on August 9, 1990 (Attachment E); attachment F contains the conditions of approval. Sunwood Condominium Association appealed the decision to the City Council without raising an issue of the height of building F, but prior to the public hearing date, Sunwood withdrew their appeal. Based upon the BAR decision, the approved height for buildings Fl and F2 is 201. The site plans, grading plan and utility plan reflect the change in height. However, the cross section that you reviewed did not reflect the approved change in height. The Sunwood Condominium Association reviewed those plans in the building permit, and also did not discover the discrepancy, prior to issuance of the permit. SURVEY: During construction, and in response to your concerns, we had the applicant's consulting engineer and licensed surveyor, D.R. Strong, checked the elevations. The survey indicated Fl is at 201.40 and F2 is at 201. The City Attorney advised staff that no action should be taken on the minor .40 of foot deviation because the amount of deviation is insignificant, within normal survey accuracy parameters, or may be eliminated by normal settling of the buildings. At this point there appears, unfortunately, to be nothing more that we can do to reduce the height of these buildings because they conform to all applicable requirements. If you should have further questions, either Jack Pace or I will be available to meet with you to answer any further questions. Sincerely, Rick Beeler Director, Dept. of Community Development P.S. This week the contractor proposed revisions to the approved building permit. Those revisions are modifications of some building elevations, which we are now reviewing relative to whether or not they require approval by the Board of Architecture Review. Jack or I will keep you informed of the status of our decision, but feel free to stop by to review the proposal. August 5, 1992 Dear Mr. Schneider: Sincerely, S ack Pace Senior Planner cc: Duane Griffin Building Official r W OWN City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Dale Schneider SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permit # 6543 -6563 tait John W. Rants, Mayor This letter is in response to the revised plans submitted on July 31, 1992. Upon my review of the plans, the exterior changes proposed for Buildings A, B, C, D, E, Fl, and F2 will require (BAR) Board of Architectural Review approval prior to completing building permit review. The revised building permit plans will be sent back to you until BAR approval is completed. You may want to submit revised plans for the Recreation Building, which does have BAR approval. Please be advised that no further building construction inspections will be accomplished for anything except work approved and shown on the approved plans. If you should have any further questions, please feel free to call or write. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 Dear Mr. Schneider: Sincerely, Jack Pace Senior Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director July 27, 1992 Dale Schneider Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permits #6543 -6563 This letter is a follow -up of our conversation on July 28, 1992 regarding the height and design changes to 62nd Ave. S. Condominiums. It appears that buildings Fl and F2 may not comply with the building height approved by the Board of Architectural Review. Further construction work on these two buildings is at your own risk until this issue is resolved. As discussed, you will have a surveyor check the elevations of buildings E, Fl, and F2, as well as, check the cross - section on page 34 of approved plans and page 2 -7 of the grading plans. It is important that this issue be resolved as soon as possible. In addition to the building height issue, any building change proposed needs City approval prior to construction. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to call. ■ 4 John W. Rants, Mayor Hand Delivered 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 o Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 June 18, 1992 Mr. H. C. Bloss Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Bloss: City of Tukwila RE: Proposed Administrative Changes to Crystal Ridge Condominium John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director This letter is to respond to your request for approval of six changes or substitutions of materials for the residential development known as Crystal Ridge. 1. The proposed substitution of Heatilator Gas Fireplaces for the wood burning units is appropriate. My approval is based on the minimal exterior change in appearance to the project and the reduction in air pollution from gas fires compared to wood. 2. The change of siding from cedar to vinyl is not appropriate. First, the fire rating of the proposed vinyl siding is not the same as the previously approved treated cedar siding. Second the proposed vinyl does not have the same color or texture as the approved siding. I will not approve this substitution of materials administratively. 3. The proposed change is from the "Dryvit" stucco system to Weyerhauser Adobe Hardboard Siding. I am willing to approve a substitution of another commercial stucco system so that you can have competitive bids from different suppliers. The surface texture of the hardboard is very different and will require trim at the joints between panels. The stucco system will not require these same joints. 4. The proposed change is to substitute windows with vinyl trim for the previously approved Bronze Aluminum framed windows. The goal of increased energy conservation is important. I am willing to consider change in the window frame system from the bronzed aluminum to vinyl. However, I want to see a sample or brochure to see the vinyl color. My goal would be to have a vinyl material in a dark brown to approximate the previously approved bronzed aluminum. 5. The proposed change is to substitute a steel railing system painted green for an aluminum railing system painted the same color. I see no reason not to allow the substitution of the underlying material as long as the dark green color approved by the Board of Architectural Review is retained. This change is approved. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Sincerely, n Jack Pace Senior Planner. Page 2 6. The proposal is to rearrange some of the interior walls in several of the units. These changes do not change the exterior envelope of the buildings. Therefor I will approve the alterations. I do want you to understand that the City does have a process for changing previously approved building construction sets. You will need to fill out a "Revision Submittal" form at the counter and pay some review fees. If you have any questions on any of these items, please contact me. u a- ____ -• =7= , North Elevation rS • < - • • C.:. r .e crn) Sc.a E Vt' . 1 -d " i V i L `— T-1 I!. • West Elevation 77721 r 2 f — „ South ,Elevation_ ; East Elevation. 1,+ . I .d Coax W. I i•o' :1 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWlLA J U.N 1 0 1992 PERMIT CENTER i 1 l 5 11101 • NIL SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS TUKWILA, WA ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES JUNE 5, 1992 Change wood burning fireplaces to "Heatilator GC100E Gas Fireplace" (see brochure attached) 2. Change cedar siding to "Sauder Triple 3" Vinyl Siding in satin finish (see sample) Change Dryvit Stucco System at exterior deck to "Weyerhauser Adobe Hardboard Siding" (see sample) Change Bronze Aluminum Windows to Vinyl Windows to meet new energy code. Change green aluminum railing to steel railings, primed, and painted green. Wall changes on A, B & C units to meet handicap accessible codes and make better use of living space. SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS TUKWILA, WA ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES JUNE 5, 1992 1. Change wood burning fireplaces to "Heatilator GC100E Gas Fireplace" (see brochure attached) RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUN 5 192 PERMIT CENTER 2. Change cedar siding to "Sauder Triple 3" Vinyl Siding in satin finish (see sample) 3. Change Dryvit Stucco System at exterior deck to "Weyerhauser Adobe Hardboard Siding" (see sample) 4. Change Bronze Aluminum Windows to Vinyl Windows to meet new energy code. 5. Change green aluminum railing to steel railings, primed, and painted green. 6. Wall changes on A, B & C units to meet handicap accessible codes and make better use of living space. ' heatilator // 11,2 Mc' cP /re Zcptak'<2.1 C1100akfite■ '..ittlfett_ • :X111,41;41 '141: ) 1?'71,1t4 ;sr.. h re• "‘. ' Big fireplace appearance in a compact installation. • Big 34" x 17" single -pane glass front for generous fire viewing area. • Ceramic fiber log set glows brightly as flames wrap around them. • Variable venting system and a minimal 16" depth let you tuck this fireplace into the corner of any room. Easy operation. Exceptional efficiency. • Wall switch for easy starting. • Electronic direct -spark ignition for ease of operation and fuel economy. • Fixed -glass front increases heat output and boosts efficiency to 65 %. Simple installation means greater flexibility. • Flexible gas connection for easy hook -up. • Frames in and finishes with conventional con- struction materials. • Integral electrical junction box simplifies installation. 71091A 6 -91 50M NATURAL GAS BURNING AND LP GAS DIRECT VENT FIREPLACE From patio level to the penthouse, entertaining installations are easy, attractive and warming. Luxuriate in the warmth, beauty and romance of a GC100 gas fireplace in almost any room. From the base- ment to the bath, in a house or a high -rise, this direct vent fireplace can operate in places where other fireplaces could not possibly be installed. Forget conventional chimney installations. This fireplace has a top vent with 90- degree elbow and extension pipe which vents directly through the wall whether it's installed against an interior or exterior wall. These venting options make the visual impact of a fireplace possible in almost any situation you can imagine. Enjoy the romantic glow and large flickering flames created by the ceramic fiber log set and 22,500 Btu input burner. With Heatilator's wall switch - activated direct spark ignition, your gas fireplace starts warming the room instantly. • A 90- degree elbow, 2' vent pipe section and venting cap permit a variety of installations. • A.G.A. and C.G.A. Certified. 1 -year Limited Warranty. Features Options • Hand -held remote control for the last word in convenient operation (RC5). • Fan kit for distributing heated air (FK8). • Trim kit enhances the appearance and adds to the visual impact of the fireplace (TK9B). • Installations along interior walls are possible using vent pipe extensions (maximum horizon- tal extension 11', maximum vertical extension 6'). (VK4). UNIT DIMENSIONS 16" s! j ," .1_ 30" 264" I 261/2" Lj heatilator® Thzxaithameutkv,eaex4 FIRESIDE, INC. 18862 72nd Ave. So. Kent, WA 98032 -1041 (206) 251 -9447 1- 800 - 660 -8845 FIRESDW132CJ Framing Dimensions Front width 40" Header height 32" Depth 1 6'12" re 34' Technical ins. Installation requirements may be subject to local building codes Alt Slot it.••••■•■•, 3.1.4C.4 II rt; s_ Vg4t■wir. • ...(4,1..11 Recreational Space(E retnrf • I* : 4.-171:4 , r. 112 ;1 rAlft:i ■11.7 i ri n :::: : : : t,::,.. ....-:: ..1 .wd,,A1 Illf ,' • 'Ai I.SMI Pa •+.4, .I■Ls :Ili „ ,f, ii.711j 7 ":1:-M.S.e.'""' •M-r- M ..;:fi 6.v.. f t trI14 pliatoritri trii.■ plokatt L.....,'!E /0,..!:e0 tr... __. ___-._........ ____. _..... VAI Paai - r.b. +Ft ■ :1 MAY 2 7 1992 oil OF I OKWILA PLANNING DEPT. WI Of IIII1NA A14'11011[11 I 101 I WI • MIS .- 1111 nail wenn-- Recreational Space _ SeY 100 - - 4YrE'e T< Th. 17 • u 11601160 < l R1 9 -I2-I 11005 0 8 1$ SCALE 1 .• 8 5' LAND CAPE SETBAC TWA - N 88'25 W Ibt r.. Jr 2 • 113W 5' ."‘" BS I (WES:04 • _ fr • -• 13.1••••••• I .11.04.01•, • S. • , j Building 1 G Recreation Building I EMERGENCY • ACCESS • 150.00' • A ..CV1 'a • • `*-• =Le/ • , (DP 13EFIDgE EXISTING CURB (TYP) 8' BUILDING SETBACK (TYP) - • DEDUNc13100: FFIC TONS EW CURB -\ ial.Plan EXISTING EDGE OF SIDEWALK aiT orwu APPOOM I 17413/1 • o c e Is SCALD 7r. 5' LAND CA r SETBAC{ ;TYP : °. ,. �.._",N 882527 W • I 1 NO • • jj1 °Rec. Hui ding 1542 SF • e ,FF -- 177.0 .,.1. 11_. , I ♦.. • 1: 1 ..rl 4 1 1 • • — Freg 150.00' .1 EMERGENCY .� ACCESS EXISTING CURB (TYP)1 8' BUILDING SETBACK (TYP) /ir. YH.�1.T ✓1 ®P • FFIC TONS 1 NEW \ORB iaI PIanA EXISTING EDGE OF SIDE J "L- 2 I-1342 soot • • r • • - • r • 3; a. ■•••, -41 —4VA. .• : ■ 41 if 1 mew Iv C rOigdigAtioiTcdfrER E9 lonsT.FLOOR RANI *v.. K.' • NI 1 I •••cl• ..../ • —. ----1 — 1 • , I I P =1 1 13E FO C •• ' frVEST iiiIIVkfloN ...E.AS7[ELEVA1 CI . • J ft 1. , 1 1 i i I I I 1 , . I , , , . I, lftr s. ..IS art el hU *,p,01 e . e c • hi . 73EFE I '1ORTH ELEVATION r• AF1E • e • NFJWr Rmn LO'4CG • s � —...� , .• fa•a T _— If�•C__.__'_. —mss— +� I IS e i 1 _ I.d, I li I — �1 e H i. I I I I Recreation Building Floor Plan 1'.12 e• 24 1-11 -N 111101 • 14) • 4 tL .__I [11] - I . 1 Fin North Elevation East Elevation ...� A FTER • L. - lb_• • West Elevation South Elevation Recreation Building 9 25 II 110 SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS - TUKWILA, WA PROPOSED REVISIONS May 27, 1992 .^ 1. REVISED RECREATIONAL SPACE PLAN. Exchanged children's play area and swimming pool & spa for larger multi- purpose sports court and passive landscape areas. Open recreation required is 14,400 s.f.; 17,695 s.f. will be provided. REASON FOR CHANGE: Play area #1 would be on a 15% slope and in a traffic hazard area along Sunwood Blvd. Play area #2 will remain and is adequate for a condominium project. The swimming pool & spa would create an economic and maintenance burdon for the owners association. 2. REDUCED SIZE OF RECREATION BUILDING. Eliminated basement and rearranged floor and elevation plan. Building area is downsized from 2,100 s.f. to 1,542 s.f. REASON FOR CHANGE: The approved recreation building is larger than necessary to accomodate the future homeowner's functions. Project and maintenance cost reductions will be reflected in the reduced floor area. ' MEM MAY 2 7 1992 CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. ATTACHMENT A . Burnadette Wilson President Sunwood Board of Directors 15255 Sunwood Blvd., Bldg. A -55 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Burnadette: H.C. Bloss Manager of Development and Construction SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. HCB /jc 1 schneider homes, Inc. Subject: Crystal Ridge Condominiums 6510 Southconler Boulevard Suite 4 •Tukwila, WA 98188 •(206) 248.2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 May 28, 1992 Attached is a copy of the proposed revisions that we submitted to the City of Tukwila BAR. You will be receiving a notice of the meeting date. I expect that it will be near the end of June. If you have any concerns over any of these revisions, we should get together soon. In regards to your letter dated April 22, 1992, Item 10: The road will be rebuilt according to the recorded settlement agreement. The storm water system has been designed to control surface runoff, and not pick up spring water. The sports court will be recessed 4', fenced and not lighted. The dumpsters will have wood walls and roofs. We have proposed deletion of play area #1 to the city. Play area #2 will remain. We will fence or landscape as required to separate the properties. Please feel free to give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, SC- HN•E1•245 P8 SCHNEIDER HOMES,'INC. CRYSTAL RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS - TUKWILA, WA PROPOSED REVISIONS May 27, 1992 . 1. REVISED RECREATIONAL SPACE PLAN. Exchanged children's play area and swimming pool & spa for larger multi - purpose sports court and passive landscape areas. Open recreation required is 14,400 s.f.; 17,695 s.f. will be provided. REASON FOR CHANGE: Play area #1 would be on a 15% slope and in a traffic hazard area along Sunwood Blvd. Play area #2 will remain and is adequate for a condominium project. The swimming pool & spa would create an economic and maintenance burdon for the owners association. 2. REDUCED SIZE OF RECREATION BUILDING. Eliminated basement and rearranged floor and elevation plan. Building area is downsized from 2,100 s.f. to 1,542 s.f. REASON FOR CHANGE: The approved recreation building is larger than necessary to accomodate the future homeowner's functions. Project and maintenance cost reductions will be reflected in the reduced floor area. MEM L MAY2 71992 CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. ATTACHMENT A KING COUN --r DEPT. OF ASSESSMENTS N 06•AS•t7 N 300.44 71o70e 1079 1330.01 4h %r7 43 1481 47 1.44 80 N09.47N 11"1040317 N84•MW •IN J Q Q N LOT I cO ek-* a 7.44 11 TE- ( P) tl4^RY 0 �rQre 1,.. • SR "`t.,, see NE Y4 1326. 9 rTU8 44 S 10 lot 3 lot 4 000 i i‘ 0% 6;' IIJ.N 01.81 , 118 t � • • .000.04 he 0 OtO N ;a1.r/ N9 1 3er, oat 141.43 N91 •Ste 2 r DLO 0 •a■rrq►n••• n v 0 0 0 0 THIS MAP IS THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING k. JCATING YOUR PROPERTY AND IS NOT GUARANTEED TO SHOW ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS, 0 • 1 �•`- 1d 1474 +100 • e4 • 47 // .450 15 NE 23 -23-4 19 0 • � 1 n z N •7 � ° i N 0 N ., 4 4 • P' A w4 ' ln" 153RD S' 1 1710 . j, Mr. Gerald E. Schneider President Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Meeting April 13, 1992 between Schneider Homes, Inc. and Sunwood Board of Directors Dear Mr. Schneider: C E R T I F I E D 15 Sunwood Blvd., Bldg A55 Tukwila, WA 98188 April 22, 1988 I f,.=,'►' 01 1992 FLiNNi t; DEPT. As a result of the above - referenced meeting, these are the areas upon which we agreed: 1. Schneider Homes, Inc. will build condominiums, not apartments, on the 62nd Ave. South property. Schneider has not yet applied for Covenants and Restrictions from State of Washington. 2. We understand you have changed the original plans by a. adding a Sports Court in the NW corner of the property. We are concerned with the amount of activity this will bring right next to our prop- erty and about the noise level - -- especially at night. Will the Sports Court be lit for night play? b. reducing the density and height of landscaping between the two properties. Again, we are con- cerned re: noise. If landscaping is lowered, our view will be of your parking lot, rather than greenery. 3. Schneider agrees to keep access road open to Sunwood home- owners at all times except, for example, the occasions when a cement truck might block the road briefly while turning around. 4. After 5 :00 P.M. all road holes will be filled in or covered and plenty of light will be provided for roadway. 5. Schneider will show to Sunwood Board the plans for the entrance sign before Schneider completes sign. 6. Schneider Homes, Inc. will not refer to Sunwood Condominiums III in any advertising whatsoever. Crystal Ridge is in no way connected with Sunwood. Everyone at the meeting agreed the two properties are to be kept totally separate. To: Gerald Schneid, . April 22, 1992 . 1 From: Sunwood B.O.D. Page Two 7. It is understood by all that no resident of Crystal Ridge may use the Sunwood pool, Jacuzzi, Sunwood tennis court or parking. 8. Sunwood Board of Directors expressed concern regarding the proposed Children's playfield. We question the need for it if you are building condominiums. If you do put in play areas, we would like them as far away from our complex as possible. 9. Schneider will save light poles in the center road median for Sunwood use at back of Sunwood property. 10. Schneider agreed to get back to us with these decisions: a. How they will deal with re- building of road. b. If they will be putting in new detention tanks to control spring water. c. How they will treat the Sport Court, or if they will cancel it. Will Schneider consider high fence or wall that sends noise back down toward Crystal Ridge? d. What treatment will be used to enclose the dumpsters so that the Sunwood view is not of garbage? e. What play area treatment is planned? f. Sunwood would like some involvement in your method of separating the properties. 11. Schneider will provide Sunwood with drawings of any amenities or changes they are taking to the Architectural Board. Mr. Schneider, please get back to us within 48 hours if you feel my understanding of these matters is not correct, or if any of my statements need clarification. Many of these items are conditions of the City's approval, not just those upon which we agreed. We enjoyed meeting with Carl Bloss and Dale Schneider and felt they were most cooperative. Let us hear from you soon. Yours truly, SUNWOOD BOARD OF DIRECTORS /c. Z C� QG c�GL i t (tiLeL4 / L. � Burnadette Wilson, President cc: Carl Bloss LTukwila Planning Dept. 15 Sunwood Blvd., Bldg A55 Tukwila, WA 98188 April 22, 1988 it � //4 - pia A /;)/ I n ... `)/11 f) t APR 2 4 R� r As a result of the above - referenced meeting, these are the areas upon which we agreed: 1. Schneider Homes, Inc. will build condominiums, not apartments, on the 62nd Ave. South property. Schneider has not yet applied for Covenants and Restrictions from State of Washington. 2. We understand you have changed the original plans by a. adding a Sports Court in the NW corner of the property. We are concerned with the amount of activity this will bring right next to our prop- erty and about the noise level - -- especially at night..,.-Will the Sports Court be lit for night play?'//`:: .� b. reducing the density and height of landscaping between the two properties. Again, we are con- cerned re: noise. If landscaping is lowered, our view will be og your parkiing . Jot , rp.ther than greenery. Ua�r�� "- '��L {� f� :,,�c�r; �...:. ��' :�f. .- .;ice -. y(_, 3. Schneider agrees to keep access road open to Sum. "odd home- owners at all times except, for example, the occasions when a cement truck might block the road briefly while turning around . .;;.Q4'. After 5:06 P.M. all road holes will be filled in or covered and plenty of light will be provided for roadway,://c4- 5. Schneider will show to Sunwood Board the plans entrance sign before Schneider completes 6. Schneider Homes, Inc. will not refer to Sunwood Condominiums III in any advertising whatsoever. Crystal Ridge is in no way connected with Sunwood. Everyone at the meeting, agreed the two properties are to be kept totally separate. /v Yours truly, To: Gerald Schneider From: Sunwood B.O.D. - 7. It is understood by all that no resident of Crystal Ridge may use the Sunwood pool, Jacuzzi, Sunwood tennis court or parking. 7J 8. Sunwood Board of Directors expressed concern regarding the proposed Children's playfield. We question the need for it if you are building condominiums. If you do put in play P areas , we would like the � as far away from our .,complex as ,1 0 possible . J C�j 'L st : A L P- /.,...:.d..t.C.il.c.t'. -\ tt. %, .C� "�� a :.r.: -,cam f C n � ! Alt-0 • 9. Schneider will save light poles in the center road median `7 G' for Sunwood use at back of Sunwood pro ert .< �� 10. Schneider. agreed to get back to us with these d a. How they will deal with re- building of road. b. If they will be putting in new detention tanks to control spring water. c . How they will treat the Sport Court , or if they will cancel it. Will Schneider consider high fence or wall that sends noise back down toward Crystal Ridge ?)LL�� d . +That treatment will be used to enclose the dumpsters L.Uo so that the Sunwood view is not of gar age? e. What play area treatment is planned? i't - f . Sunwood would like some involvement ii otur.. method of separating the properties . �/ r 64, l/- a^`e 11. Schneider will provide Sunwood with drawings of any amenities or changes they are taking to the Architectural Board. lir. Schneider, please get back to us within 48 hours if you feel my understanding of these matters is not correct, or if any of my statements need clarification. Many of these items are conditions of the City's approval, not just those upon which we agreed. We enjoyed meeting with Carl Bloss and Dale Schneider and felt they were most cooperative. Let us hear from you soon. SUNWOOD BOARD OF DIRECTORS Burnadette Wilson, President cc: Carl Bloss Tukwila Planning Dept. April 22, 1992 Page Two I• CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D °-- _.._._.BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW nEW D SIGN IEVIEW 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOURPROPOSAL: Revised Crystal Ridge site plan. Project is under construction with approved plans. 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) 15310 Sunwood Blvd., Tukwila Quarter: SE Section: 23 Township: 23 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT:* Name: H.C. Bloss Address. 6510 Southcenter Blvd,. Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone. 248 -2471 Signature: 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. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 4. PROPERTY Name: Schneider Homes, Inc. OWNER PLICATION 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 Address: 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 248 -2471 I /WE,[signature(s)] swear that I /we are the owner(s) or contract purchaser(s) of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: 7— fly 1-1 ∎.r J u► Mu ,tUIL'L' I ulUAL 1►1.YILYY DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION t CRITERIA RESPONSE: See attached list of revisions. Changes proposed do not avvect items A, B, C, D or E. 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. 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. Page 2 RESPONSE: See attached list of revisions. Changes proposed do not impact items A, B or C. 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. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION Page 3 3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken. E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encour- aged. F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accom- plished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and summer. G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls, and pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used. H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining land- scape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. RESPONSE: See attached list of revisions. Changes proposed do not impact items A, B, C, D, E, F G or H. 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. ►u V► ►.►►V►►I IILI0 V1►l iL- ► L.... 61_+N DESI N REVIEW APPLICATION C. uilding components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets - should have good pro - ortions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be onsistent with anticipated life of the structure. D. olors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. E. echanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be creened from view. F. xterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all ex- osed accessories should be harmonious with building design. G. onotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of etail, form, and siting should be used to provide visual interest. RES ONSE: See attached list of revisions. Changes proposed do not impact items Page 4 5. ISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE A. i scellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architec- al concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale hould be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and roportions should be to scale. B. ighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. RESPONSE: A, B, C, D, E, F or G. See attnchPd list of prnposPd ravi aj nnq C;hangs fin not impart items A or B, • BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLY` 4TION Page 5 INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area in order to manage the development of this area, to upgrade its general appearance, to provide incentives for compatible uses, to recognize and to capitalize on the benefits to the area of the amenities including the Green River and nearby recreational facilities, to encourage development of more people - oriented use, and to provide for development incentives that will help to spur growth. Please describe how your proposed development relates to the goals for this District. Use additional response space, if necessary. 1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. No change from original BAR review 2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. No change from original BAR review 3. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site pedestrian circu- lation. No change from original BAR review 4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. No change from original BAR review 5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environmental im- pacts. No change from original BAR review 6. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features in the area. No change from original BAR review S iT )4 • r d.J� !Al.-cab • 43) 11,: IIA'.ol -+. SitePlan ! 1 . 4 0... i QY.rs,C■Www 7 t l 111. ltagal tkocripirOn ,'►` r IIiiYYlr3Mtl ..++V W 4 .1• .rr. w •. b.No.. r104 1 I C I3rrr....Nrwt 00711 0.11 u.IMr..r..1lm110001.. , 7 I M I w iC1 W M dorm W. rem ... '1.4., r tTA 1..144 I.bw. tllr. 111•..4 1..0410.•. v.r l.Itlr1 T1pc.1.. W 4 l r w 1411 W K 1. N .1.rv[r lw.l . r4. rrr r • •1 I ;R0.1MSUWlr II b 1•41•• w.4z4 41 Or i, � F jl ' VI O.tl ..a•rM Uw41sM• 7wwa1�1. •• I w .. 4 041 CV, M ,. cl.a, M ..4. Nw0 .tl/. i } un LL i I 1 W1rU 9.114441 YAA m.prM t 1 • , w. i nulo �1 t . ►40.p3o4.,..�. ma m ....•r•1 r. 6.9 p.wr f1 _ 1 hr.rti ' .. M 1i l Ot9lw 041; (w Y .y OMi.�N tp r 444, r p. MO rm.14.041 1 N... O M U. roar r..I Cwr• M.. w w Cry M I. . CO. r r... 11009 N Project Data Zoning Code ,4444 40 Sul • 0101.{. 1.41 r 1.••••04 . a4.. .r. W.. Mai. Ma MOM I b.r o l :r ormolus PW 7131tb CT Lw..K Smarm W WI WIN Iw. Mau ▪ I>" IN I. 41 LIMO 41...4.1.4... Vt. . 44.• Wyt, 11 771 ▪ 00011.044001 _ . - 11.4MM.•TrLau Construction Notes r, 1..• 11 N U. or oar • r edit w. 111 wl.. r S. W r w••∎•••.rr..44 w.u4r MN. .4_O.1Re ..14 1 41 rnrw t 206 r0, MASS WIC• f •arr b K' 41944.4040.r. 444 ..4. e'd tW 11.t..1.••Ir. .5-5 b.�i.lo far Building 'Code Cam 'oaf LOC It tr./ loraal -- `Energy Cdtle I • r w l ij .1111.011 IW W A i.a.MWw.b r•tl, • 41.11.•• w •..r 43/4.1 110.010/1 w4•rw..Ar . ..4.r. 404. • 114.«14....4 1pw..•• hao..rrw.4o.1r•0. • • 1..r Y.4.1Y4Y 1.«0441. I1. L.01.•4∎04404.44 roroman000rroas Mam :eu CO. 00904 .117 J.hK FeD7C4..1 ▪ 2.12.1•41:V21a. r2. t••.•. 1.:•• . «•,pan - .r, • rr.r. r 1•04 *6 PM r.r.. . 4041..04: I..ri14.01rn . r • r 04.Mwre r.. b I.r4.r r... 4' I ,Now. ►+.q VIrW a 1.044.. ....w a • i44 4q. mr.y 11.4..1 0..1.Ow..p.. 404.41•429 Nr rYlw.Mr.l 4.13.1 M lonr.r.n r .1rtl M w.p •4. SCM111101 C0.11 10. T WO• 1. ON I COMBIMUCT °I..u11N• cool. or It. IH4...Itl San rr•.,., 4910M r 44 w..4.• /494.19100 M e.1.1 w. r..a 44.444944,r I. + .. 444 .4 Nw .40 MOM 4. 11«41 c.+..r...rr Oda*. r • ...4 r1.t . N µ a .041010. ..,.a r,. I:r.rrl r M[..aa .t r 1 prow. ▪ I wool 1140 Area Calculations 1044 w 1141 (.11190 K Sue I1. •1 91144 Al In 1111 ; ,•IW I err 11 in w • ; T 53 w , nos. 110 V f :; :; • i . .N 1 1100 nW 1.. WW ulii T.. „ 041 Ar $4343 .4.11.4.. T.• r211.14.4.04211.14.4.041.44. 13.N : ` G � •O... •t... M .1q• 194. M- Y 1�•t d.•.. ... srr ..•c.0 4111 is NI t 4o ui7 i 111.1 b. I nn 04 4400 lr uu 13 III? 1109 .1113 . +rd .I1 11 1 1Q t' 6006 egal Description ) • 71✓ 811016 OFVI1MC111 P MN/NMIPIIOI ' YA T Ir'rf••111A p �1r1=PI. OM ram lllrwCp•rlvtt P i1lI IAD W L:+ iZz • 11t • 1 [ p111101U:Y11IMIO1111L11•NN•Aa•w a111•Pws•w M AACYi111P • • a 01,1 Nllrtlt. WW2/ oPpp •0. MM•Cn.1MNN•NP.• I•,�a Y :Mum. IN Names. w Tr:fi tl>R •l� ll IIIt.Ny�pi �v 001.111 .l 11 IIII. w 0N AIMS •YWl6 MM AIO PINT ale VIII NCI O • IM� I lp 1 l/< NMI Ie nod 1 • 1aIPMNY OC1 1o.l1wrlrr« Iaa11M rwr•M••r1r ru N.r..•F ■ •1 , 1 I✓INr FI iS0. "u1.1.1:74.7.`4`. ✓ iLS II P % � u• 1 •. ,,, .11 lll LLt 111 ll 11. �✓✓ r.wNa:r.l a•f • .. wa. �a riw ", Y11re: PNll'RNNrV. • FM .• •*AAA..• •.. a•• r N }. 11•11011P Yt•IwW 1t Aw1111r1N✓O✓CtC1Nr.•.r•r•r •1• lOMP1111•IAtO.1nPOa111•NP. p1a I unaia ! ' 1011111 OM (V Ww••alfl•1.•w.•• r•r. ✓. • . t4l• NO.N.41 Y1n•1111w.t wl.n MrNAN.K •111101 Iu•N1.1 !•!� • A 1 fP•aw•0.1 0• *II y r1•1P • 1i11 YOIr•o V "11:1:91"1 1 ! 1� N1 L A.:3I.OWCRMnYP •1 lli . ' .�J ryplg l 4 l°•° 11714A•••••••, 1 � ✓. r'Mlw;4174.1,9.7 11.00A CI 1 F 1 .1 1 a:!,. • boo• aa� MrM llYl'ratlr• tr �!I ' ^Mq•t•Nr••.•twr o nu'u 01 1 •• a �M1°"p�rN 0 1I'II• anl;!j rr...= • . L' 1' «�NP�yrA ll �1 fiwc oil•Nt M. I N✓JHC�IN Noo 11111000 1d W nwr.wrNr Y•nMwlla nt 1)1< • � u dnd111rAn. 010d. • I1 u1.1 • , 1 ; YwI , C IINOAPnINr•rwwrl• • ••. ;1p y 1 A lwr•o11o1P N✓al Nw•a•nUf��1.�•�•Y1 • 1i. •' 111.1•4•• 0140WYn.alOINO ••••••••••••••••0••••••••••••••0•111•114 +•••,•111•1 N trOC N p11 O 1 OtttC t:u:iiia ifu ti PU11 ti•flap• RICP1 S MC . � • • ' - 'WG• • ItlN Y•NMI NIIIYNI ✓O I1. 1011••••••11.1•••••• CI: INuti[U: trwo •IWMI I; PrwNIr l A I• a•.rw 11 A1tc llrtlr• Nn ' • • \ 9 Or MIN 141 ti lA V ••■P •N { IMO. LI11NIN1. 10• 1M iyy��11 I - 1NwP1•1411 rlaOOYa1111.•••111111a 1i • :1 a w•.1'• N t ••• __190 1 "••• •Aw•ww••• ••'.A•••^•••ti •r• •• ...fl* ' w e • w �rM a••f.• ' e • , e.• r•wrl. �•w r,r Way Y 4 '1 :R wr M1 • =r IK r.l1P11PNaNM¢ 1 rr✓tlrr,l r iuli�tri unl�� '• ' un,�Y ur F•r• tlM 11'4 t1I1II 1 N' •ay a• 1' • + qi.. SitePlan! I S: rt. 1100 63) L 2. -0043 (c I ILAN N•n.111At•••OCI.O.•wx••oval. • SlIat( It IfO.tw.AO•w1rWYU VVA11O M✓t•• I 0.311 ••ri•j •• .a 1 aN�i. w• I. • .11 11.1.0 AMMAN, 11.41111 -ALL 1.110111011. , to .• I.1 11 on •rye0a s 1 Aa ruuIAnc• 1• pi of to A•lltal 1 • •AtCw.O IM• r•• t .. row i11u..trnt rry•1.J wa et t } . x �. • j.11I UM ati � y l�i►+�l . _ 1�_ • -� min 1,511 IL I `.l': AI . 11 �� 1 ". /`✓♦1U11MA OVIONO • ` v r ..Clll' , 1^I011 • Project Date • • 1 • ti.Nr iw RAr4 M ORIN • ,1lP1t•.,.1( I� } Iw N • KW *3 IIII BURDENS COPY PERMIT nu. 1w.li- _A116- IIIIS III Ilf MYY111V111 M ANS MIISI BF (III 111E .00001 Al AIL DUES INM,IN(: CINIS111UCIIUN DOS WADING IS 1101 Ill SE IM:UMIfU ONO' MOM fRUI 1NS1'LCIN111 AVVROVAL RV 11W IURWILA RUILUINU DIVISION 1r1A•I•ln P •••••••••■ •••••••• aermVS mot FOR 111■NaWlfq. LQptiQSIIl71L Mumma 11vY me all/ OF YUMA IMMO DYSSION ''t?nefpf .• Cdtle 1.. I I.M✓auAN•��L141•YM VMI N •• WiM'albStll Mwr ar•.Mr11.11 . ru lt•w It1Y•111.11 ✓.1•. M.A.E. ■ N4alYb u✓I.Y.•. F rumoo raA••..•r. 1 11 NMwr•arow Old ryyNw.eM••1.. • ▪ 1 .i.* •.MAry r.Mt•o •r•a••w � j,,,b�w.r�.t�r,M,�r NY . RN f . ‘t '1 ' w ••MYM '•:00•1 ; ':'. 00 i (•w i 'r N IIE'+M4,1MVY•rp� ! 1 za . et.. Nn A .1.-Wr { 7 00 1 , Index to Qrawing & 'i . li•Ir'Irlw or. l �, I,14L �� a.r•rr Nw iAi. ' ' • ' •• 1•�• •r Nr.M arrr ∎•• M• 1.11.1 1.11.1 AR A 1• n.�'r�T111•1=Ir�n.f , S t All ...wll Ml IN. No ,ryr /rp•► It•11a0III f, i t wM1•IMA • AI • � ',� . Ara 100. A• 1 •: All 1'r 1•N '' •11' LII (• M•N •oo.•YY111 ARGO. SI/ IFlba \YN fl.0 I •t••■ •••••••••••••• AN �M"•Ya \14.00 • r1I I, rterr lrl'rY 0tllN"q✓Mar✓, ~�W,r! 1 Mn�MN b11.e..., t 1 %Ill • , • IN iII l Nam.. IMAN•r.Mwarlrr ' -• N••. MI NI It AN 1•fl'•••'•1 'r..•. I L.. INY !T r.n • II •MMr I4.r 1 oiling Co SI no Nueow no r r ; III I .1p. • lrN 6.... ,■ r r i••t Yr.n1••r Construction Not NUa1•N11U.Ir b• N -rr YMdAIN • A. •rAw . " Mary IIYr•, 11',1' 'pp•a1ilrrp1"'•I.L ✓" 7 i N•l.�Ya NIYNM a 1NS1111a. 111N1l. 4M•Y•IOYawN.,Yrl 1,104ttg,'Code .l �1 °••l�ll` M • 1 W , �ei .•� f. 19fAI 119 • ' 'y(y rr 1•11111 ' Y � v 1 1 �l1 - ll - o , tlgt . , , ,s ,,N t , ,1 ,_ 1. 11.1 i I •Ut•/CIIOY CNRMO ,IY Vi I CONSTRUCTION. . v , 1•••••• ••• Eni .Arllar I. 1.00 1M ra•tl I M YAN M CC •r. r••r /r A rw • fC•�� In � ✓ • l�~NM a 1 ML •AwY Nam. 7 . 7 tMe1r••IW par.. ISS MOO I Area Calculationdl U. IM roof Mill • 11 03141. h. 1.n $1 t• r. II (*1100 Al II( II N •.Th I• It 1}1/•••:1 I IY_S•CIY.J�r • •f 1 10.17- •, / 10 ION 1 ; 100 11 ••••• rAM••.u.lbw l ,r 1• .•r• NI r IWr a W �..♦•� •b•... lad• • y11NS lye - •.w.. • ti• un.a .._ '1 ri aL.r 11.1(1 . r•1 I' 400 AIN ff cm.- III t 1 LW 1 1 1.:. 1w• CIII W IU1a ' ''�',• O[ •∎ , .'4 Z Lif:'t', r ► I d ! � I . • ..... rrl le I Ito G 1 TIC• '. , � MKYq N% �� LE p.;.0. M.... L12. - 00L13 U Id� p _: ....., , , „..,., • Recreational Space Scala l]0 MI • K2GcEATION L 5 v.:.cU A11 J 1.[4tM,rM,. Ui•,...1. .G ...a � 9H Y . •.A,W. ^ ' 1. +✓ 1 J iow. .yx:r TsVA .�rAM qW lkaun..i .p.c. I7' eF " 3 ti ' MIK. I2241s .YO.. WM. fuil y.... 140.m, ply 1e'K - 114,11.E I..,,xY , PP. 4 1.1...4 CT. l" � • r it l ereae . a.a /.1111 • sec 1 R1 1 moos - - 1111111 LI IT L.qz -0043 1 - I(l Il i 4.: 21 II J - 5 F4W0U C11I»F4 • 4141 I1 iy ( 1 I JI'I J Y, r Il�i�llllllll�l ' W�1r16LrL.li11.I.Ww11�s.L Ih �. 1.1_11_1 I _.�.._ ..- _=: -. I .I C I IILtt1111111 (IIII(I(IfliL(ljrl —1 O FJ 1 1607 NA04.0 (TVI1f36 64M•O4) 1. rC.PEATIONAL 6PAG40 CAI CJ OH GLOMS. OF FNAN- 1 111116.1. ET111FIM Hl1 264. 011 1.13». trop I U, l 1410 6.F. 1920 60. 16110 • P.C. CINIFP 015 543 4110P5.6 6110E Fl 1147 1197 1L34 61R11C14PY 1790 Wm.'. - ��_- —1'1419— E 5'192 _.. 6953 6r • PA56NC OPE1I R1X.PCJ.110N 600461 V/ FL(.. CENTER 1340 IF MU. 60 6001• OF 01.1 . V 1600 1000 wl OF 04..E.l. •A ■410 1910 600711 OF ►600. 2600 2100 60019 OF 01.00. 0.' 4660 41.60 0611 OF 04.00,.0. 710 940 3311 OF D-PU, 'P 1' 516 626 000111 OF 06001.'0" 1040 1040 600111 OF 04.00. '0' 1040 1040 600111 OF 01.001 " 1 960 960 10T64 17,915 IF 16,1.57 2.1 70764 PIZP CATION 63 P0041000: H•C1.LA 11001 1000IIMI4T 3162 IF 1366140 OWN P.FL.. 61t 2'6973 TOTAL 09,42.7 6P 5451 ]P (1,4.61 21,0429 60 OW.F1 P1L. E.11L6 1662101('641 OFON KG. 6P3CO 100 1s.F. UHIT 1 U14116 FPO410LP% . 9,'lou IF .1%420 61. PFFU1.11 F 0116 0000 0P6N 06.4. of a P3041010 w /116611GA1109AL 041UIP4CNT■ 3111 E.F. / 181427 B.F. 41.5 1. _ ■&v,S�o gKKE- 4/7,4; Gc.cac.rlrolls 45 (PJJJI/l' », - /2 - -5 A Ic FLO rrea-10 a ' W.'S. L, 6.0) .V.P .5 : CD .147.14VVIT " D's r�io'lc, (3' 4.0,1 ■..azif.O.E.I., •••1•4•1' t AC. 4 'A . . Im.k. 7 r .. r%.i... .,-. •..-•; cr,z:, . ...,., \ 1440X00.../W•1 A...A PP* A. f ..W.7.4 i104.. Aa 0 p.IrOOLIENVIo. •:.42. ....r.:...... .n .^ VArr.•10.• 144.4 lett 44'.V Ne 4 Itti, .7 7 ‘ 4 • Pc" ... ..,,c, • NT. ....• ....J.' I Itit.s.,..cs •••••••••• ....v 9 - 4 W t.L. •• * W. , E.' • 34r -US . .4A4 4.7 ... -- *.E.C...:4.4...51.A.ol t.1 ..141/ ftLy. €1) C3 :2:-•4■rtLI :A : ,P.Ajt.".°FttiVA14..rf w"" , ,t. ,, z , ' ■-,64, .. 4 ilk ..••• ..,...;':,c. sWeLL.. 2es9.C. 74 ..•1• , .....,...m vk. t r..5' 'am. - 0 Ka 15 •• a F. Aolgel•o 11% 5 1 0.N. A i kokh.l....• t • • • V os.+0 •:• -.IL.' • L... • • • • S. , 4111 TgRt. rami.AL ;"filWIP zr 11% aco,.. .04"Z•VM402:r44ft Cat. F=NV•444".."*".4 5 155 ••• a} Sr IhiPsreSir 1 •••sor••• Ci3 0 0 E trirtIA!;" L4L/6 :ALLotrat • 5 an •ot$ LL. •••••• sIS sr •••• to ••• watzrz 1 ZUZ7;1 • 1 2•''' 'NI. WIZ r••• . _ . • 'OP P 0;4;0; P.M OFJO ••• „ . • • - 0/ tg v7 ,1 gir tip*. - 14 sr 14 so • “. rh..1 PoO. ssissuossa.•••••.s. - OCO tr,fral rJ •eg * a$ IMINIEffei 1 1 s ss • -dde PLANTING PLAN e • r W SV , '"'"Ittr•ZZA“8 ,, ••• ••••VJ.sts-( NOTES - - .• • 7/ ••••••••,,••• • • Sof'. • ,r- LEGEND S „ V* +4,, • ...t0 P.M:TEO avlic S Par'.....41.44. poo 0 j r 14. t.* 4 1 , n••••1 itte.4 At-tt. PS SdISPt$I Isr War:, lecis5•/,O.4 1441S.4 41.4ill..ele rash rad.. /Ler PA, f•••.5 1 GolPIE; •••••• •••••tot1 .411/14 • 4.0,15 , /(".St YP•yr t...11.1t1 • JOHNSON I ASSOCIAILS L.J • ' 'C1 2I ir cym � .M *It K SI. toy, H.(w 044. W wmnatig M..u+1r. / MNIy, WPM .• MV. y . /i— J I ' '1w F14 ISi» d...1106.1y 6P.R.PO(L-f w/ PI•AT 1 • Irma .i11 nr• 41 I) • loll •nu. MOmw r . w- , woub a ° �IL 1.01166, N.4. W qtwlo .., Roof eaembly ,�� nr ,r. it Fes, arl Wall Assembly • ICJ f ti bur Assesnbly • if w�I Willi Assembly , • (i) To Detail ' ; • r 14•.•.,.q...re 1 . I I• I.. v++.L i.r�. y1'Wr. y 4 c PA.owy 6 1 lock Assembly 1..mo".rlrlrl W r.r.r...ar M IM 4+.. rrawl.l.n. .I v� Al i w iu ~~ rM - accla Ven Side bl Tryse' ) • . I .40010d20 111.44 OA LAMA,a.M M. 40.06 a (.•.. I ••• stourr• W.M. a • L. l Facia Vont at End of T►u* • IOUI� GARAGE SEGTi(I41 • • our aIAeA • *rrloorr — nve�e>,a t ICI 1 • .4 L-q2-00 It • WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION Wag , 11. 1.1 • 1, I ""1- • ;1" I 16i -'. . '""`"'"' • ,i,, 11 lighS 11. rrx•Ir II I lion.. I .021. 11 ;M. i I I • I • r7 - or.slexitrer.e.rar er•WtrrA. Unit B 2 BEDROOM/ 2 Mtn RIthl• I/ r , .111305.r 1.12--004 • l vit kreva ir tar . / O.& b 0, • Ayr. * ei• .•' 1 7-7 - 7771 • irrnx. ....z,11,......„..": ; ..II_:.:_... - t:._f...':-[r----- F .. - 7 . 7-. 7 . 1' 1 "0 4 ' 1 I : ="- .. ._,. .•• • v..... ]______Ii____IL , .,, Li.i. . t,'. a-..) Unit A 2 BEDROOM/1 BM'," SCALE 114 \ 11U1/611r N— • o C 12 17 g. 5905 ' 02.-0014 1�y' YI ( J fY yvr f•YI i I \• Ws I n.• iti I f• 110: i -r l I I I I I I 1 qw•r 1 r ,/N 1 11'0• C. 48pk ELEVAT1& ; I {1. 4./ I y b��• !__ _ 1\4• �...�_b.Y h .•. 1+`^•' .•v_1 -.�• bLY fll"• N'i. ' IM �• L . w...• I L I e. 'FLOOR PLAN - : 1.14140 14 .fY � t- • LL. -` � � I I I 1 M^ -� � - -� ICY I I 1 II \ Ty P afl. In 11t Y 4 • .• • 1•1,t " • • r•LOTTILTI • 1 Tr: Section D—D • • •• '.*•• E—E • " " ' • 1" , r • ••• to so' I . I twi!. . I • • P44' • 1 -. ; • , :Y :: .g. "."7 ' -:?• ra I, • I .....ZNIL•111■51'....—..-..... 1 1 :: ''''' WilLt ' ! VOA L. 'Loos vd IL 1 I',. • RECEIVCD AN IL93 fe,t, 1.■ I VL ar ryak " 111P.i. sectipo A—A ;•-•••-•-■••••••••-• - 7:!7!:!:::=11 1 , ; • . _ Section B-B sLosii" (• I SOL AL UM .1 -rem —Ars To FL liO71 l o ge 7 i e kt'717 • vo!o ;.:61 • • I ...". 9.... p1 . 47;7\ Lill Of 1111100 APPROVLO 0 EL_ • 3 OCI 1 MR • 2 ( *CIP ,• :• J . 4 O 1 1 b' !Y. ) ' ) .mo w .• I 19 . .s. . z � 4) S• ' t1 c A� . �Bl L-92 -cX ♦ I I I , [1111 � �tv ►�1' .'►�f� } 1r )z 12 Will y .•r i . .. R ;. • L I I 17 Ii Open Recreation Sp - ce ED t r 10 r' i x H r i 3 j • 1 h !i 12- LG 2. -ces4 4"1 - -,—.. _•r - -- t+ *#- -- - . _ _hr. _ 1•�F i* i • South Elevation J South Elevation South Elevation - e aining WaII Retaining Wall B r • II . _t �zd' 4 '1 :or -II: 441 I -1 14.41 a ar\ Retaining Wall • C a 1I 2 tl3 MOO 1111.Section D-D grectinn E-E m°grF et.• 1... . ..I I, ! _ ,10 . . 'Section A-A *Section 111-Et • • la •g. r. L.... • . . Section C-C tj 11 !