HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 88-04-DR - SHIMATSU - PARKWAY RETAIL DESIGN REVIEW88-4-DR 88-04-DR
PARKWAY RETAIL SHIMATSU DESIGN REVIEW
•
L
.:i. >:.i"Xd� :i•:Y :'I;tY..YY.'::1;: li#. tFri. 7' ti' f:' 2Z:..'! 3` JiKi+ a'+ p.; 15 ;- 9WF'kn:.e4tn:rta'�.:a!v�wntirta vucctu,�c�.r.�..aw.N.mwp�vnkzr xr�mvH•rrttr.+aar...
AUG 20 1990
t -i
4.4..4 o- G
�rwu. mrznnzan.ensvaV -,» z• a�w�.,..,.,...,.�...
8 -p0
•
/ v.
V
5 -P [ ...,[2.1.-a..•... v 60-1- /a4 7 0- i-0...4.
ma y ,54.461 w,'JL
7 , /4'7 /Go
/ S/7 , 5' S
L .SO
- L K 4.6 ?'w d c..- .
3 . tea- , .��.. 1
2. .
...�.,.�� rte•.. ..L.. y. 0 f• J - . � , y, 3 f• 2 s p
e-0
G., 1 c �...Q. �G-«J , �t�..(.c. �,.� .a - o - '�• •; ..cam.. atiL�,.� Q `�2
v .
72 0- , -X- -7, " cis-x...84,4.... • te.- (Z.
adrAi
3,1 - ••3 9 Y)
A L • '.'f; 1, • . i , • . ..,::5...,..,.:',•.... .. -. . ... ►
•
• . ••! •f.
•
T
•
•1
•4 ... i' i •Il •ti •
• ' L:'ti•�:
• J .t ', �c11 1 • •
• . • . C.• ,, • ..
• •1!
• J.
'
• � . i . 1,1 • • • , . v /. • .. • •
s. •
. r 4. •.,. • j'!1• • 1 . ' • j • ' �
•
•
y= o I.& 1 ' % ' o •
-Oµti Mr .. SI � yr
•
•
•
' �"'.
. ; ,
ply.. suas6c -T-o
L i t
15-GAKD tA SL Y SAMG
Sva KT AS AirkovdD
9
fZil
; y $. A.
• 201
• 41
• QJ
•
I
.o
• ,� • •
'e>U11;✓ jNd' " °A'
r• "• I� j S 'tr7 41•
• • ' 1 4-a' - II
er
- - ..... -,. _I •_ ,- .•••
N NI
AUG 20 199(1
Or :1UKa{l
• ; Plp►NN%NG UEPT
•
•
W c p
•
r
"NM
P1 • r
•
•
•
• .:1 t, b rbrr
•
.1,• `'
I "I' '•'
T
ti •
to
t1
r v ,
•
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 11, 1989
The meeting was called to order at 8:07 p.m. by Chairman Randy
Coplen. Members present were Messrs. Haggerton, Hamilton, Cagle,
Coplen Kirsop and Verhalen.
Mr. Knudson was absent.
Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu and Joanne
Johnson.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MR KIRSOP MOVED AND MR. CAGLE SECONDED A
MOTION TO APPROVE THE DECEMBER 21, 1988 MINUTES AS CORRECTED.
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
ELECTION OF 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS
MR. KIRSOP MOVED AND MR. HAMILTON SECONDED A MOTION TO REELECT
RANDY COPLEN AS CHAIRMAN FOR A SECOND TERM.
Mr. Coplen declined the nomination.
MOTION AND SECOND WITHDRAWN BY MR KIRSOP AND HAMILTON.
MR. HAMILTON MOVED AND KIRSOP SECONDED A MOTION TO NOMINATE JIM
HAGGERTON AS CHAIRMAN. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. COPLEN MOVED AND HAMILTON SECONDED A MOTION TO NOMINATE LEE
CAGLE AS VICE CHAIRMAN FOR 1989. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Haggerton commended Mr. Coplen for a job well done. The
Commissioners concurred.
88 -4 -DR FOSTER CENTER - Request for design review of the const-
ruction of two retail office buildings with a total of 78,895
square feet on 5.72 acres.
Mr. Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner, reviewed the proposal and
recommended approval subject to conditions noted in the Staff
Report.
Mr. Hamilton expressed a concern regarding continued public
access to the river.
Planning Commission
January 11, 1989
Page 2
Mr. Robert Fadden, project architect and applicant representa-
tive, explained circulation other design features. He considered
it appropriate to mark the parking stalls at the easterly end of
the southerly building as public available parking for weekends
and prior to 8:00 am and after 5:00 pm to provide access to the
river. He concurred with the conditions outlined by staff.
Michael Rice, President of Park Properties and purchaser of this
property, reviewed the tenant interest already expressed and
explained that interest has been very strong. He concurred with
the provisions of the project to ensure public access to the
river.
Discussion ensued on the project.
MR. CAGLE MOVED AND KIRSOP SECONDED A MOTION TO ACCEPT BUILDING
AS PROPOSED IN 88 -4 -DR WITH THE PROVISION THAT THEY COMPLY WITH
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1 THROUGH 5 AS LISTED AND INCLUDING THE
AVAILABILITY OF A REASONABLE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON NIGHTS
AND WEEKENDS.
The conditions are as follows':
1. Complete vacation of Maule Avenue and eliminate any internal
lot lines;
2. Provide pedestrian walks having a minimum 4 -foot usable
width along buildings and illumination which does not
produce off -site glare;
3. Provide rolled curbs at the northern emergency access
driveway and sod with grasscrete;
4. All trees shall be root pruned and balled prior to issuance
of a building permit; and
5. Final landscape plans to be stamped by a Washington or
Oregon State licensed landscape architect, reflect 80%
ground coverage in two years, and note provision of an
automatic irrigation system serving all planting areas.
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
A five - minute recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 8:40.
88 -12 -DR - TUKWILA POND - Request for design review of a 170,000
square foot retail shopping center adjacent to Tukwila Pond. The
proposed development would occupy, with buildings and paved
areas, about 14 acres of the total 39 -acre site.
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
December 9, 1988
Kim Hart, Finance Department
Vernon Umetsu, Planning Department*
Partial Refund of Cash Assignment for Performance of
Landscaping Work
Please refund to Bob
funds deposited with
(Receipt #5365A).
The balance of $450
completion of work.
Schofield the amount of $3,250.00 of the
the City of Tukwila on September 15, 1988
.00 will continue to be held to ensure
ALC LAo,raSC /MP2ove'Mc.trs Nlt Vc ?
coM p ce-reD 7 ? M Y SAM' EA c 77 OA/ . T
R,6- COM M aiD IZCF() o f TffCr IVVovC-S"
VU /jj
•
00 SHAMROCK LANDSCAPING & NURSERY, INC. Candsicaper
Jim Hunsaker • WCL Pat Hunsaker • WCL John Hunsaker • WCL
560 SckQ
34o1Q 130 Pi �.
B.Q'l 1 �►� , �a�ln cr otS
L2 k€
k W SoC4.JCQ g fie g�d�
I DEC 8 1988 1
Lo, v� d SCa�e c.o ►v, p(.eV ► o .
0, 3 1-I 1 no . Iuo ..Qas1/4- c. ze.. ey6 l``"5 .
C 'S «�►� - Z-�i _ S 5► cie sld
T bkal c ‘ko cAry
11335 Durland Pl. N.E., Seattle, Washington 98125 • 365 -4378
g cerf h
September b4 1988
Robert Schofield
3806 130th N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
RE: CASH PERFORMANCE DEPOSIT FOR UNCOMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS TO
SOUTHCENTER RETAIL BUILDING (BP No. 5271/88- 4 -DR).
Dear Bob,
I find that the improvements satisfy requirements and the
applicant's presentation to the Board of Architectural Review
(File 88 -4 -DR) with respect to parking and landscaping except for
the following:
Item
1. Emplacement of nine deciduous accent trees along the south
building wall per project proposal. This area must be
served by an automatic irrigation system. The total amount
of trees may be varied by the Planning Director at his sole
discretion,
2. Placement of sufficient low ground cover to provide ninety
percent coverage within three years,
3. Placement of two additional parking lot trees at the north
end of the building per project proposal
Your landscape contractor's estimate to complete the above is
$ SOQ2 1 Q0 . Your deposit of 150 percent of
this amount is $ s .,�. 7 47 40.0c)
A check for this
deposit is a City requirement to assure completion, in order for
an interim City approval of these items.
These items must be completed within two weeks after permanent
sewer hook -up. Failure to complete all improvements in this time
shall result in the City Planning Director, at his sole
discretion, authorizing completion of these improvements and
assessing all costs against the *4jIOB deposit. All unexpended
funds will be returned. *3700
You will be liable for any costs which exceed the deposited
amount.
Vernon Umetsu, Assoc. Planner
I a to the abov- provisions.
4 4 19117
_ __411-1LAL
Robert Schofield
c oM PG z
Pc N3) e(
REVISED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING
•
APPLICANT: A. Shimatsu /Y. Mikami
(29 /NTC.SHIMAT)
c
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
NOTICE OF DECISION
FILE NUMBER: 88 -4 -DR: Parkway Retail Building
REQUEST: Construct a one - story, 24,243- square foot retail building on a
66,000- square foot parcel.
LOCATION: On Southcenter Parkway, immediately north of 17015 Southcenter
Parkway, Tukwila, WA.
The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) conducted a review of the request on
May 12, 1988, and approved the proposed project. The Board also approved an
option of establishing hanging flower baskets as presented in Staff Report
Attachment F (see Planning Department file).
Any party aggrieved by this decision may appeal the decision to the City Coun-
cil by filing an appeal in writing with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of
the above date and shall state the reasons for the appeal.
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner
May 13, 1988
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission and Board
of Architectural Review will conduct a public hearing on May 12, 1988, at
8:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter
Boulevard, to consider the following:
Planning Commission Public Hearing
87 -2 -CPA: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SIDEWALK POLICIES
City of Tukwila
Add policies on the design and provision of sidewalks in the
CBD to the Comprehensive Plan, and amend TMC 18.70 (Noncon-
forming Lots, Structures and Uses; Tukwila Zoning Code) and
TMC 11.64 (Sidewalk Construction).
City of Tukwila, south of I -405 and east of I -5.
1. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
1. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
2. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
3. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
4. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
5. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement
or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above cases may be
obtained at the Tukwila Planning Department. The City encourages you to notify
your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above
items.
Published: Valley Daily News - Sunday May 1, 1988
Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants,
Adjacent Property Owners, File.
(21 /NTC.5 -12)
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
City of Tukwila
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
Board of Architectural Review Public Meeting
87- 14 -DR: State Farm
Castillo Company, Inc.
Construct a two -story office building with 18,401 square
feet on a 4.42 acre site.
Approximately 100 feet east of the interurban Avenue South/
Southcenter Boulevard intersection in the NW * of Sec. 24,
Twn. 23, Rge. 4, Tukwila, WA
88 -2 -DR: SCHNEIDER TOWNHOMES
G. Schneider
Construct 9 two -story townhouses on two separate lots.
East of 65th Avenue South, at the east end of South 153rd
Street, Tukwila, WA.
88 -3 -DR: 6450 BUILDING
Bruce Solly Development Company
Construct a one - story, 15,000- square foot office building on
a 53,000- square foot parcel.
NW corner of the Southcenter Boulevard /65th Avenue South
Intersection, Tukwila, WA.
88 -4 -DR: PARKWAY RETAIL BUILDING
A. Shimatsu /Y. Mikami
Construct a one - story, 24,243- square foot retail building on
a 66,000- square foot parcel.
On Southcenter Parkway, immediately north of 17015 South -
center Parkway, Tukwila, WA.
88 -5 -DR: METRO INTERURBAN PUMP STATION ODOR SCRUBBER
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
Construct and screen a 9.33 -foot tall odor scrubbing pipe and
tank.
On Interurban Avenue South, across from Foster Golf Course,
Tukwila, WA.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1800
Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
Tukwila Board of Architectural Review
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner
May 6, 1988
88 -4 -DR: PARKWAY RETAIL BUILDING -
ADDENDUM TO THE STAFF REPORT OF APRIL 7, 1988
E Itl Lf7L 4
The applicant has submitted project modifications on May 5, 1988 (attached) in
response to the Staff Report of April 7, 1988. These changes are generally as
follows:
Landscaping
1. Landscaping along Southcenter Parkway has been increased and materials
modified. This includes street trees 40 feet on center, a larger landscaped
vehicle entry, and introduction of evergreen shrubs.
2. The applicant has verbally stated that the hanging planters will be elimin-
ated in favor of a four -foot cantilevered overhang and low planters at
points along the storefront walkway.
3. Additional landscape detail has been provided along the north and south
property lines. Five Flowering Pear trees have been introduced along the
south building face to relieve the blank concrete wall. These trees are
deciduous and slow - growing to a height of 40 feet.
Building Design
4. A four -foot wide cantilevered canopy has been introduced along the north -
and east - facing storefronts to increase architectural variety and detail.
5. A glass display wall has been added to the south building wall to increase
harmony with the adjacent Center place development. This glass wall runs
approximately 27 feet from the front of the building. The applicant has
verbally stated that the location of Center Place relative to the enhanced
south wall will be presented at the Board meeting.
FY, 74,1NrAkMClonAtOvaA•odzo. w.wu. v «... a w.•.w..+.aw...w....
MEMORANDUM to:
Tukwila Board of Architectural Review
The applicant's modifications increase the level of design harmony, and level of
architectural variety and detail. However, the Board must still determine if
these changes resolve those issues raised in the staff report, and if the
project satisfies the review guidelines. '
VU /sjn
Attachment F: Modified Landscape Plan, May 5, 1988
Attachment G: Modified Building Elevations, May 5, 1988
Attachment H: Modified Perspective, May 5, 1988
zs%'
7 4.64 - 64 ‘--
Vernon Umetsu
May 6, 1988
Page 2
a
• ,
• . . • .
' n.,1_ • —,L . '."!,
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission and Board
of Architectural Review will conduct a public hearing on April 28, 1988, at
8:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter
Boulevard, to consider the following:
1. Case Number: 87 -2 -CPA: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SIDEWALK POLICIES
Applicant: City of Tukwila
Request: Add policies on the design and provision of sidewalks in the
CBD to the Comprehensive Plan, and amend TMC 18.70 (Noncon-
forming Lots, Structures and Uses; Tukwila Zoning Code) and
TMC 11.64 (Sidewalk Construction).
Location: City of Tukwila, south of I -405 and east of I -5.
1. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
2. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
3. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
4. Case Number:
Applicant:
Request:
Location:
(21/NTC.4 -28)
City of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
City of Tukwila
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Board of Architectural Review Public Meeting
88 -2 -DR: SCHNEIDER TOWNHOMES
G. Schneider
Construct 9 two -story townhouses on two separate lots.
East of 65th Avenue South, at the east end of South 153rd
Street, Tukwila, WA.
88 -3 -DR: 6450 BUILDING
Bruce Solly Development Company
Construct a one - story, 15,000- square foot office building on
a 53,000 - square foot parcel.
NW corner of the Southcenter Boulevard /65th Avenue South
Intersection, Tukwila, WA.
88 -4 -DR: PARKWAY RETAIL BUILDING
A. Shimatsu /Y. Mikami
Construct a one - story, 24,243- square foot retail building on
a 66,000- square foot parcel.
On Southcenter Parkway, immediately north of 17015 South -
center Parkway, Tukwila, WA.
88 -5 -DR: METRO INTERURBAN PUMP STATION ODOR SCRUBBER
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
Construct and screen a 9.33 -foot tall odor scrubbing pipe and
tank.
On Interurban Avenue South, across from Foster Golf Course,
Tukwila, WA.
Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement
or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above cases may be
obtained at the Tukwila Planning Department. The City encourages you to notify
your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above
items.
Published: Valley Daily News - Sunday April 17, 1988
Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants,
Adjacent Property Owners, File.
;1909
qty of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 14, 1988
The meeting was called to order at 8:06 p.m. by Mr. Coplen,
Chairman. Members present were Messrs. Coplen, Kirsop, Knudson,
Hamilton and Haggerton.
Mr. Larson was absent.
Representing the staff were Moira Bradshaw and Joanne Johnson.
MINUTES
MR. KNUDSON MOVED TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 31, 1988
MEETING AS AMENDED. MR. HAGGERTON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
88 -1 -R and 88 -1 -CA: FIRE DISTRICT #1 ANNEXATION - Continued -
Continued Public Hearing from the March 31, 1988 Planning
Commission meeting regarding annexation area and City -wide
amendments to the Zoning Map and Zoning Code.
Moira Bradshaw reviewed the supplement to the March 17, 1988
staff report.
The Public Hearing was reopened.
Mr. Daniel P. Wolf, 11821 44th Avenue S. expressed his concerns
regarding a proposed rezone in the annexation area from R -1 to M-
1. He submitted a list of persons living in the affected area
which were surveyed for their preference. This was entered into
the record as Exhibit 9.
Mr. Mike Levy, 17310 S.E. 45th Street, Issaquah represented the
owner of a mobile home park in the annexation area. He expressed
his concern at the adverse impacts to low income residents should
a change be recommended from what is now presently permitted in
the area.
Ms. Bradshaw clarified that the park would be unaffected by the
proposed changes.
Planning Commission
April 14, 1988
Page 2
Bob Mackin, 1301 Aetna Plaza, 2201 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA
98121 represented Scott Traverso and Six Robblees Inc. His
concern was the adverse impacts the landscaping requirement of
the M -2 zone would have on businesses presently operating in the
area.
Neil Robblee, 11010 Pacific Highway South felt the landscaping
requirement would result in poor visibility and, thus, create a
safety hazard for trucks leaving his business. He requested
flexibility to move landscaping back from the street.
Scott Traverso, 11025 S.E. 60th, Renton, concurred with Mr. Rob -
blee and also felt that landscaping placed around the building
would be more appropriate.
Pete Hedegard, 16800 N.E. 31st, Bellevue favored landscaping
against the buildings or kept at lower levels and in narrower
areas. He felt trees would create a visual hazard for truck
traffic and therefore should not be part of the landscaping.
Bill Schaible, 5729 S. Pamela Drive, Seattle, WA. He has a 1973
mobile home on his property and wanted it grandfathered in. He
has three lots but they are difficult to develop because of their
shape and easements. Inability to use a mobile home would render
the property useless.
Discussion ensued on this issue.
Ed Woyvodich, 14415 - 57th Avenue S., pointed out that the fill
that took place on his property was in accordance with all King
County standards. He submitted a diagram of his property as
Exhibit 10. He felt that unless the property is designated
commercial, his property will be rendered useless.
John Richards, 15320 - 64th Avenue S. represented Rainier Bank.
He favored a 65 foot building height limitation or, subsequent to
Board of Architectural review, the option of going higher.
Sharon Stanley, 12072 - 44th Place S. was concerned with the
impacts a rezone from R -1 to M -1 would have on her property. She
wanted the neighborhood and quality of life to be maintained as
it is.
Norma Derr, 12507 - 50th Place S. expressed a concern regarding
the inability to use mobile homes would have on development of
the rather small lots in their area.
Glenda Knudson, 12050 - 44th Place S. requested information as to
the impacts the annexation and rezone will have on her property.
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 14, 1988
Page 3
Louis Stanley, 12072 - 44th Place S. asked if the current zoning
would remain the same if annexation were to occur.
Mr. Hamilton clarified that the intent is to preserve the current
zoning.
Dan Wolf asked for clarification on the current status of the
proposed rezone from R -1 to M -1.
Mr. Knudson clarified that a vote was not taken at the last
meeting.
The Public Hearing was closed and a 4- minute recess was called.
MR. HAMILTON MOVED TO APPROVE ALTERNATIVE 1 OF THE STAFF REPORT
WITH A PROPOSED NEW SECTION M -2L WHOSE PURPOSE SHALL READ AS
STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE ADDITION OF "AND FLEXIBLE
FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING, TO AMEND TABLE 2 OF THE STAFF REPORT TO
SHOW THE M -2L ZONE WITH FIVE FEET OF FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING. MR.
KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. HAMILTON MOVED THAT ISSUE NO. 2 MOBILE HOME /MANUFACTURED
HOMES THAT WE ACCEPT THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION. MR. KNUDSON
SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. HAGGERTON MOVED TO APPROVE THE HEIGHT OF THE ENTIRE DISTRICT
AS SHOWN ON THE MAP (BOARD 3) TO 65 FEET WHICH IS COMPATIBLE WITH
OUR EXITING CODE AND HIGHER SUBJECT TO BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW APPROVAL ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. MR. KIRSOP SECONDED THE
MOTION WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
MR. KIRSOP MOVED TO LEAVE THE DESIGNATION ON THE TWO BLOCKS
DESIGNATED LIGHT INDUSTRY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS R -1, 7.2.
MR. HAMILTON SECONDED THE MOTION. A VOTE WAS TAKEN WITH KIRSOP
AND HAMILTON VOTING YES; MR. KNUDSON VOTING NO AND MR. HAGGERTON
OBTAINING.
Mr. Coplen gated that a note of thanks was received from Mrs.
Sowinski:;
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Joanne Johnson
Secretary
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Building Design
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1800
Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
Tukwila Board of Architectural Review
Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner
May 6, 1988
88 -4 -DR: PARKWAY RETAIL BUILDING -
ADDENDUM TO THE STAFF REPORT OF APRIL 7, 1988
The applicant has submitted project modifications on May 5, 1988 (attached) in
response to the Staff Report of April 7, 1988. These changes are generally as
follows:
Landscaping
1. Landscaping along Southcenter Parkway has been increased and materials
modified. This includes street trees 40 feet on center, a larger landscaped
vehicle entry, and introduction of evergreen shrubs.
2. The applicant has verbally stated that the hanging planters will be elimin-
ated in favor of a four -foot cantilevered overhang and low planters at
points along the storefront walkway.
3. Additional landscape detail has been provided along the north and south
property lines. Five Flowering Pear trees have been introduced along the
south building face to relieve the blank concrete wall. These trees are
deciduous and slow - growing to a height of 40 feet.
4. A four -foot wide cantilevered canopy has been introduced along the north -
and east - facing storefronts to increase architectural variety and detail.
5. A glass display wall has been added to the south building wall to increase
harmony with the adjacent Center place development. This glass wall runs
approximately 27 feet from the front of the building. The applicant has
verbally stated that the location of Center Place relative to the enhanced
south wall will be presented at the Board meeting.
• `MEMORANDUM to: (w.,
Tukwila Board of Architectural Review
The applicant's modifications increase the level of design harmony, and level of
architectural variety and detail. However, the Board must still determine if
these changes resolve those issues raised in the staff report, and if the
project satisfies the review guidelines.
VU /sjn
Attachment F: Modified Landscape Plan, May 5, 1988
Attachment G: Modified Building Elevations, May 5, 1988
Attachment H: Modified Perspective, May 5, 1988
Vernon Umetsu
May 6, 1988
Page 2
•1909
qty of Tukwila
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
(206) 433 -1849
STAFF REPORT
to the Board of Architectural Review
Prepared April 7, 1988
HEARING DATE: April 28, 1988
FILE NUMBER: 88 -4 -DR: Parkway Retail Building
APPLICANT: Akiko Shimatsu
LOCATION:
REQUEST: To construct a 24,243 square -foot, one -story retail
building on a 66,000 square foot site.
ACREAGE: 1.515 acres
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial
On Southcenter Parkway, immediately north of 17015
Southcenter Parkway (Center Place). T.L. 9011 -07 and
9012 -06 in the SE* of Sec. 26, Twn. 23, Rge. 4, Tukwila
Washington (Attachment A)
ZONING DISTRICT: C -2: Regional Retail Business
SEPA
DETERMINATION: Environmental Determination to be made prior to
April 28, 1988.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Vicinity Map
(B) Site Plan
(C) Building Elevation
(D) Existing Land Use
(E) Perspective View from Across Southcenter Parkway
• STAFF REPORT � 88 -4 -DR: Akiko Shimatsu
to the BAR Page 2
VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION
BACKGROUND
FINDINGS
1. Project Description: The applicant proposes to construct a one - story,
24,243- square foot retail building on a 66,000 square foot site. The devel-
opment is shown in Attachments B and C.
The structure is "L" shaped and located 20 feet from the property line along
Southcenter Parkway. Also to be built are 78 parking spaces, a six -foot
sidewalk along Southcenter Parkway per TMC 11.64, and various landscape
planting areas.
Building elevations are shown in Attachment C. The structure is 19 feet
tall with a flat roof. On the north and east faces are glass store fronts
for approximately half the height, followed by a flat concrete wall. On the
south and (rear) west building faces are 19 -foot tall concrete walls. Total
building height includes a 3 -foot parapet and decorative cornice with 2 -3
foot overhang.
The central peak is an additional 12 feet tall by one foot wide. The decor-
ative arch within this peak is 7 feet tall by 15.5 feet wide, and inset six
inches. This central element is of the same materials and coloring as the
building's concrete wall and parapet (see North Elevation). Color samples
will be presented at the Board meeting.
2. Existing Development: The site is currently cleared, filled and vacant.
3. Surrounding Land Use: Attachment D is an existing land use map. To the
immediate south is a commercial mall (Center Place) similar to the one
proposed; to the west is a steep hillside and I -5; to the north is an
agricultural parcel; and to the east is the Bon Marche Distribution Center
across Southcenter Parkway.
4. Terrain: The site is generally flat, at an elevation similar to Southcenter
Parkway.
5. Access: Access to the project is via one 30 -foot wide driveway onto South -
center Parkway. Additional secondary access for service and emergency
vehicles is being coordinated with Center Place.
6. Utilities: The site is fully served except for sewer. Sewer service is
being arranged through a local improvement district (LID 32).
This is the first project to be reviewed under the Board's expanded design
review authority for projects in all C -2, C -M, and C -P zones. The Shimatsu
project and the northerly abutting Mikami property are the last parcels of farm-
land in Tukwila's central business district to be developed into commercial use.
' STAFF REPORT 88 -4 -DR: Akiko Shimatsu
to the BAR Page 3
DECISION CRITERIA
The proposed project has over 10,000 square feet of building area and is in the
C -2 zone. It is therefore subject to Board review (TMC 18.60.030(2)(B)).
The Board's review criteria are shown below in bold, followed by pertinent
findings of fact.
1. TMC 18.60.050(1) - Relationship of Structure to Site
1. The height and scale of the building is generally consistent with the
project site.
2. Transition between streetscape and building is relatively abrupt. The
building's flat, 19 foot high wall is located 23 feet from the edge of
a six -foot sidewalk (i.e., slightly more than a 19 -foot parking stall).
This is less than half the distance of the existing Center Place to its
eight -foot sidewalk.
A more harmonious transition between building and streetscape might
be achieved by the extension of street trees from the Center Place
development.
3. Pedestrian movement would be enhanced by architecturally sheltering the
building walkway. This would also provide an element of architectural
interest to help reduce design monotony (see BAR Criteria 4).
2. TMC 18.60.050(2) - Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area
1. The project is oriented and open to the north, with significant poten-
tial for coordinated development if and when the adjacent northern
Mikami parcel is developed.
However, the proposed project turns its back on the adjacent Center
Place development to the south. This project presents Center Place
with a 19 foot high, flat and blank concrete wall extending 66 feet
beyond the face of existing development (see Attachments B and C -
South Elevation). No coordinated extension of the Center Place covered
building walkway is proposed.
2. No significant landscape transition to the Center Place development is
proposed along the street or common boundary. The applicant asserts
that the proposed street -front landscaping is a unique floral theme
which is carried through the development, and is an integral component
of the architectural design. Thus, the marked landscaping contrast
between this project and the traditional ground cover /cherry tree
frontage landscaping to the south is unavoidable. Perhaps a blend of
existing and proposed landscaping can be achieved.
3. Shrubs and ground cover are currently proposed along the southern
concrete wall. The pine -like trees shown in the southern elevation
(Attachment C) are conceptual representations only. The plants in this
STAFF REPORT -
to the BAR
88 -4 -DR: Akiko Shimatsu
Page 4
location are columnar juniper shrubs, approximately seven feet tall
and located on the adjacent property. These shrubs are not planted
to provide an opaque vegetative screen, and extend the length of the
property to the sidewalk. In addition, screening of a project should
be done on its own property without reliance on adjacent development.
4. The proposed finished concrete and glass building contrasts with the
adjacent dark shake exterior of the Center Place development. However,
there is a variety of architectural styles in this area. Contrasting
building design and materials between adjacent developments in this
area is not unusual. What is unusual is the proposed heavy reliance on
flowers to soften the building's impact and break up flat walls. In
addition, colored tiles are proposed to soften the flat walls.
3. TMC 18.60.050(3) - Landscaping and Site Treatment
The landscape plan is shown in Attachment B. This plan does not contain
sufficient detail for final approval. There are no plant varieties, sizes,
or amounts identified nor have automatic irrigation plans been submitted.
Within these limitations, the staff has the following findings.
1. Landscaping consists of low shrubs, floral displays at two street
frontage points, and nineteen 1/ -foot square floral hangings. The
floral hangings are located approximately 9'4" high, and are spaced
approximately 18 feet on center. The applicant has verbally agreed to
place two cherry tree type plantings in each parking island to help
break up the effect of large paved areas.
2. The applicant asserts that this is a landscape plan unique to the area.
It provides large areas of color to attractively present the develop-
ment, and is an integral accent to building architecture. The low
plant material choice is a purposeful design which allows the building
and floral hangings to be viewed from the street. Three plantings of
flowers and one planting of ivy each year are proposed.
3. On -going maintenance and replenishment of floral elements is essential
given the applicant's reliance upon these colorful plantings to provide
architectural detail, variety, and form. The staff is concerned that
there be an enforceable rapid mechanism and standards to ensure high
quality floral plantings.
4. TMC 18.60.050(4) - Building Design
The proposed building is described in Finding 1, Project Description. The
staff finds the following based on this description.
1. The flat building walls contain architectural elements of glass store-
fronts, colored tile accents, and a thin building cap for fluorescent
lighting. The west, south and north walls are flat concrete. This
monotony could be relieved by stronger vertical /horizontal building
elements and perhaps some building modulation.
' STAFF REPORT 88 -4 -DR: Akiko Shimatsu
to the BAR Page 5
2. The south flat concrete wall faces and is very visible to Center Place
which is an open retail /pedestrian mall. There is no coordination
between the proposed building and the Center Place building design.
Additional architectural design elements are needed to break up the
wall's monotony, and provide harmony with Center Place.
3. The central building peak provides some visual interest. However, it
is an isolated element or theme which is not carried through in the
rest of the building.
4. Luminaire plans have not as yet been submitted to demonstrate that no
off -site light spjllover will occur.
5. TMC 18.60.050(5) - Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture
No miscellaneous structures or street furniture are proposed except light
standards (Attachment B).
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above Findings, Planning Staff concludes that significant building
and site design modifications are necessary in order to satisfy Board of Archi-
tectural Review guidelines per TMC 18.60. These modifications include, but are
not limited to:
A. Add variety to the building form and detail along the north and east build-
ing faces, perhaps by pedestrian walkway or other architectural elements.
B. Increase the variety of architectural form and detail along the portion of
south wall visible from the street.
C. Enhance the intersection of the "L" to form additional visual interest while
clearly relating to the building as a whole.
D. The colorful floral areas, integral to the proposal, must be maintained as
represented to the Board. The applicant must be responsible for providing
the City with a surety acceptable to the City Attorney, to maintain and
replenish all floral areas to a standard established by the Board. This
commitment should be recorded with the property title and remain valid for
the life of the building unless jointly amended by the City and property
owner.
E. Building design and colors should be compatible with Center Place.
F. The limited duration of flowers significantly limits their year -round effect
on softening the building's impact. Therefore, flowers should be viewed as
important site accents, separate from the building design.
STAFF REPORT
to the BAR
(22/88- 4- DR.1 -3)
RECOMMENDATIONS
88 -4 -DR: Akiko Shimatsu
Page 6
The staff recommends that the Board of Architectural Review continue its con-
sideration of the proposed project to allow the applicant to modify the design
per the Board's direction.
If the Board requires less significant revisions than recommended herein, the
staff recommends that the Planning Director review final plans for conformance
with the Board's decision.
+0 5 TILE
vicinity map
Tukwila, Washington
ATTACHMENT A
1 1 r
..;;=3 J 1
Pa P Iaza
TAGCMA
r'tjFrj"I,�''N
1
1 • "
ary
Ctus
vr . NA• 3f Alf
tdt —0 dr,
e
• •-1-641.4L1
MCSI•Ll.. KS.
rom brOCY.f.
rotr400,10.•
•
EYKTItilr
• •••• c.
LL•m•••
SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY
R/W AND UTILITY LOCATIONS
FROM CITY RECORDS
•
'U• vrt. Inn
ATTACHMENT B
II•Vrff
••••••• • •*.:,
• •
501,114C.ENTEK. r'
• Z4' n Ltd 4 ri •1' •■•••••••et
•
4,
z
0
3
1
1
p
.. -
willilmullEMENNEMBEESIEMONEESEMO
........... -2.■...
■ie'aa==c,,,S2ommeiairmswom
......■mwe
aimmommum
.. ■.......■ .........-
mialoset.ao
m. ma. M=Cou ium...
mina:ma
■ ma m til
0
MNIIIMINIIIIMININNIMINIIMIMMINM■MI
• www
____
■wl.
mi..
w il■wwiwaw•mlii
-
=mi..= musraLiiiiwagsst
M
wnwwiwwww.......wwwimilm•ww
II
mow
f.....
mm
ow.
mum
ww.,Jiwww.L
_ ........_
-- -w■ww..
.
-4-
-
...
...ow..
...Ns
i
_,
.. -
_ __
_ r t
l ■ -
.
( I.
71+;"
____
f 4
•■•••
i.i.1••
-
=mi..= musraLiiiiwagsst
I.=
ms
.1.......i
_ ........_
4---
, • . .
.
-4-
-
i
MIN
MN
IMM■ SONIMIMMII••115.11■=11
01111•11113
I
11111•••••
NM
■
_
I
■Igml■
ir
--4
Erni
I=
. . .
*
■II
mommilim...
II•M OM MIMM
MEM M•
tq dowN.111..mfq
MI •
.
tr•■■■■
.*:-..
smi mom
...11
. me
'I
a I. - 7 ar
A
r
47 :1 - r
H
ri
H
/\
••■••■••
ATTACHMENT C
El
or.
...W.... • ••• (,)
l ■ -
.
____
______1__
1
1 -.
-
1 1171 1
i
.
-
i
I
I
--4
. . .
*
•
'
.
•
.
^ —
.*:-..
.. _
- - -•;:;:
...t. 1
..:_'.
.':'
. . ...
:: .
. -
s•:." '
-
' •
.:.
• . . .
:,:
. . , ..
1 ,r " - c . .....
-1
I
‘ . T
t
.
L ' •
..--"' *.
--,
-"
%- 1
---1-
1-- -L.- --1
'I
a I. - 7 ar
A
r
47 :1 - r
H
ri
H
/\
••■••■••
ATTACHMENT C
El
or.
...W.... • ••• (,)
Tor
A MI
in 111
Ini..0ffi ewe,
10 ,.•
J 1 Iff;
— 4...
I oot 0
1 MN W em.e.
•..
IIIN r Afe.
i• 1 1 1 coil ree.
PicA cc,,..
La ..." a
1 f .
a . . . •
t .
- 4 . 1
,c ,k . IN • .. / i " a ' 4 4
1 .." " ".;
• NI 4:
V I .:domiL.
' ' it
..r •,... 4 '
I ..-- E _„._,....\_,.
/..,, .i
" .
PROTECT
S I TE
Box/ mAggger
tAiAaFt4ouse
USE N0
1 00o ' (AZ
•
4
rwl
IMPli*"11 � O.: h- • •!.� . "7. __ — __ 1 -
. � ..r ..�� q ` ` 14 `1 �
1 .. ' • 11 .Mr1 l •
. y • �liw` V1:�7 C 11t ' -,_i -_ .1Q: - �• a 4.1�r1
- fif es - — —' _- •- _ —_ • �.. : i)
1
. -
ATTACHMENT E
!I r
0
eisii 21A
3
ttt11
oddd;;,
• t T
leREHLognUELLUDIVI
211. I qialle-IEBEIBEIgliE:
2 gi sETE illeMESUIE 2
iE
fa lit 7118EEBESSEPOSIE ;s*
r ,
11% IESEESEBBEEEED
nESEEEERMEEEEE:1
,,. 8CEECOODICCEMIC"
• hi
...,--.. ii sEDOCUOBWOMMUP
- 111011112WELEM12 8
- sialliMMILIIMIE I
2:„ 5 I' glEMIMMGEDICEILIER
-, 1,`-'..- a RIDENSIMEIZEISIA 13 ti
a v EINEBLEBESELIE!
x
. 0 121ESEESEEESSIGI:
t) 11111119121194;
—15 41 :130EEME; !!! :EGOE i
ii.-1,. . 1 1111111 ":." °°°m '
ii... ..,:
§s-,-7,--fr
z ,?.1 .:
g ..74'
ilV : ! 7 -1
-! : 1 1 -
,, _, _ ,_ ,
„lime, _ ik E, c) 4 is El .t is A) At a t) 4t IA 6
g =I.. os qi• .. 111 4 4. Of 41/ •• ei 4 xi al 4
3
g
4 5 7:- ,,, LI 44•1_411ititiii
4
I-.
3
114
0
sr •
SHARP CUTOFF LUM11_,2ES
Characteristics and Applications
Polyquad (rectilinear style), sharp cutoff luminaires for
outdoor lighting are a special breed of high
performance luminaire. As with single beam
downlights, all light is directed below the horizon, but
Polyquad's wide, twin beam light distribution (IES
'Types II and III) produces relatively large ground
illumination patterns. The design objective was to
achieve outstanding uniformity of illumination out to
areas near the perimeter of a sharply defined pattern
edge (cutoff line). This provides the unique
combination of wide, efficient light distribution and
sharp cutoff of glare and spill light.
Polyquad luminaires are particularly suitable for
outdoor area lighting where relatively high levels of
illumination are required and the benefits of low glare
and spill are recognized. Roadway lighting is
only one of the many applications of this versatile
family of luminaires. They provide outstanding visibility
in parking areas, bikeways, walkways, malls and other
outdoor areas for work, rest, waiting, recreation,
entertainment, surveillance and displays.
Without compromise, Polyquad satisfies both
architectural and engineering requirements. Polyquad
can enhance the environment and minimize light
intrusion while providing high efficiency in producing
visibility
The outdoor task lighting approach to the design of
system layouts (see pages 84 -87) is essential to the proper
application of this lighting technique.
Features
(•Upique regressed frame for flat glass provides distinctive
appearance and absolute cutoff of all light above a
?rtical angle of 85 degrees (Beam cutoff is75degrees )
The IES Type Ill light pattern can be easily adjusted in the
held to IES "type 11 by a simple shift of larnp position
Aluminum and stainless steel construction provides
outstanding durability and resistance to corrosion
Faceted mirror reflectors fabricated from spccular
anodized high purity aluminum have 0 quality of finish
and grain orientation) that cannot be duplicated on
hydroformed reflectors This results in excellent Ilaht
pattern size and uniformity as well as outstanding figures
for total and forward CU (coelficients of utilization)
Easily replaced integrated ballast assembly with plug
disconnects
High power factor ballasts (regulator or non - regulator
type as recommended by the lamp manufacturer)
Optical assernbty provides easy access to lurrunaire
components and can he quickly and easily replaced
Can be rotated 90 degrees to shift the light pattern
vwwithout changing luminaire orientation
Baked acrylic finishes are applied over surfaces
E prepared by chromate conversion process tor good
adhesion They retain color texture toughness and
snatch hues 01 anodized poles
Optional photocell receptacle available
l ore contained in the photometric
data for spacing to mounting height ratios that v.'ili insure
even overall illumination
- ' 'FACETED MIRROR REF,LECTOR.$PECULAR ANODIZED HIGHPURITY ALUMINUM.
:'.'CAN BE ROTATED TO CHANGE BEAM DIRECTION
•ADJUSTABLE SOCKET - ADJUSTS FROM
r 4ES TYPE 11 TO IES TYPE III DISTRIBUTION
=.13 UICK DISCONNECT PLUGS FOR EASYSIALLAST REPLACEMENT
4 EORESSED EXTRUDED ALUMINUM DOOR FRAME.
' FULLY GASKETED
•
11-101-I T () i_ I l= P 43
April 5, 1988
Date: April 5, 1988
Information Items
To: 87 -4 -DR File.
From: Vernon Umetsu
RE: Feasibility of Covered Walkways Along the Outside
Building.
1. Contacted four retail businesses in the Center Place retail
building and gained the following information.
Prosser Piano and Organ. Manager interviewed. Located at
the north building corner.
a. Covered pedestrian walks are essential to this
business. Even located nearest the street on a
building corner, traffic would be zero without the
overhangs to encourage customers to walk in and look
around. People who now corne from Pier One would not
come to this shop if they have to walk through the
weather. As it is, the Center is a very good location.
b. There is another location next to the freeway with no
overhangs and that store has better exposure. However,
glare blocking the window displays is a problem.
c. Given the choice, covered walks are unquestionably
desirable.
Kuppenheimer Clothiers, Manager interviewed. Located in the
north central half of the building.
a. Covered pedestrian walks are very important to a center
this size.
b. There used to be a problem with visibility of window
displays until they were illuminated with interior spot
lights. Now there is no visibility problems during the
night or day. Without the sheltering overhang, window
glare blockage could be a problem.
4. Computerland, Sales Representative interviewed. Located in
the south central half of the building.
a. No problems with business visibility from the road;
especially with clear signage.
b. Covered pedestrian walks are preferred over uncovered
ones.
Pier One Imports, Assistant Manager interviewed. Located in
the south corner of the building.
a. No problems with visibility of displays and shop due to
their prominent location. Illumination makes them very
visible at night.
b. Would rather have covered walks.than uncovered ones.
,..■ ..M ~SW," • •
)14at IT
1.4 P
+tsc /les . •
IA %CMOs
iNS• td.
YI•q -.It
1
- Z55 255 �` `
A.
4 14 p414 • 4. - 294, 42
a ° 9 \ 93:
v o h
bt 0 0
0)
8305 2 G7 j;PCn4 STATE
o. a $* 1
. 4 d ,A
s u 3 .3, c
s� S I
i.
A RKWAY aeaa/ .:.0
SOUTHCEN _ — ( . v ,n�_�A�n b e an / y - - -
- (S777f .41/S. s.) j s e ll sS/
C.C. VoL. /7- 576•
N N ARc.tlt
8 s 0 5,S d Z GS /
M
--- — Sr, rE
M. A'C'T
MIK 1
C Restr)
- �QY 3 /.aa:�
4z 1
4.
o J
4..• N
es 7
w W lJ
so ,
r
N
0.
h
L ' C F
N r
1v S /� ,0 3j s_ co
F
c, a
0
Vt..
0•
0
c 1 ! 2i
■
■
r
I . 3 `
1 13
i
A
E p
h
(57,71 A VE. .5.,
• •rc..�4
' �v_r r4e •S: J
•
" o x
N •
0
c)
r
742-a0 /GO. O¢ TS .• - //4.02
2/8.70 142) 5
L
tv
l
N
co I /S O ;-..i /3 re J. . - Z10 7y
A., -,%. T(./•CAITER PARKWAY '`i4'3 a• F .1 . 040. -;.%)"." ; 1/..:C. :),,,70. �:•_ :.
(/✓in.ne c/....ver only) ; •O•.•• .53... •`: 1
'S. I- 4a-Z3- .. • ..•�..r .- - • .`: . s a__
re •a/sfly,2�. --.
,
C_[NE
/V.,' •r. •4 $ - n. .
..a •.er - sap +VY
3pp-34 j1 -
SQ
n
r
N
J o T
'JJ
'h
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
3. APPLICANT :* Name:
Signature:
4. PROPERTY Name:
OWNER
1: BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: f5t t& -tom AtPlAfoX Sic;
d 1Z"ck- Jet'
2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access
street, and nearest intersection)
( ^t' S (c6 go te_bo ) 1.)0vtt c 1* 1 - 7 oos
-tax LAM ejbt1 --d1 ) Qol2 -b
Quarter: SW Section: :Up Township: 23
Range:
(This information may be found on your tax statement.)
f Q� SGi4O'iietTD
4-
Address: 3 ob4. 13o i-' £ , L'3 IgeoS
Phone:
l3vt.. 061 ' 75Z5
Date: S•• 1 4• a$
* The applicant is the person .• 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
A lLt t " S ( t t4/41. Md yokicie.e, ita tie.AGut 1
Address: 4-2 S w 154 S StA• WA• 15(66.
Phone: 2
I /WE,[signature(s)]
swear that we are the owner s or con ract puj haser s o
property involved in this application and that e foregoing
statements and answers contained in this application are true
correct to the best of my /our �_ ��
knowledge and belief. Date:
the
and
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 cri-
terion (if appropriate), and describe how your plans and elevations meet the
criteria. If the space provided for response is insufficient, use extra space
on last page or use blank paper to complete response and attach to this form.
5. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 2
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: A.) (5}+eu.4,4 LA ,.s 3 CMQ *.*, Ai(.,m,o 5t 17 40 , S `' S1ZTT
o46 a vt t - cl 1] (ukSEt ' fk"-Cogrr4-4/ /4--C.i5S e lYc " - �^ S'(Jt cam.
4j;) 1 4 e 144 - 1 A041G4 g1PW W rr 4 00-Nae4L-04%5. A L LGF ista.154 LS
4,,m41145, C 6, ST c t s CO.& po �6Le
w( 4 .1 -S s't t tt,cry I
6. 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 estab-
lished 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: A evct.t c& ( /14<tu45 Apt) 1 "r'A«- CI= F'(" l0 'W-
U(ScoAi. lt-'Ct Sr. » eA ctv t_ Fbitsr M - CJk r A 4. .
g) tmtvt54- t 4S0vt. 20:0114 Nom ftoc.(a5o . m
01A.Gtx- oP ANIL -- f J
&u lit4sty RICSOSLE , au S
4 4.40 ,pKw w A9 IGAtitp 1 i W 1114 t2 M
-mow nazoc•kt1 •
7. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 3
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 encouraged.
F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be un-
sightly, should be accomplished 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 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.
RESPONSE: i t6 S((ft t iR Al $) .54.7 4 t d4,4, 04.6E CwarA40-
1i- & +, `&4 v Sa - ' 6 - - i kr ()■-3 �c 11 exotA-41)(0-)Attao
(0 [1 4- Go(1xn-S caF gc,LcAl*Zo . f7) 14, S.ucg ect...+6t1icS 711A 5S
' ( 6s 14A- gicx-OP tN Et AwES ) � Ackir74s ActLc
Sc I , 9 ia.vt ( -gam. � U uf - t 1U Ar c� �u
USit5t) t rrw e- , i - - tL O(tae). 4-0 Bo LAw 046
tNct floes -A 3 4 cosi-r +- oe:us g“-t w•w uu A& WPc
►.:fi r (1u'&r oy4 Nom) -fc,fi or .
S A ANQO at4kJeltal Let' ' LA6141'T o Lo t t-A- (0)(14:
Flo Gn-
LEISS 10 pksvici.Pr } 63(1-4 ( Low 6k.A / x- t .
8. BUILDING DESIGN
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 4
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 per-
manent 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. Fix-
tures, standards and 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 siting should be used to provide
visual interest.
RESPONSE: A.►..) et,tt..lot* . t,tLL. bt5 C 4A11 Wrh & r .-R-
6-ut t.(3ck —}o Skx t M he s LS Sko- ttuAc2, . { twt►aG 1 S
8 fki =4- - c-o 1 ilf00 as goom8 ) ThAbot 0 (ix, t5Ascf
11 le( CIF 1sr*lir+t . c . W 14-)0ows 7 De0IL ) ,S.>
Lt f-s5 i +'► 1 o (x)kruS vuoy om tuteoc.AK C ote s ts?"
A41 ( -'&4r t( 1r) bN.S w t C.c_
Li 640' ool S 0 C wckt S W tt4l ,iS b.-05
1 5 Jt Clx oc& - j-t r (p u - 6.e CdtotzDc u pit to i+4 (SL 4c.
r • 4 fir 1. -tio -A r w Cw
sL a 1aP kL tC t ut s tt' . j.) 2195- — 1.4.
6. )kik to eau Lt-oc "re4A.4-A w t Acciiiisr
kr lit Aglow .
9. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 5
A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be
part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials
should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate,
colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and pro-
portions should be to scale.
B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furni-
ture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and
buildings.
RESPONSE: 1 Ak -- }4 ' - Aorpuciii,E,LEF
INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT 4
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 appear-
ance, 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.
10. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities
of the area.
11. The proposed ,development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and
enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities.
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
Page 6
12. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site
pedestrian circulation.
13. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and
complementary to the district in which it is located.
14. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse
environmental impacts.
15. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant
historical features in the area.
(29 /DSGN.APP1 -3)
• . .
4 ) Ce 1■ SPI C-10-B IS
1
Wm vetet4 gvi6v4/
niF V6-14-PR
t:ritc-st■rri6g. py
'7 7777' '7777 ,
• Q r i
c
�r. '-
\,; ' •33
t a 0
/ iu "o
3-
O
2
e.
/-88
Barghausen
Consulting Engineers Inc.
Land Planning' Survey i Etglnit ring simian
18215 Ave. So. •Kant, Wash. 98032 •(206) 872-5522
RECORD OF SURVEY
SHT
I
OF
2
MATT MIKAMI
AKIKO AND YAEKO MIKAMI
16813 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY
SEATTLE, WA 98188
DRAWN BY
ETC
CHECKED BY
NL
DATE
2 / 17/ Bs
J OB No.
2668
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
SCALE
AS NOTED
F.B. o
. .
110476 •
22 23
27 . 26 1607.4 State Held
O
co
N
t
5
z
w
1-
- CO
N
0
0
0
z
0
M
27,
34.35
NW COR. SgC. 26,TWP. 23 N.,RGE.4E.,W.M.
N. ctr. 2 brass disc. In conc. post down \
1.5 10'N of edge of pavement (also punch \
mark 0.04' W a 0.01 S ) This cor. may
not be in its original Iocatipn . 1 calc. It to \
be N 52° 49' E from calc d position FB 380 \
Y / i I
r
"? o
59
State Held
26 628.9'
1'
LIMITED
2512 +31.5
N 88°13 W 2663.88'
\ 376.34
2
N 87 °5 W
!32O.43
� �L
I
7UNE
I /
° dI
0 011
O �
z
1312.15'
A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M.
KING COUNTY WASHINGTON
1
1
1
N 88°05'01" W / 2657
1328.72'
25O' Y z
\ 0) ! °, 377.77
C: .(=-
or. Sec. 26, Twp. 23 N ., • + g v
Rge. 4'E . , W.M. Fnd. 1/4 jg ( rt.
brassy In 4' x 4" conc. post a N a
(Incased) -. d V* `-
.: h
0) � 1 i 376.44
O .'c. oN 4 4 ' 0 0�Q
0
N � o M co
N C t. 9 1 - �0
Co a1
0)
0
0
1n
ti
w
o
0
0
F 0 OT
o�0 6
V\ Z
PT on Tray. line
KCFf3 380-
43.0 N. of
Sec. line 41.14'
N 87 °45 57 W 2624.31 KCA
SW ,COR. SEC. 26 TWP. 23 N., RGE.4 E., W.M.
Colt d from KCAS i data to accepted corner
(used by this survey also ) I do not believe
this may be In its original location since it
lies N 53°04'E 14.9' from location of Sec.
Cor. found by King Co. In F.B. 380 In 1913,
however do to the extensive amount of surveys
In this section based upon the current location
it was held as controlling in this section.
co
♦^
_
w C
ad 8
N ..
0
o '
z II l
88 W
3 9999 1111 9999 6.93
Ste an Held
36'
RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
Filed for record this day of , 198_ at
.M. In book of Surveys at page at tip
request of NORMAN E. LARSON
Manager
Supt. of Records
N011257 E
� ,,,,s 80.14'
",<.c
z
v 07 „�
664.66 -
1326.90' °D
_ N87 ° 55'33" W N
249.18 700.02 - - - m
a
rm 699.45' a
N 87° W - - -
�132_5.29 36'
MI
YN 0 w
m M
MO'3r - m TM m ; tm
Or mmtl_ `,,u_
2640.87' '5 x
1n
1320.44
I w
ti
1312.16'
658.75
23
2
a
N
0
0
co
M
2
3
0
70
a]
Q LL
o=
co ro
in
N
In In
Calc'd position of conc. mon. •f
w /brassy (Incased ) shown ••
w upon survey by Stepan 8,
Assoc. Vol. 55 pg. 104 as
in set by plat of Southcenter
N Corporate Square Vol. 128
pgs. 27 a 28
N
o_
0
6
5
RECORD OF SURREY
N 1/4 Cor. Sec. 26 , Twp. 23 N.,
Rge. 4 E . , W.M. Calc'd from
KCAS Data
44 ° 52'24 "KCAS
44 ° 51'35" KCFB 380
S 1/4 Cor. Sec. 26 ,Twp. 23 N., Rge 4E.,W.M.
calc 'd from KCAS data (fit well with 1913
breakdown KC FB x} 380
AN E. LARSON
ertificate No. 22
O
EASEMENTS AND RESERVATIONS SHOWN UPON
THIS MAP WERE BASED SOLELY UPON TITLE
REPORT PROVIDED 10 BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, INC., BY TRANSAMERICA TITLE INS.CO.
#0913811 12- 16 -87, AND NO FURTHER RESEARCH
BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.,
HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED.
Si'
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
This map correctly represents a survey made by me or under
my direction in conformance with the r :: ' -, ments of the
Survey Recording Act at the re • MATT AND AKI KO�
AND YAEKO MIKAMI in EB ,988
NOTE'
The section breakdown on pages 89 Through 94 K.C. F.B. 380
(July 1913) closes raw S 78'14' E 0 2.27' with angle error of
0 correcting for angle error yields a closure ,al S 42'38' E
8 1.56'. All corners of the KCAS breakdown agree favorably with
this breakdown except for the NW and SW corners of the section.
The location of the Mess Bros. Rd. was calculated from thls
balanced 1913 traverse and balanced Into It (closes S'19'21' .E 0.70')
0
4
LEGEND
• SET * 4 REBAR /CAP , L.S. # 22338
LIMITED ACCESS
LINE
N 88° 05' 01 W
377.77
r r Tg- BR
FND. #4 REBAR
COLE S52 °E,
1.3
srA. 25091.50
Z
FND. #4 REBAR"COLE"
N83 °W, 1.2'.FND 411X411
CONC. R/W MARKER
N6 °E, 1.0',
377.70'
376.44'
LIMITED ACCESS LINE
\
.. ,.,.._. :'ai.r,;°,: r �,3 i'i• 'r F 'rA: 1. ,n..;;1„ii.r,
iilliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiIiiiiiiiiiiiIiiiliiilwr limilliiiI twill iiiiiilil I I I LI_L1iiiili ppitit IIIJIIIilIIuinII1 ipliiiiiiiiipiiIIiiiiiliiiiiiiiIIiIIiiiiIiiliiiiiiil
0 16THSINCH 1 2 3 , -[f. _ __ .. .- - 5_, . 6 7 ..- \ _ 8 9 10 ' 11 MDEINOERMNY 12
\IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENTIS LES' CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO ft
.TUG nuImI, TTV (IF •TI-IF ORT(TNAL. DOCUMENT g B y ? s g z c WW 0
01
N 0I °07'58 E
10.51
0
O
z
SEE DETAIL
SHT. 2
N 89 ° 52'54'E
37.81'
E - Ct.
SEC. 26
36.00
N87 °55'3311 W
\ 249.40'
211.69'
N05 ° 09 1 57 ° W
/3.59
N0I° 20
77.64'
•
w
'' 2.10'
1
=01
z
w
a
O
0
0
z
N
4- 0.32'
36'
- 664.66
Sta. 28 +62.52
Angle point ' Mess Bros. Rd.
SEE DETAIL
BELOW
15
EASEMENT
AFN.6343884
MAR 2 1988 c'j
DETAIL NTS
r
•
. • . •
_ II .
1111
lit-
i ' i • - ri • .
.1 .
. _
• S E
• ;;;:
i' •
• I o'
..• 511 . ' 0 - 4.?I'ATI1 - 1 - 6.
. . zap.' e:• - * .,. . .. • • ,
vnor ; AL.". . Prerg..V
. .
- 01.24, Ai..., ie ift,..3.e CP . ,... . .
. C.4 ' 3 . • 1% • • • • .
(.0.1.41•11HGVIOre TY P I , i , rt •-• .5.rItirlla-L1,6509. •
.. ,
. .
. aseL•U•AHG1 ' -2-r re. : fbl.... ' ..„............,_:__,...,,...:_. ,. . .. '
1 1S1 - 1 ,1. 0 . If. ye. 11 eirr‘.114)
. . . . .
0.1.4 ' *ROW vi i ....."
.4&A l'5 II'. ... 04141.1? ..11. lis 'VI' •
. 4.11 1154T , A: .16 s Wets PIMA Ur: Ter 11.....„--•
, • ' MA1101441. 1a1.15 • . .
•
..".TOUtHCENT. ER, PARKWAY, : • : .
R/W ANI"..if.L.itliiTY.
• • ..•. . • . ",
FROM CITY RECORDS
• y.
• • •• •
*.u•Tii.ESI;41% r•;-; ; • . RIW 35 FUW Lr •' '111. UTL. E'S/AT:.
' ••' • . ;; 1 43
- .• -12: 1 • • • •
• .
•
ww..
•
„IIONCAPILL..4
• WV4 . .., 14 41 /0 Si ' r 0
tirg7',';iT90F11194:
X le MOOR Wive -
• coonetve Mime
3-.1 Ben 'VeRTICLIE
, . •3 Mt NONIONTALLY AT e OA -
•
.ilowo rerun Atrisi sTreeino
• inerionitiv RocroeCto incise ODOR-
MT ALUM. MAT COM • AMC TAU
r. NON WINN OACMT
A I =
r =" 111 :51 , _-•_-' 1 11 11 i Ff.
ro.1
!mm
IlI- 11
•1
:E: 111' 711 "' 1 1 1 1 :1 :: : =1111
Jr I GA.L. L-1601-1T
•
; CONCRETE CURB WITW PREMOLOED I/2 7 1XR JOINT AT.
_ .
START OF RADIUS • PO{NTS a KNIFE curs AT •
i TO, A• DEPTH OF. 1/2. ( TYPICAL ) • ,
' ASPHALTIC • CONCRETE PAVING' OVER
COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL PER 1. ..• . •
•
' -, ; i '.:•;.,:ri:i;•..... ii ..1 ,,,.:. ., :: ,,, .,,, - .:, : r ,.,.: :.
I9i1 4 , , ,,, a..., -i , ‘,4;:;-,...,:,./,.:;,;:i.ta.iiiiiiitio4,4i.c•i;,14 , 41;-•, ,, , ; .
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
7 3 4 5 6 7 • 8 9 10 11 --....- 12
1, 1 I
-E IF
L N i g71 1 12 CU 7T " is g •
0. .. n 0 THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL e en '.. nn 'i cZ ■ n t. ' DO . . L • . v = a . ....
.....
1 iyiiiI1194199110i119[14d*tuliwhiLilimlulollnkfibilpub Flop1011.1PIRIESql)IlinitiiiniirdpihiaiihiiiiimhgliOplitIlllinhiliWililliipliffillillilillIIIIIIIIIIIIiillioiliiiilyilliiillinlinqhilli
„ . . , „ . . . • . . , .., - . . , .
tle
„ . vicinity maP
TUkvoila, washingtOn
T •-• PLACE`': CdNICREtE CU
, . . .
. . .
. . . . . .
• • . . . . , . • • . . .
o s l WI. MI, Township 33 Noah. Renee 4 East, W. . .. 14., described al
Th., potilon off th ir 14ont7 . aesner of the Solobwest owls., ISontiolui Wert. to
• •1 th Svbdlon) o
,
. r 1: 1 :0 " INNINCi at a.1111 ea 1111 W. line of miel,eutellvIslos 761foet North of dm
. , • • •
,
•outh*. tomtit Minor; .
THENCE North Moss mid West line 153 fish': .. . ' • .
' TIIENCE Eat on a am parellst with IN both hoe of mid subdivisiou to the. West line
'
• SontImiater Parkway (TIM Ayes. Muhl 111 PAM 10 hot W. of th• Centerline;
• •
T Moos sod Wass Ilse 115 1.1, mare be le31, to the Intereettion.with a
line parallel with the Sown. IN of said eabdIvision and bearing East from I. POINT OF
. . . .
. T 4
1 eaidT .. .
a1141 U to Ilm POINT OF IIEGINNINO: • •
•
E that por dwarf lying Easterly ra sh• W. Ihse of Seellue.MPar.ray •
(3701 Awn. Sosth) Se to•veyed to 1h Ch C hy of Tukwila by deed wild. totder
. . . . • • .
• . . . . _ •,,
■ PT thal 'paidos thereof toeveyedlo I. state of Medlar. for Printaiikilli
p F lit. 1, mishit deed mord. ender Audillsra Fn. N. 5992101,.
TOGETHER 'Min Hoel colmoYed by *h Male a ,M11.111.1by deed Worded .
onder Recording No. 1110$130217; , . . . . • :, L j '..
.. 'Intel, hathOCItY eiTu.dlit, ei;;,iYofiChti, Mae of lasitlegint. .. :, • . ,' IL. '...-,.. : i •
. . . . . ... .. .. .., .._..
TA
I - -- -
--
it6 -.Atfitetta 4 0 00 . 11
stimmmestmEnaNb= 7 :PAZRZYMMEIMP:MariftVri.
• LEGAL DESCRIPTION
F 'li• 4.•-t7R
Keitseb PA-AK/me, 1- k -1?
n .
/JO
rill;NOW
1 AUG 3 0 19813 ,
. •
,GENERAL. , •.:;:"NOTES
,•-•• Jett Lo end to b.000rdInItedv1th
2. n P. 1 h t e i n t o e t ti o ed . r. th z e ol a n e bi • : xt:irn p. „t cu
3.. Verify location of all utility '•tuba , ;.•
P.• di n t n h e e s , : t o .... f e r !wet d . • e r and
5. .Dr d t i o .or b e e p ,./te y l . er.• Con.. , A ;. rehltect .... ,,for . r ? reso ,., 1H o
6. Contractor to • verify • all .• field '..timensione ; and .'oOnditIons iny. •
die between • plan and . •ctuml condition la. to be brought to the ..,••
attention of architect for roeolution.' . • • L • . ....` ; • ;,.,; • • ••
7. ' i n 2 1
9.. See LCivil-Bratiings Cite development) for , grading, alto' tt1it1.$, ;
10. .,Each ,Co li ii
racqtar to , @Joh ' Xeet • Of 'diawingti;•insaiar„-14. It may
.• , apply to his . portion or . th. work; ! to rdiSt. lo n�
11..41. n
•,00atinOtIon 'and ;h .
andle proviiiiivis';:
ere 'to •it. Or ••zo••d • ,portion iit,iletihitigton.Atato handle.;
Stenderds (nor .twaign) , 0.B.R.A. State En:mi.'
;Code loll) emended countorpart,,U.B,C.;:11.P.C.,'U.N.C.,' f. •
etc.) Local Zoning Cod. NM Mondeenta thee...codes, end"
• (All currant's:Intim. so •doptos b loot
12. Building •dd.. t be •Olaarly • • ,.,• .. •
13. Po ...panoy prior to Inman. at
I. Sp..). teat l•toratory • Insp.tion raiplired • nit:alrilte
., strength bolting, ,,•nd all •tructural 'conorder,... '" "
.15. Pour *. oo ..r•te when the antle.ated
3°F during the f1ret hours•of
H n th
.' I. the event of fie1 d error or, Catellonsq14..ntractor shell t1ty , •
. the 'arehitect and•naka no . repairs without :nil •pproval.. • •
17. C n o t n a t , r t a; . t . o n : . o o t t ; •,
IS. Contractor ',to provide all..worl.;•' natnesary;to.•,•;
1 ;: th ort co ruo nt t r .... t o o me r. p . le . . l iop . e op re i t y l . ni a f.41 .0 1t r y . ....,;;;■ ; ;,..‘
voter,, •lectr1o.1 and , oth..pensiternrcept'building:Pereits..;• N. shall
.• • pay 'oil n. ***** y fele and post hon. required:
Zo. .Contraator to provide energy !Mg. allaulstione • requireeby:,
• Woshington State Energy Cores.... • 1 - •. r • • • 1: 1
21. Concrete Welke to ant the following criteria. • • ' .-;.
a. • thick.with' ...Ion joints at 20.-On o.c. and •eore joints •
• ' b; Slope for drotnigi Is sin. sox. • • .• • • ,
72. Cederal ContraOtor responsible for all cutting. and Antonini. •‘• .;•.•
23.• Repetitive features hay be drains only 'once, hut .•.11 b. provided •
Portable fir. extinguishers per • NITA lo and . in ' construction h.ck
Pernanent eating. shera .by Ownvr. • , , • • ". r;
25. Suspended ceiling. to 'be ' deafened for seismic ione 11/, Submit'. daion.,. •
• . t Io1 bt1d1,i authority for approval.'.:. • •; .
2¢. Tie Contractor.• .011; •11 the •tructitral
olmerestfon prior to pouring of precast :pato and.'prtor; to,applioetiOn
• • of roofing,. •nd.• . •peoltied. • , ;..• •
27. Ceotichnicol Engineer . ; bearine'PriOr..tO 'poSring', or:
Geotechnionl ngineer '1;i...sp.! and approve 'imilltringT,peil,:yiriir
"P
' a. - ?Curb 'reoiniiid; p.' L plii4;.-.
b. '.• Struotural•inglneirifOr any,,beofina,up
boomiso of wichmilcal ;Unit
31. Pro,td. eimilusiloarlientilation; Per; thilftwa ;FAr,..c...ccisap SI
33.. Required., hydranta..p...,;,C1 oaAe. Lo er.;pe
o' 1
y
end . be .4/22vgd..by 133 11.t.L;4, r '
TYPICAL . 6 . 1i5EiVALk
,t r■' -;;;-'`.
.1'44111.41.1140H4PrillilA
(YIP • • L
•
111 Rl1 04,
rAk4 4074 .:.
IMIMMTKOPM1.4.,
1 it
A
,a,lio. 'A 1. ur
D Awk; biraNLi Irn.a
PORT MG •• *'I
l' ''R /W EQUIPMENT.
1S' UTIL ESMT. • 38' R/W ; . .
LANDS pi'
.'.20116; G•2 .. .
'BIT - C hli eta.-.1- GG,‘ 4P :'
• Iwvr hPCA'1 d9o14:+1 ' ;
;avaxA�a ,. Vey
_.'Ii. PI�IKe ILeav
1 /4+. • 4b w•wa
rAI+KI -4 . • ..'1b !/•tK
TEL
e_ aa ELEC. 2� A" CR. 28' 4 2 •.38• STORM 4.8
STOFIM LS • ,Q ... ' 1';•rr¢eLRCT'GRAVGL . GR •�'
1 ,: e.ACKFI" MEGN, + O
�2'•i3• •TORM`� � 1 I ;' .. � 10' WATER JET _ FUEL .ELEC ,TEL.
RS% PROCTOR.
..-. 10 SEWGR PIPG, 6E IN
DDG
?Ire. Fo»4 ATION
LAG. CLASS ea
4146MEh r
s. I tT` e I 'L.; A N ..
1 ∎11 "25
71TLi1 as •STATE •co-E r-r ,v -ctz A.
ZOMOPr OW'{ r•EA b;j.T E C'+blMeEi0. •
991 rG ?i'
- nitw - S91GA'NI•L�•r
he nt
p inp Co
vicinity :
U'(NGI.NrCSIZ. Ph.KK
Tukwila, Washington
0
SOUTHCENTER.PARKWAY
R/W AND UTILITY LOCATIONS
FROM CITY RECORDS • ' • '' - e
RAPFIC.' DURING
CONSTRUCTION..
38' R/W
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIIIIHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIIHIHiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIHIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllgIIIIIIlllIIIIII HHIIIII
O ^ ..... 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 -•••..• 12
1 1IF THis MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS?I S
:CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
OE 62 ne cz uz tz vz cz; zz _ lz OTHE QUALITY OF_ THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTI} e 7 1 1 7 7 1
biillillllllllllli 111illlill lllllllllllllllllllll11 111111111 1111 /IIII�IIIIIII1 ill�l,llll IIII�jIIIIIIII�ipthIIIIIIIIiI I IIIIIIIIII I IIIIII � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIII I IIIIilllllllllillll l llll l llllllllllllllllllliimlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllilllllllllh »1
MA. We
Landscape Panj
0 U I L O 1 N G
�.i HfJJN.INC�J F✓'<N7P..R5
(TYPICAL)
1 MEDIUM EVEgERecN
5NRUSS
[Site Enlargement
N.T. 5.
I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I III I I II I I I : II II I HI I IH I III IIMI I11 Ww l l lII I III I III I III I HI I VI I III I llL l llI I II I
D •�•� 1 9
3 4. 6 . 6 7_1_ 8 9 10 11 +• • 12
IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS 1
CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
es a e cc 9L GE oz ' GE/ EL IL TH IUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT . e e e p
G z e c ¢ h.•
oc inn
'Cr4 � II III Ill l l pimp, J I IIII iii I Il l a uh �nl uIITI II nl1 l u un I li I ml lul l h lu II 1 m h I u II I I Ilh Illll AI
•C+t * , z.. r z,. ; . ; + q
.... -, ,u.. 3 Lfo �: a. � ,`:a.:, . 0 ...�t . z�U . ,t t; :L l�r .TA MP. s''.0 r " <a` ,
b�S '`° t ° o �• ,: -`!. .:i,
TI
P A ,e IG W A Y
COVG2L'Te. 1M`tLK WAY
— l'AvERS
ALPINE CONIFERS —�
ACCeNT G-rRci
P AKKIN S (Cl
I;KOaULP.AF
tve%raKFrN crlave5�
1 Preliminary Plant Schedule
Able• Paitw : ASSM., specimens, UM
Tanga mwtwsena 1 LMvf /Aembat
ANss hsbewpa / PE Api, FI
Cwddiph m 1 Mars rW.,/Mght., BIM.
Prue sp./ Th,.w y Aw
Cwpinua batulus / Mrvkwm
Photsda Odra 1 Felothia 24 ht, Wd trenched M, 868
Taws sp./ Ywv
Prunus sp./ LM,
1a'• 24" ht., lull ndbwhy,BLB.
tl`J Osmwsa bhrkwdodi I fhgrrl °wow
Arbutus undo/ Sla ndmy LZe1
Prunus le minus p. Ieew Lam'
Smithlladteffargnwt.Slmbe,
Rhodoclenrice p. Groda YMWS
Ilex crenate / Amway ht ),
Kelmta p.1 AAwW7 Lain'
,r) ^hen Mswi n8.: 1r•16• ht.. W. branched, M
�!, Patina'ruYeo n1 chqufe i
Berbsds 'Crimson Pygmy 1 Owl. Remy
Lavwhdula p. l Owe Eopfsh lam*
li<eetbtlrlL: 1 gal cont. 02C o.c. Hang p.
Callum wlgerls 1 hrwslrr
Vince mria I Ate Prik th
Eunymus 'Cdarate'l Minh► avow
f
Padua Strut I Pwllagltlt_Trsr
Acw platnddes 1 Menroy ALpb
Aar rubcum '*mainly I R dAfrpee
Saaaarwl catty
Lobsea
Petunias
Ssvla
, Modena, etc...
FusdJ p
Seasonal Colw
Evwgesn Vines Iv Con nuhy
r Csipw, Matched Specimen•, street
Pm to match editing adacenl paled.
16' Iola' ht.. Full and Bushy
Full bushy r pots at r on amw. Theo
Owings Per yew.
Full bushy plants to guide Initial Impact
In hanging planters as shown.
Iwm lgad w SsM: Culavws u eppoved
las-4, im
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
F•
ZP,41.:9(1MViclef) r1s-rAL
felnklacW' vri CoNT%
▪ .p.T. t=eaT. •
rp..P,r4 WAN.
I•4IS
▪ Lor4e
A
1.
aidiiiimmanniemium 11 MITEraiririiiiiiiiiiiii77
IIIII iiiiiMMEUMME
II,
iiir
id............mm.•••=mmommu,aulimmils.•••■■•••■■Impwiml...g_im..ijMiiiiiiiiiii.
4D
4D
41/1110iMil
4D
IDA
AV•11111•7■
1■111MMIIIINIMIMBI um MIMI .I.13E1S1====IMESSINNIrIMIMINIM"..
MilliMMIIIIIIIMMI KINII I IIMI MI VEIBIEMEIMINIM
117 111. d i rIEMEIM I MI 1 = 1 116.11111111111111111111.1111111.1.111.01111
4D
ion riiTiiimiummumsimmimmum
=MIMI MINI MIN MIIIIIIIMMIN1111111111 MIIMINIIIMIIIMIMINIMEMIIN
GlItc:**4 "a7=1
WALL. r,+.4
- 2r_c_r•_12X&C p.
- ffer rE-"rP
kr.oc-•rl Pir-od.14 11LT-wt. -
rti
VVVC.,r^ir
S T
0
L E V A T 1 O N
4•10:.=.1.3
4.111 111110
FACE OF 6LV.3
To •50UT
T
O .
1 . 8 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12
1, IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS
CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
3
Oe va CZI aa I THE UALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
Trarrivikiiroi
0 L
•
9 9 v a a 1 ^. 0
I ii il 111111111110i.,.._
At.f.*Igov
...1".1" oh el
_ 4 011 ice., lAHLIA
•° '
I
°10
a
D
441,j '' f ' ;I t ll 'i1.* F ‘ :- " ,
51:11 �• }Mlet► Int n eL�i■Iraa� ..�,*!ri.'•
'1 1 *� . frl�� I•. �� �° � ��►
is , 2 ��
— �•- -_ %- -' GLL/! � . .2/� - . sirs :�.�;_.
I t dt�.�'t'�■21■1��'Tl1it� ]'��I [+i'�t•!•1 l��u �, ur , � :177
-si - Al
141,S .
1� 'V.� ,Cl� �r� MINI + a!IEIill"�I ■10.1 ■`r/ 17 ■ . 1Ctiii ZII• �' f \,•
. al i \Wi_•t ` � ��. "�' :
E - � -/ ter!
�� ��I"al / %/_1. • + -! -i 1`'11 _ i I! _ : L
c..
• ' •?� IIII '`• 'N.
� `. •elll
• PPlc _'It. , 4, I�t., {- _� 11111 I i i l a y a
r �.. ��. �s1�.� ;'+. 7
rn�r Y -1 � �fi, J mg' � .1 I�
I.- , —i ds- �`
AleMIIIWAI ilk.
.t.AW1491 Al pa .
•
�.: .. :� -
y r
w
SOUTHCENTER RETAIL
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
ROBERT SCHOFIELD
lance m eller
& associate
architects
130 lakeside •..attle wash. 85122.208
aia
325 2853
:14
YhF• ' -fir- DR
BUILDING
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 7 11111111 1 I 1 1j111111 IJ1111111111111111111111111I111111111111111I1111111I1111111I1111111I
t• +•• •• 1 3 ' 4- S 6 7 ... 8 9 10 11 + 12 • I IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS
5 CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
OE 6 I z � ee cz 9z az oz CE zz Iz (C THE UALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT e e c 9 s , e z f p •
IUAAIlll4!!I I I „ 1111 1 1111111 HI III 11111 III I I I I 111111 ITnn m n1 n 111 J u�lll11111111�1iif11 do d lilllll l n il l 11411 i1' 1�I1u1h1n■�udn I u11I 1 d111Im i u1III111111Iun u
Sir�Unra
cj. � 0
" ° Z
-"
• ' e
F �'�;f F �� �
Barghausen
Consulting Engineers Inc.
land Planning, Survey & Engineering Specialists
18215 - 72 n d . Ave So • Kent, Wash. 98032 •(200 872.5522
RECORD OF SURVEY
SHT
2
OF
2
MATT MIKAMI
AKIKO AND YAEKO MIKAMI
1681 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY
SEATTLE, WA 98188
DRAWN BY DMG
CHECKED BY NL
'��
v ' f i (iiS %
3-1-98
DATE
2/23/88
JOB No.
2668
KING COUNTY WASHINGTON
SCALE AS NOTED
/� F.B. No.
110475
1
•'
in
FND. #4 IRON BAR
LS 18075 COLE &
ASSOC. 0.2'N & 0.7'W
OF SET IRON BAR
3.5' WEST
4.5' WEST
6.0' WEST
8.2' WEST
r ..e •• N89 °52' 54"
f
RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
Filed for record this day of
M In book of Surveys at page
request of NORMAN E. LARSON
Manager
Supt. of Records
, 198_ at
at the
RECORD OF SURVEY
A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M.
KING COUNTY WASHINGTON
N05 °09' 57 "W
3.59'
0.6' EAST
0.1' EAST
37.81'
1
1
6 "CONC. CURB
P AP
Rt
ti
k\ -
190,s O
G 1Q I
6" CONC. CURB
sz +,z ez ; zz
ROW OF 65 EVERGREEN TREES 4 " +/- DIA.
& 8' HIGH (SPACED EVENLY)
N87 °55' 33 "W 249.40'
y •• 15.8' •
0.5' +/-
211.69'
DETAIL FOR SHT. 1
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
This map correctly represents a survey made by me or under
my direction in conformance with the requirements of the
Survey Recording Act at the re • st of MAT
A . KO MIKAMI FEB.
MAN E. LAR
Certificate No. 2
A 1
. ty
SCALE: 1 " =10'
r id .e • d,h4 + .4't-
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' I I I I 111 111 I I � I 1 111111 VII I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 11. LI111.11111 I_l1.l_I I_I I I l I 1 I II-I 1.11-111111.111 I I i l 111 11
0 1rTN " INCH 1 2 3 4- . - -. -- ... • .5_, ..6 7 .... ` 8 9 10 11 WEMOENMNIY 12
\4IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS I •
CLEAR THAN THIS.NOTICE, IT IS-DUE TO
of ez . 8L �z Bz t? (QTHE.•OUALITY OF THE. ORIGINAL. DOCUMENT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
new S -4.-DR
That portion of the Northeast quarter of t e Southwest quarter (hereinafter referred to
as the subdivision) in Section 26, Town 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King
County, Washington, Lying West of the unty Road and described as follows: ,
BEGINNING at a point on the West line of said subdivision 1,020 feet North of the
Southwest corner thereof running;
THENCE North along said West line 294.62 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner
of said subdivision;
THENCE East along the North line of said subdivision to the intersection with the West
line of said County Road;
THENCE South along said West line a distance of 294.62 feet, more or less, to the
intersection with a line running East from the point of BEGINNING parallel to the South
line of said subdivision;
THENCE West on said parallel line to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington for Primary State Highway
No. 1, under deed recorded under Auditor's File No. 5992105, Tying Westerly of the West
line of that property conveyed by the state of Washington by deed recorded un'ier
Recording No. 8505150265.
ALSO EXCEPT the East 6 feet thereof for Southcenter Parkway per deed filed in Volume
5083 of Deeds at page 553.
PARCEL "A"
PARCEL "B"
That portion of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (hereinafter referred to
as the Subdivision) in Section 26, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., described as
follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the West line of said subdivision 765 feet North of the
Southwest corner thereof;
THENCE North along said West line 255 feet;
THENCE East on a line parallel with the South line of said subdivision to the West line
of Southcenter Parkway (57th Avenue South) at a point 30 feet West of the centerline;
THENCE South along said West line 255 feet, more or less, to the intersection with a
line parallel with the South line of said subdivision and bearing East from the POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE West along said parallel line to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT that portion thereof lying Easterly of the West line of Southcenter Parkway
(57th Avenue South) as conveyed to the City of Tukwila by deed recorded under
Recording No. 6343853;
AND EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to the state of Washington for Primary State
Highway No. 1, under deed recorded under Auditor;s File No. 5992106,
TOGETHER WITH that property conveyed by the State of Washington by deed recorded
under Recording No. 8505150267;
Situate in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington.
4148 z 1988