Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 91-09-DR - RONHOVDE ARCHITECTS - TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER DESIGN REVIEW91-9-dr 13995 interurban avenue south epic-55-91 Permit 91-09-DR - RONHOVDE ARCHITECTS - TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW 1908 March 30, 1992 Sincerely, Darren T ilson Assistant Planner City of Tukwila NOTICE OF DECISION Torjan Ronhovde 1048 West James Street, Suite 102 Kent, WA 98032 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor RE: Notice of Decision by the Board of Architectural Review File Number: 91 -09 -DR TUKWILA DENTAL BUILDING This is to confirm that the (BAR) Board of Architectural Review approved the project's design as presented on March 26, 1992. The BAR also adopted the findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated February 27, 1992 & March 19, 1992. 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 ten calendar days after the above date of the 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. Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 Torjan Ronhovde, Architect: 91 - 9 - DR: Tukwila Dental Center Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 February 27, 1992 Darren Wilson provided the staff report. He stated that the MDNS was issued on January 17, 1992. The mitigated concerns dealt with pedestrian connection to Interurban Ave. S. along 57th Ave. S. The second concern dealt with the right hand turn heading southbound on Interurban, making a right hand turn onto 57th Ave. S. The right -of -way is 30 feet, however, there is only 18 -20 feet of pavement. This project also falls under the Interurban Special Review District criteria in addition to the B.A.R. criteria. He went on to say that on page 6, under staff's response, the second sentence, the monument, freestanding sign should be 48 sq. ft. and not 24 sq. ft. as stated in the staff report. The staff is recommending that five large stature trees be added within the parking lot to keep the consistency of the landscaping throughout the project. Staff is asking that the applicant provide a lighting plan that would also consist of the types of materials for the security lighting. Staff is also recommending that the building design be revised to provide consistent banding and recessing throughout the architectural design, as well as, additional modulation of building facade. He went on to say that due to the surrounding buildings, staff felt that the proposed colors would contrast. Staff is recommending that the applicant use a slate gray color which is one of colors on the color chart that the applicant submitted. Jack Pace stated that in talking with the applicant, they have agreed to all of the staff's recommendations on page 10 of the staff report, except for recommendation number two which deals with the building design and additional modulation. He went on to ask the Planning Commission if they were comfortable with what the applicant was proposing for the north perspective as it faces Interurban. Mr. Ronhovde reiterated that they agreed with staff recommendations 1, 3, 4, and 5 of page 10 of the staff report. He went on to say that the lighting fixtures would be two pole mounted lights in the parking lot area. The upper floor does not extend to the outer limits as in the lower floor because there is not adequate parking to accommodate the additional square footage. Some of the modulation that is proposed for the front of the building is due to the fact there are stairwells that project out. This was not repeated in the rear of the building because there are no stairwells proposed there. He went on to say that he thought that by adding three columns to the back of the building, they were satisfying staff's request for additional modulation, however that is not the case. Mr. Malina closed the public hearing at 11:10 p.m. Mr. Flesher stated that he felt the north perspective needed additional modulation. Planning Commission Minutes Fe bruary 27, 1992 MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO OMIT RECOMMENDATION 4B; MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5 -1 WITH MR. CLARK OPPOSED. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATION 5A, BUT TO C ::1 GE THE WORDING TO READ, "THE PLANTER SHALL BE THE REQUIRED s -FOOT WIDTH."; MR. FLESHER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTE O N WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATION 5B; KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS APPROVED BY/A VOTE OF 5 -1 WITH MR. MERYHEW OPPOSED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATION 5C; MR CLARK SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANI IOUSLY APPROVED. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVERECOMMENDATION 5D; MR KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATION 6 IF THERE ARE NO SAFETY ISSUES ONCE REVIEWED BY PUBLIC WORDS; MR. MERYHEW SECONDED MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. / `•. \ . MR FLESHER MOVED TO APPROVE RECOMMNDATION 7 WITH THE WORDING CHANGED TO: "PROVIDE SCREENING FENCE' ALONGILENGTH OF PROPERTY WHERE NO LANDSCAPING IS PROPOSED." ,MR. HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO ADD AN ADDITI NAL RECOMMENDATION (#8) WHICH WOULD REQUIRE CUSTOMER PARI[NC ON SITE. THERE WASO SECOND TO THE MOTION AND THE MOTION DIED/ MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE 9X10 -DR: DOLLAR DEVELOPME \.BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S MODIFICATIONS. MR. FLESHED SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Malina called for a five minute break at 10:25 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:30 p.m. Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 1992 Mr. Clark asked if the window glass would be colored or clear. The applicant stated that the windows were not proposed to be colored. Page 10 MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVE PROJECT 91 -9 -DR BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RECOMMENDATION #2. RECOMMENDATIONS 1, 3, 4, AND 5 ARE ACCEPTED AS WRITTEN, BUT ITEM #2 SHALL BE DISCUSSED AND RE- NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THE NORTH EXPOSURE MORE AESTIM ICALLY PLEASING AND TO HAVE THESE CHANGES BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. MR. CLARK SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. During the Director's report, Jack Pace discussed the American Planning Association's Spring Conference in April and asked if any of the Planning Commissioners would like to attend. The Planning Commission also agreed to hold a public hearing regarding the Multi Family Design Standards on April 30, 1992. Mr. Malina adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Sylvia Schnug ATTACHMENTS: City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor STAFF REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared February 19, 1992 HEARING DATE: February 27, 1992 FILE NUMBER: 91 -9 -DR APPLICANT: The Ronhovde Architects (Torjan Ronhovde) REQUEST: To construct a new 5000 • s.f. Two story dental office building LOCATION: Located between 13985 & 13995 Interurban Ave: Lot A, Tax Parcel # 336590- 0229 -09, Tukwila, Wa. ACREAGE: 13,500 SF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial ZONING DISTRICT: C -2 Regional Retail 0 SEPA DETERMINATION: MDNS Issued January 17, 1992 STAFF: Darren Wilson A. North & West perspectives B. Site plan C. Landscape plan D. South, North, East & West Elevations E. Cross Section F. Sample Color Board (Submitted at Public Hearing) Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433.1833 Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION FINDINGS 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr. Page 2 Project Description: To construct a new 5,000 square foot two -story dental office building. Existing Development: The site is vacant and undeveloped. Surrounding Land Use: The proposed site is surrounded by two and three story office buildings. Terrain: The site is relatively flat will the expected of the rear portion of the property. There is a steep slope separating the commercial development from the multi - family development. Access: 57th Avenue fronts onto the site which connects into Interurban Avenue South. BACKGROUND The subject site boundary is located within the Interurban Special Review Area. Due to the unique physiography, the presence of natural amenities and recreational facilities, the historical relevance of the area to the community, and the contemplated future mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and public land uses, the Interurban area requires a special approach for coordinated planning and land use management. All development in the Interurban Special Review Area, excluding single - family dwellings, shall' be reviewed by the board of architectural review. In addition to the review guidelines specified in Section 18.60.050 of this code, the BAR shall utilize the guidelines specified in subsections (4) and (5) below in its review. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review DECISION CRITERIA This project is subject to Board review due to its location within the Interurban ' special review area. Board review criteria are shown below in bold, along with a staff discussion of relevant facts. 18.60.050: BAR Review Criteria. (1) Relationship of Structure to Site. a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movements. 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 the site. Applicant's Response: 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Page 3 "The site is and will remain flat with landscaping between structure and street. The parking area is small and visually unobstrusine. The building is similar in scale and height to the adjacent buildings." Staff's Response: The building is located on the eastern portion of .the parcel. While the parking lot is located in the west side of the property and is separated by a 30 -foot access easement. This sidewalk connects directly into Interurban Avenue South, however, the sidewalk is located on only the north side of 57th Avenue South. The proposed 5,000 sq. ft. office dental building will be two story and 35 -feet in height. The NSG office building located to the north of the proposal has a height of 35 -feet with two story and approximately 10,000 square feet. The architectural design consist of tinted glass windows and banding and recessing throughout the entire design. The Golden Nugget Restaurant located to the south was developed prior to the Interurban Special Review Criteria. Staff Report to the 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Board of Architectural Review Page 4 (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony of 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. Applicant's Response: "The proposal will be similar in scale and materials to adjacent ,previously developed projects. The landscaping will be designed to blend with existing office buildings. The user of the project will not have to cross circulation areas to access the building nor either will the existing service street or the proposed parking areas will have any detrimental effects on on -site or off -site vehicular circulation." Staff's Response: The surrounding buildings are a mixture of old and new structures with concrete stucco, wood frame with a dryvit finish, and glass windows complementing the overall building design. There is an existing sidewalk on the north side of 57th Avenue South for pedestrian circulation. The vehicular circulation will occur at the western portion of the proposed site. There is existing road that access the adjacent buildings to the north. The parking area for this site is located at the western portion of the property. (3) Landscaping 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 walkg, 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 encouraged. f. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination. g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, Staff Report to the 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Board of Architectural Review Page 5 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: "The is flat and will remain flat. The grades of walks will be flat and constructed of exposed pea gravel aggregate concrete. The landscape treatment will significantly upgrade existing conditions. Sight vistas are not affected. All planting is protected by curbs, sidewalks etc. The paved areas will be provided with planting islands at the ends of rows of parking. The dumpsters will be screened by fencing and landscaping that will match the proposed structure. The parking lot lighting will be shielded light source luminaries and building mounted lighting will provide for security. There are no nearby residences that will be affected by the project lighting." Staff's Response: Due to the shape of the parcel and the location of the parking lot there is a large area of pavement. As shown on attachment C, the landscape plan indicates 4 trees around the parking area. The dumpsters will be screened by a fence and landscaping that will match the proposed structure. (4) Building Design a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of Its design and relationship to Its 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 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 Staff Report to the 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Board of Architectural Review Page 6 all exposed 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 sitting should be used to provide visual interest. Applicant's Response: "The proposal will be similar in style, color, and appearance to adjacent projects. The proposal is similar in scale to adjacent projects. The building components are appropriate to scale and congevity anticipated. The colors will be neutral and similar to adjacent projects. The mechanical equipment is rooftop mounted and will be screened from pedestrians, vehicles and adjacent buildings." Staff's Response: The detail of the proposed building is inconsistent (see attachment A). For example the perspective drawing indicates five columns on north side of the building and only two extended to grade. The horizontal relief is only present on north and south sides of the structure. For continuity of the design this should be reflected on all sides and elevations. The mechanical equipment will be screened by the wall on the north perspective drawing. The colors of the exterior consist of red rock and a white stucco finishes. The proposed colors create a high contrast within the surrounding area. The painted reveal and painted coping cap will be difficult to distinguish between the two colors since there are two different types of finish materials. Since the trim does not continue throughout the building the proposed colors are too dominant (5) Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture Applicant's Response: "Not applicable due to extremely small size of site." Staff's Response: The miscellaneous structure on the proposed site will be one monument freestanding sign. The monument freestanding sign will be 24 square feet and installed on the western portion of the site. The sign will be constructed of the same material as the building. INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review Page 7 The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area in order to manage the development of this area. 6. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. Applicant's Response: "The development will upgrade current appearance of property and adjacent property." Staff's Response: The site is vacant and surrounded with old and new development. Staff's concern with this proposal is the visual quality. 7. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. Applicant's Response: "The development has no effect on existing rec. uses and will not add new rec. facilities and uses." Staff's Response: Due to location and configuration of the proposed site there is limited opportunity for recreational areas. 8. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site pedestrian circulation. Applicant's Response: "Walkways are provided where appropriate adjacent to the building and sidewalks will extend along the border at the street and connect street sidewalk to building sidewalk." Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Page 8 Staff's Response: The applicant has provided a sidewalk and outdoor lighting fixtures. 9. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. Applicant's Response: 'The proposal will be similar in scale to adjacent developments and will use similar materials." Staffs Response: See Building Design discussion. 10. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environmental impacts. Applicant's Response: 'The proposal will not create any significant environmental impacts." Staffs Response: Based upon the environmental review process, no significant impacts were identified. 11. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features in the area. Applicant's Response: 'There are no significant historical features in the area that are affected by the proposal or will affect the proposal." Staff's Response: Through staff's research there are no historical landmarks located near or on the proposed site. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review Page 9 CONCLUSIONS 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr 1. The height and scale of the proposed building is compatible with the surrounding office and restaurant buildings. 2. The architectural concept is not consistent throughout the building. Further modifications need to be made in the following areas: 1) Horizontal relief needs to be consistent on the north and south sides of the building. 2) The north, west,' east and south facades needs to be re- designed to provide improved modulation of building facade. The vehicular circulation is located at the western portion of the parcel which is shared with adjacent property owners. 3. The applicant has provided sufficient landscaping surrounding the building. However, the landscaping around the parking lot needs to be expanded. Additional tress need to be planted around the perimeter of the parking lot. 4. The details of the proposed building are inconsistent. i.e. the columns are not carried throughout the building. The horizontal relief is only present on the north and west sides of the building. The banding and recess are not consistent within the architectural design. 5. The proposed monument freestanding sign will be 48 square feet located on western protion of the site. While the wall sign will be 30 square feet and mounted on the north wall of the building. INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT CRITERIA 6. The site is vacant and surrounded by old and new development. 7. The proposed development will enhance any future recreational facilities in the vicinity. 8. There is minimum landscaping treatment within the parking lot and landscape islands. 9. The proposal will be similar in scale, however, the proposed colors will create a high contrast between the finished materials. 10. The proposal will not create any significant environmental impacts. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review 91 -9 -DR: Tukwila Dental Ctr Page 10 11. There are no historical landmarks associated with the proposed site. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Department recommends the following conditions be met with either approval by the Planning Director or review by the BAR. 1. Add five large stature trees within the parking lot. 2. Revise the building design to provide consistent banding and recessing throughout the architectural design, as well as, additional modulation of building facade.. 3. Change the proposed painted reveal and painted coping cap to Slate color on sample chart submitted. The window, door frames material and exterior insulation system may remain the same. 4. Provide the actual colors of the downspouts. 5. Provide location and design detail used for light fixtures. 7 • ----- • - •• • 9 1N3WHOV11V PC. 4 0 , at "'-- - CAADJ WJK MX. • C r t=.K 664416 KIIM 14&,.. N81'054 g11.4 1MI I - SITE PLAN A ' dlfTlla a•vCf eur_n.e (14.1 416446.16. r•Y.71 .warr ATTACHMENT B THE RONIOVDE ARCFRECTS 1048 W.,w.ES ST SAE 102 P(81� ^>t. amn.. 1 � .�.no Ib r, wrwr aM/ TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER tom 1 4Z) PROJECT NOTES !4aO_EC7 o. - nEP' pe .ni.roP £faT p.W.,110: Tr' !ONNWJ• AINQuT:16:S (b.+W66 .a6.4) 1046 N. r.r.,N •■01 61.1T, W I. !eo (741 Y9'T•501 .• ITT 4. io�J..T pawiACVD6 MP:�••M �aer.S• /•e!.IK ‘D000( Cibr.) awl Nee 719. OOG4•■■1 06 15.2 C? f CoweiNCTaN 'uW peOuMCD -2.f/ 10.:0Sr : ,7.1/ , 16 r?o10e0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION IFKf:... 9PoPT r✓•T t en -Io ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 634 6/10. 0219 -09 ENERGY CODE NOTES VICINITY MAP DRAWING INDEX SITE M-N PI SO.ZOT NOTES Pooftims On 1.r o.un..• rr9O.1 cAwwweeN I- A0.2 Seto L•OX40•INJ f•-71 8 • ,tfs. V:Arml.e.A • 147 rov* IN•21.410. FPASSIel •uxistva A.P.Ne Rik:H.10 HON 114 -1.1.1 , 32‘12.P - ' 'rte.*. 414J , filc”.14 owt) e,r,...tverturi 6—,T. 4 :- • o' .441, r cosi C.-NI'', 2 7.. _N. - . 111400.0. ATTACHMENT C • wal.•••••• • L. ,17,74,4 17.7.70.4 /;:O 1-1 2 • _ • r. SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION y .p.r.e .�..,e w.... prom. ... ntrarr C L.b •■■•• TT ' • M •./ arrow re♦ J • 11 r+• f I. I., I_ 1 I u�J'v� io-J Doi' I I • TIT[ P: 1 _—h EAST ELEVATION .sic. • cos WEST ELEVATION • 0 a 040 UWE i f&oxii U ut 'au•Jr wry "NWT NIVO • i ti a o -i r/ /PIT- sD 'IIl..�r�DNG 994 LI • ..n.. �. • - "run. rJ.cs w .4 8•04. 4_ ...41 Pr•TCM ATTACHMENT D THE ROt+$OVDE ARCHTECTS 1048 W. JAI ES ST. SURE 102 K2a. WA9NGTON 681332 rIo E (208) 854 -5010 Aw mm�n• .n +na M;. TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER TUKWILA, WA. °Xr 'IoR C-EVfv'I A4.1 3 r TUKVVILA EtT L CENTER COLOR BOARD Arprotta 5 74) 1 E X TERI OR:. INSULATION • � COLOR CHAR i #01 Super White #09 Eggshell Cream #13 Amarillo White #17 Colonial Tan #21 Summer Rose #02 Brite White #06 Pearl Ash #10 Van Dyke #14 Mauve #18 Camelback #22 Pink Shadow seattie wall systems inc. 929 arney Street Sea je WA 98108 (206 3 - 8890 (907) 276-5607 On Alaska) (509) 926-1296 On Spokane) TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER #03 Natural White #07 Sunset Yellow dr #11 Prairie Clay #15 Beach #23 Spanish Tile DS116 #04 Dover Sky #08 Manor White #12 Sandlewood Beige #16 Victorian Lace #20 Rose #24 Rose Petal #25 Starlight #29 Silver Shadow #37 Mushroom #41 Sandy Taupe #45 Forest Eve Dryvit Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 1014 One Energy Way West Warwick, RI 02893 800 - 556 -7752 #33 Driftwood #26 Frosty Blue #30 Grey Fog #34 Steel Grey #38 Misty Mauve #42 Spectrum Brown #46 Jade "It is the intent and purpose of this color chart to provide a basic representation of Dryvit Systems, Inc. finish colors and is offered as a sales aid only to select a range of colors for final selection. This color chart shall not be used for final color selection as color differences may occur. Actual color selection should be made from 2' x 4' samples of each finish type, texture, and color to be used on the project. Samples shall be prepared using the same tools and techniques proposed for the actual installation . by the applicator /contractor." 21st Century building technology, today. Printed in USA SSC 7.68.20M #27 Newport Mist #31 Gull Grey #35 Feather Grey #39 Adobe Accent #43 Burlap #28 Wedgewood #32 Mountain Fog #47 Red Rock #48 Bark #36 Slate MEMERSEEMBE #40 Tumbleweed #44 Pinecone dry e CITY OF TUKWILA ; DEPARTMENT OF COMM UN! Th' DEVELOPMENT'- OWNER BOARD OF ARC 'ECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN' REVIEW APPLICATION 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 • m Z. • - BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: Con 51 "fit " /7 CA) 50Lb SP 2 67 dcnV a -M ce 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) / Quarter: G t Section: ' /4 Township: 2 3 d Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT:* Name: 'The orhovcl e ar hi 7 (70/e TAAJ ;ovHav s) Address: /D' A). LAMES /02 I / g 7 cuA 96o32 Phon • • S • 50 f. Date: // x /91 Signature. /:,;� . � � � .. * Th: ap • licant is ' e person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFF:QA.VI T OF QWNERYHIP 4. PROPERTY Name: PA. t M $f t, 'c S NGH Address: / 05— /?'l e / S��TIL.c. = w 1 9Z1 2/ Phone: 7Z 2 ^ 76/6 I /WE,[si ature(s)1 Arc 12.-k I _ f? / � swear that I /we are the owner(s) or contract pur (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: 0 1/f f ( `119' , BOARD OF ARCHITECTUI L REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC . ,.ON Page 2 CRITERIA 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: .? s /7• is w Gr cr -R /A.) •61 G, Jos / ,- 86.77-0.) 5 U c7v)2- STIz eZ°'j" .) tee' pra0 i ru Cm /4( ./s v,(JO,B7"K UsNE- C.) 8 u /Gc ,,j ,- /s S /e7, / t Aiti . ! N 54,47-4-45 I Hai To " / Ac , Jr /L47 /NCB S . 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: ,q .) 7hc prop o . / wi // he si i Ja r rn sca/<e ina t eri 2/s fry adji ce4trt prvious / deve./oaecC pre/ ecfs. 5,.) Land5oa?a'r'? wi // fx desehec, fa blenoe i/ .ax /67V, c.) Sae r=spvr75G ,4 , D.) vs-ees af- prv/ev'/` (7i // naf /1 ve. fia cr'ss C/rcu,44.176r3 ot'veu.S 7`a acces t.Y- 2(L0- y • F.) ive/ fher 67`rh? Selr0C. or "t e. p opo5ec,Q ptr/a /ijq a#' as •w/// hAtec a frty clo/r1»homial e e or! on -w or' 0 ff • sib ye-hie-ix-14e aircu- Ca.7 -, BOARD OF ARCHITECTrAL REVIEW ' DESIGN REVIEW APPLI&. , fiON 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: A.) S/7 /s 7-7' 6v/ /J m 13,) des c wac //a s wi // /ae - e.4--7` 1 con Gyrid - -P 074 p u s•©r.E. / v ca. ‘ 9,01 0 /4,10 / 4*- Yz7a4 7 - -1'07 en7` w/// $ /en / 116 4n7` /y 'F9r�rd� eKC /H corrct::7`?ar? 59 h7- k/E6 -zi5 ere ti 47 a t) G/ /J plan7 is p -7 1 b,1' cuvb5 6,decva,/ / eic, E,) 772c plc, a r s w, // !oc provi/ed co/7417 p larrt%r/,7 is /A na:5 ae-1 7"/PG abidS o rows a-z" par k./:-j . /) .5 o,sf screen ec-e by • 'r a ‘Z i /7 \ 1 r ' 4arl a54a n; i4-71- a/I /1 rna7th '/he prepoS-ecf/ a i e. G,) X0 ao /i b/c .i1) , f r /G /hy /a7 / /('`J7�/i79 `v /// 1)c c cke/G/'ec, Lcgh,`/ .5ource Lvm,1aivies cin GL. •/ C� /r " - , v a On t rcL � t. h f //-i f w /// f brcv/de �'v� seouYIf rs • M are P o f P 5I dEY/ c S 7170,1 will be. a. :5.c/1 - _by -fh prop 4.7 C i 7 4 /h5. 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. LIOAKU OF At -Ct1I I•LeTURAL REVIEW • DESIGN REVIEW APPLIt TION C 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: ,a• 7/ae' •ro - -mar w4/ be.. ,sim i lav i h s7/ /G co /c' - a • peaky c. e Q ac at�an7 ,) 7h e pr orDev/ V4 fC, a �L�i Lei 7 ' pre /e T . c .) .5c ,c; �c(��n co m pa r; fl' a rc a-oprrdpr'iu. 7a scar ' Garl e i i an t7ap -tEd, p.) /Urs w/// hey 4e,o ?J" 5 //?/( 7 oLIJac Perri f p' ' e-dS . Sae ca/or .f aaer:2 prve∎ ' 1e e7u i pmeiz -v'` p-a a -7 rn o v n7' vkn Gfl will b- Sc'r Y! -cc-C. 404-2 4-2 pest 51Y' / � h S / tick ie./es alq aca , .��GoCG�.,9s • ) 6a-e.3 iL/ �,) /vc'�`' appiia a tile. 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: A aRO, /16 ab/ dve .� e# S.7100 • G+ x 17" Page 4 BOARD OF ARCHITECT(RAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLI _..TION INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT Page 5 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 - orieriteduse, 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. Tlie`proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. .11i.4 a wi // upsraWe cvrr i7`- .0ppc arcirc.ix of •prope a .2- ,-0acer77 properly. 2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. 7'h e devalo prnewt hu s r-2o e �f or? ek l s7 /ry /= uses CY !,v %f/ no7' add /7e1.4.J Pea, - pctC / 7/7 vS,G3 3. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site pedestrian circu- lation. Gig //ways a/ re. l nrovide�(� r.� h e a_pproprx a��ACe�t t 7b - Ma e7e-ti t hhy1 Ghee garetva,Glcs cvl // e deGfce etior7y '714- 17A -de- a `79 c. r ¢` Cohne� -s e.R` s ti , ,�� l b /cr Sl 4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. The p. r o5cc/ /.c) /// be 5/KI7 / l ow- / r .Scale oc z tj of c 4' C/eve/opir op7d & dl use .slim' - 1x-24 //r/4 /s 5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environmental im- pacts. • . 7h. propvso / Zvi // na cvr.4.-1`e ctny eIvi - cnmek J /n7 104G'1 4 6. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features in the area. . - *CPC a/e tio 6117 /a c:ItiaA` I. /57 - ca, - /z.'i S /rn 71,6 7%4 7 are Q ca7 -, 4J prbpcPS•f or w / a icr. ec7' . ,pr-of o54-/ MIEN DEPT. SECTION A-A 141.-0" .,....„ ..: .. 1048 W JAMES ST, SUITS102' '•. ,. Karr; WASHINGTOtt 98032 'z •, , - PHONE (206) 8544.5010 . —. v v .. ±; \ REGISTERED . • ARCHITECT. . . TOR-JAN-RONHOVDE • STATE OF WASHINGTON • • ,. . . . • .. TUKWILA DENTAL CENTER: . . TUKWILA, WA. • . : . , . _ . . . . . , . ,,,, • . , : • .,-...-, ..,..... -..- , - . , • • .. , -.. . . . • .,.f...::::.,...... .... ... . , ,: ..,, .., 1 11'' 1 fl! T ' E:' • '' " „ FEB I 81992 DNA/RONHOVDE ARCHITECTS' r.- • -, -• ';;.,-,. '','-' ",/,.,. ' • :-.: :, , • - ...-., 47f. 7:::f.±' , . ,„.4., , . ...... ';■ .;":,::,.: ;.7 , .71; r•:'•: Sheet Contents . , • • • , ..rk-..._.sec.17,1 .. ..., .. . . .. : ...., , '', ::-.=:, FEB1 81992 ' , • ' ' ' YPLANNING DEPT.' . 7*.- ,..., ' . • ,1 • ,:..: ,..,•: , :•, ,, • , . , :r.,• ; :• ...;, .Revieloos,, A-',40wg,; ;14,-: 1.. No Date •:: DeaCrlOtIonN C. :::,i'.'Y .. ., .i'.;';','`.t.tt.f :1' 7 •, ..-,:;;;;::::, t'. ; A-; '..i.! fA704 ;.. t,..47 riiirzoi, Inr lv-i.. -,:•.--;,. , .,.... • Job No.. i • Sheet : 4i.,. No,q, 7 Drawn Elyrft Checked Elyt Date;.: ' -, ' ,, .•'. r''' ,:.••:. V.. :q e2iJoarriAti-J4 — si-rri , r gsterr ts4 0 L1 L-Eow=e •P'._ : " — 7 , 41 6. 1 1_o .14 r) .4 61 ■" I i. • •:•-y,AnG• I A: I A■C.4DUST C•Alik• • 11 , : ' TFE ARCHITECTS , 1 \ . . . . . . . . . ..• . .„ . • . . .. . .. . „ . . „ . „ . . : . . . , . . . . . . . . .. .. „ . . . .. . . .. . „ . . . . . . . „ . . . . . . . . . . .* "''''''' ' ''''''''''''"''''''''''' . "'''''' - ' - -'-''' ''''''. ''''''''' ' - ' - . . , . . , . . . ' • . '7 sP r i;'7;t1 7 4ruh l itiq ti Lusi,v "NcficAN '2 .•7'4 •• c .a.pfiwkhA ' T., ‘ .- •4'4:41. qft.,Tt,''4'.4 • ,,, -0 tid. , -,... .N.' 1 • it. t r . .,?",..,:■••, z ... ... .. `i "•• ' ,.: •`' ''' "' • ........ k. '4 , ... 4.0tf,• +4' ,..L, , 1., 1 : ro. 4. AI' 'fi,',1 • i ..!..t... • °I ... ",---' Ll , : 1 : . 0 ., , : , ' tiltiVra g& 111221362 W iltmailmal=m ant. - .. ' - ' "P •ble vor* r.''"' 4 ‘ . C '44- '. He ., .. • iirm DIN'X'4. • 'op' .. ,...: An.* --At1187—: - --° :7,f 4 Vrini tt t 7 a; • • agrasaxw :. 4344f. REGISTERED' ., . '''...' • • ' ARCHITECT : ‘..... . : , ,, , ... ... . „ . .. . . . . :TGR4ANAONHOYDE 'r STATE Of WASHINGTON :' • . . -,...., : . . . • 4.: •. • • • , • • . •• •••••••,6%, , " • , • ' • ;;,...r 11111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111I111 I'l lilliltill 41111411111111111111111111111,1111111111,11111111IIIIIII ... ..-: ... , . .;':'' • ' 2 3 ' . 4----=,.-L- -,..; ',..4 .--:,;;;;;,—........_6..___....J.........,....,7___:: .:..;:,•.:;.' 8 i: :..•••••...,: • 10 :•••::' . '. .11 .......... 12: r . ; . 0 ....INCH 1 • ' IP-THIS ;MICIWFILHED:.:DOCUMENT4StESS 1:, • .'• : ,:- •. ,', , :•••• -, • • • • - - : , ''' I • • ---- ' - :',- 0 .:. 6z .., 8L. '• .12 .. . • • ' . '. ' . 1 CLEAltlHAteJTHIT±NOTICEIVIShDtlE ,.•';f0 ' •• .-. • • .• '. '' ' ' ••'••• • 7 • .: '' ' •••'' .. f" '• '.?:',- ' : :!,.: • • • . • • <• • • , • ; • • : • : • " „ . • „ • • • • . '■• " - •• „ • • .• BRUMNG 44.232 _.�_. trE 7 1I■ 1 Mel"; ^(Ohl p --- ! t `'epErtci„4c■ f 0.1 I. -Ih1.L t ti V1 bw .F lo-r I I" ::. _ q'�2'' coP:�ati�lEp : uitT • :7EARBI?9;i'OOIJNL ��lijlli�lllllll�lllllll�IIIIIIIIIIIILIIIIIII! I���l !J�ll� ►I�I�I� I�I�I�I�I�III�I�I� q4L P111111111 1 1- � PIIITIll�II p wnu,mw 1 2 3" 4_:_____:::.:. � , 6 _: .___... 7 8 9 10 11 w,-MNequuNr 12 �' IF, Ill IS ILLI'IED;DOCUMENTAS LESS ! CLEAR�THAN�,THIS IiViS DUE'4 'O 1 Z : H -i' =I IGI A1.. DOC NT .. y.- �: 2 .f., c ., .. f ..t , •� Y OtY. I i il�If11T1nffl Itt111II l fiffillifi � i� ailinillu<i0[iui 1111IiR;i1illim 'x �i�ilnfP I i I i i IIII �l W: �t l j . u,.�l Si }s it`Yt `r "f + " .Y'"+ t v P §A +bY' `•'r +sr q.i y T 1 N � . r: 4 v xa•c+ ' .Bb a sv lsions• ' 'TOR- JAN :RONHOVDE ATE OF,WASHINGTON 1. Contractor Shall obtain ell permits pay any tens. as required for any work ammoniated with the •landseape Auld irrigation work'** shown. • 2. Vsilty'I�ac *!lens of .11 scoriae to any work. Adjust' . work +s'rpalrad, upon ?approval of the LA, othsy appropriate • :'daslan conaultant(a)'and /Or owner: ' 'Verity loeatlon•et all prior to any work. • arltq' all' Ladvare. conditions, vaoont+ prealble, to L1, *realt.ct. and /or`ownar'a attention, prior to . eurrecclona /matlrlcatie .a. . .. . Contractors ;: . conform and comply with all ' • `re ulatloni s a requlrad by the governmental miracles. which. thi!a;) within.. . ' :'Scope,of vork-ehall Lnclud *'all pals, labor, equips.nt. . • and rel.tad items n y to accomplish the aubgrada and • roll preparation,' berg till lsls,.plseeaent and ' gradlnq. at.toproll. ' plesesent of specltled plant Natarl.is, tartllleer, • Vltuln 0 -1, staking and mulenlag, appropriate prot.eelone wintln.nee, guarantee and rsplae.a.nt of plant - material, clean -up, debris• raaoval, and any ltaaa naceasary or inuldsntal to complete the work shown and spacifled.. Land.- Contr.ctor'ahall call Underground Utilities Locator ' S.rvlee prior to any Sark: . . . Shoesld, any. 'or conflictrbs present between the • .•drivingr or specLtle tions and on site conditions, tha lend. cont. , :shall awdlataly• notlty the LA, architect and /or ovner,'prior to proceeding with work. . 2. Abbravlacions for lnt.rpr.tatIon of landscape plans . o.d:.on meta- ballad I barlapped, cont...ont.iner, • • ht..halgth e prd.- rpraad, cal..catlper. N.T.S..not to anal. • alnl.elnlaaa. LA- Landaowpe Arehltect, aaa.- a.xleaa. . ' 4. • All.groundeover shall be planted using trlenglm 'peeing a shown below. � e 1 . • • ma y �V Equal 'paling . S.__ Plane es per details provided. adjustanes will be by the . only. *ring any propoaad.changaa to LA's attention prior :to changes. -Arena or *tending wattt shall be brought to tam .LA . .1. Rototill• clue existing soil to • depth of se prior to any topaoll pile pent.in ell'groundeover planting bed . ar • ' R.ka off all'rocka 2•.dlneter and larger. Place 2e depth of 1 -Way all,tepaotl or•approva0 squat in the'. new groundcavar bed Rototlll into tha subgrade soil* this 2• layer of topioll.'Then'place another 2• Sayer of topsoil, thus adding • total of e••dt topsoil.' Soso beda•a.y :raquira more that:the alnlau. 4 depth of topsoil, adjust as required. to be flush vlth thr.topa of curb., paving, aLd.walks, etc... ' 1e) Fa'.oIL ,Pfa" -A.U.. •�/.,;•;, r .r • �, ic, ./.,4 9- ^.",,. I, An the punting of the tees*, shrubs and i gallon can groundcovera the !allowing topaoll mixture shall be used. Thia topsoil mixture •hulk. be'a total of,'VS% of then 'above ■paalfted topsoil with the balance belay tea of the onalte aorvanud soil.. with all rock. 2• and laryar reaovad. min . these molls• together. Dispose of all rosining unumed•' ` • enlacing molls. awaits it possible. • - Stoney with general contractor It unuied soils need to•be imported from alto. Determine this prior to bidding: ,-.Source of the topsoil ehall'.be approved by the LA.prior to � dallvury. „ Strip all. existing 'weada /graoma. prior to any topsoil •placement or'rotottflinq.. Kasove all debris from site. • Plant lade shall be to the aatlafactlun at the LA prior to•plantingi- and shall only occur after approval of such. 7. Plant pits shall.be toles tho site of the rootballs,ht. and width:. Plant'*. shown in details. Scarify s• of soli under the plant pits. Contractor shall test thn pits for drainage problou, Lt any problems encountered they shall bo'brought . to the SA'a 'attention /or - correction. prior to the contractor taking any actions.. Proposed drainage solutions shall be approved by the LA, upon notlllaatlon by the landscape contractor that there is • . problem. Na. plants will . be allOVed to be planted during times of a wet.or t a muddyanwullti during topsoil only'durinq tisaaf in locally • eseepted:practice. Stake tease shown in the details. U. rartlllae all trace and shrubs and 1 gallon groundcovsre. with ■low ruleeses formula fertiliser tablets, 20 -10 -S, as per aanufacturers.. raasmendations. Agrlform brand tablets or approval equal. • S. All mulch in plant beds .hall ba.appro*iaetaly 1 /2a below all adjoining hard surfaces roads ado. top of curbs, etc... Mulch shall. occur only I se n all. plant beds In which , . Shrubs and groundcover plants only occur. Mulch shall be 2• depth of Nutrauulch as manufactured by 4orthwest.Cescals. Puyallup, WA.. or approved equal: • 10. Apply .Vltealn 7 - 1 root stimulator to plants prior to planting of.any plants. • Apply antldesioant, to plants at the nursery. prior to delivery to mite. 11. Spacings of all plants shall be as per the plan and will be field adjusted by • the landscape contractor, with epprov- al.of the: IAL pnsitu., • 12. the correction of all drainage problems in .11 plant beds ' •la part ot.this contract. Landacape•oontractor shall be responsible for a.tublishing appropriate gradue to that all water shall not collect'ln any plant pits or plant beds or , ayalnec gs and walks. b 12. Any uubet ate... shall.be approved o 14. Contractor shall provide the owner with a one year guarantee on all plant aatarlals and workmanship. hall begin upon final acceptance by LA. Maintain all plantlnes.until final acceptance by the LA. It lathe landaaps.contraetcre ruaponaibillty to arrenga • uleu mauling, at the conclu.lon of the one year guarantee period/ with the owner and the landscape architect, onalte. .LS. Vandalism corrections are not the reeponsiblity of the • contractori however land. cont. shall take every precaution to •protect all work' during conatruction. Provide . fencing /roping as required. Ss. Contractor shall provide the LA with 72 hour notice on the following lnapoctlonet 1. Prl.eonatruction seatingq, attar contract aignsd. 2. Inapactlon of tine flnlehad grads*, prior to planting. 2. Plant,materiel. inspection. 4.. Vinal inspection. 7lesr inspections can occur area by area, as required. • %%dam inspections are r.qulrad. It is the contractors reepanelblllty to call the LA and schedule a clam. The coat of thuae inep.etlona will be the reeponaibility of the owner.' . . 17: Do not prune any existing vegetation or new landscape materialrvlt rut the direction of the LA and /or owner. la. See. all: grading, engineering, Arch. mite, and utility plans. .lv. All finished grader shall be as per the UDC Coda, and locally' • accepted codes for the distance below building aiding. 20. All •plantings shall be Irrigated.ae uhown on the - •ettiOhed- lrrigition:plana. 21. provide an acurate eA'- Built• drawing of the final landscape • and irrigation work to the LA, upon final approval of the work. ' • 22. Obtain all bonds as required by the state end local codes, • ' to perform work am shown. 21. Protect all existing fencing at the property lines, existing g races a existing eloped areas. 24. Any slopes 211 (Koris :evert) end steeper which shall be planted with trees, shrubs or groundcovere shall be covered with jute net matting, lnatallud •r per the manufacturer. • 1 See civil. plans for the proposed ' locos. . 25. Install *Deep 0oote root growth barrier material as per the eanursaturere recommendations, at the bas of all TRE4i..wiT#I Call N If o� l( -C sales. Kirkland. K es.. Kirkland, WA. 487 -0317 tor further information and costa. 24.' Landacepe Contractor shill provide the City or County, In which this protect occurm, with any and all appropriate • A'- eullt• or Revised Plan• information /drawing' that may be r..quired,,et. the Completion of the project, for all landscape work. • 27. All permits and bonds, as may be required by the City or • County,' in which this project occurs, shall be paid for and avaIlebla et the Limas required by the governing Lady, and provldal for by the landscape contractor. •