HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit DR-06-80 - SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PHASE II LANDSCAPE PLANdr-06-80
15101 sunwood boulevard
15195 sunwood boulevard
sunwood phase ii
190•
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Van Waters. Pacific Townhouse Builders
FROM: Mark Caughey, Planning Department
DATE: 12 May 1982
SUBJECT: "Sunwood" Phase II Occupancy
As a result of our field inspection this morning, our office takes the
following position with respect to your request for a certificate of
occupancy on Sunwood's Phase II units:
A) Actions to be completed by Pacific Townhouse Builders before CO is
issued:
1) Install five (5). randomly - spaced conifer trees with an initial
height of ten (.101 feet along the common property line with the
Sipe residence. Also, remove all downed timber and debris,
reshape the ground contour and treat the area with hydroseed.
2). As described in Dick Gilroy's letter of 2 June 1981, install seven
(7) conifers and three (3) vine maplets plus hydroseeding in the
area of the filled retention pond on lot 4 of the "single- family"
plat area. Spacing of the trees should occur at random, but should
emphasize visual separation of lot four from the adjoining public trail
right -of -way.
Provide documentation that public access easement on north property
line is recorded per stipulation four of Short Plat 80- 44 -SS.
Complete installation of all shrubs, decorative and bark ground cover
and ornamental trees for Phase II units per the approved landscape
plan of 28 August 1980.
) Actions to be completed by Pacific Townhouse Builders as a condition of
issuance of the CO:
1) Within 45 days of the effective date of the certificate of occupancy,
complete installation of all sod as required on the approved landscape
plan for Phase II.
2) Within 30 days of the effective date of the certificate of occupancy,
complete hydroseeding operations on the westerly slope of single -
family plat lot 2 (the "fire lane" location referenced in Mr. Daily's
letter of 19 January 1982).
MC /blk
xc: P1ng.
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1115 108th Ave. N.E.
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attn: Dick Gilroy
Subject: Sunwood Phase II Landscape Plan
The landscape plan transmitted to our office on 28 April 1981 is hereby
approved. Based on remarks by Don Dally at the Planning Commission
meeting of 23 April 1981, I understand that you intend to install decora-
tive landscape structures at the Sunwood Blvd /62nd Avenue entry to the
project as part of Phase II. Since these improvements are not shown on
the referenced landscaped drawing, separate approval action for them by
the Tukwila Board of Architectural review will be necessary. I have
enclosed filing forms as required for B.A.R. review.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Tukwila P)r iing Dept.
Ping Dir
Marc Caughey
Associate Planner
4 May 1981
Dear Mark,
RG:ded
Enclosure
C
Pacific Townhouse Builders
Mark Caughey
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle office: Mariner Building, 1370 Stewart Street, Suite 105, Seattle, WA 98109 (206) 682 -7830
Bellevue office: 1115 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 455 -1726
April 28, 1981
Per your letter of March 26, 1981, please find
enclosed one Sunwood Phase II Landscape Plan showing
location of all tree's replacing indigenous specimen's
per the Vegetation Removal Plan approved by the City
Council on March 16, 1981. Please note that these are
approximate locations and may vary in actual installation
due to electrical vaults, water meters, fire hydrants,
rock, and other site problems.
All replacement conifer's will have an initial
height at time of installation of not less than ten
feet.
Cordially,
Pacific Townhg/se Builders
O
Richard
ilroy
City of Tukwila
Planning Division
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845
Office of Community Development
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1115 108th Ave. N.E.
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attn: Dick Gilroy
Subject: Sunwood Phase II Building Permit review
Our office has reviewed the plan set submitted to the Building division
on 6 March 1981; the following concerns are noted:
A) "Snow Fencing" - Per Ordinance 1181, Section 4, snow fencing
or comparable material must be installed at the boundary of
the growth- preservation zone at the east edge of phase II
before construction begins. The purpose of this temporary
barrier is to prevent accidental accumulation of debris and
encroachment by construction equipment within the open -space
area.
B) "Growth Preservation Zone, North Prop. Line" - Ordinance 1171,
Concomittant Zoning Agreement, item 2 requires as follows:
"To preserve the visual landscape buffer in the R -2 zone
at the north edge of the property, the developer shall re-
tain all flora within 20 to 25 feet south of the north edge
of the property in the R -2 zone in a natural growth preser-
vation zone, as designated on the site plan."
We note that sheet A -1 provides a 25' wide setback from the north
boundary of Phase II. Vegetation removal in this area is res-
tricted to those materials which.must be cleared to provide a
fire -break adjacent to the buildings, and to those materials
which are dead or irreversibly deseased.
C) Landscape Restoration Plan - The _Cancomittant Zoning Agreement
of Ordinance 1171, Section 6 requires staff approval of a
landscape /vegetation restoration plan for each project phase,
simultaneously with building permit approval. A conceptual
26 March 1981
Page -2-
Pacific Townhouse
Builders
26 March 1981
landscape plan was approved by the Board of Architectural
Review on 28 August 1980; we should have a copy of that approved
diagram for inclusion in the building permit plan set. To serve
its function as a restoration plan as well, the diagram should
reflect the following:
- Location of all trees replacing removed indigenous speci-
mens per the vegetation removal plan approved by the City
Council on 16 March 1981.
- Notation that all replacement conifer specimens will have
an initial height at time of installation of not less than
ten feet, per the Concomittant Zoning Agreement.
D) Shingle - Siding, Buildings K,L,M,N,0 - Stipulation 2 of the
Board of Architectural Review approval of 28 August 1980 re-
quires 6 -8 "wide cedar channel siding or comparable material and
the exterior finish of all buildings in Phase II. We have
interpreted the use of shingle siding on buildings K -0 as consis-
tent with the Board's stipulation.
E) Single-Familr Area Utility Improvements - A matter of record,
we wish to remind you that prior to occupancy of Phase II con-
struction, all stipulations of short plat approval 80 -44 -SS
must be met. These stipulations include:
- Documentation of an on -going maintenance funding procedure
for private utility lines installed according to the plat.
- Recording of a. access easement on the north property
line, and restoration of vegetation removed by the abortive
fire lane.
Please submit the above - described landscape plan so that we may expedite
release of your permit plan set; the other comments contained in this
letter are for your information as a matter of record.
MC /blk
cc: Bldg. Official
TUkwila g Dept.
Ma Caughey•
Acting Director
March 16, 1981
7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL OF LIONEL C. BOHRER, MABEL J. HARRIS, GEORGE D. HILL, DORIS E. PHELPS,
COUNCIL MEMBERS DANIEL J. SAUL, Council President GARY L. VAN DUSEN.
OLD BUSINESS
Cedarwood Habitat - Council President Van Dusen said the applicant, Mr. Campanella, .
Waiver Application. has requested his waiver application not be considered at this time.
In place of that discussion, the Sunwood project will be discussed.
Council President Van Dusen said Don Dally, developer of Sunwood,
has met all of the conditions of Phase II as requested by Council.
Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director, said the Council had
requested Mr. Dally to prepare an inventory of trees on Phase II
site, showing which trees would be saved and which would be removed.
Mr. Daily has complied with the request. The inventory is introduced
and made a matter of record at this meeting. It was submitted in a
timely manner.
V Sunwood Project.
Councilman Phelps asked if the developers were required to submit
landscaping plans? Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director, said
it is a requirement for restoration.
Councilman Harris asked if the plans have been through the Planning
Commission? Mr. Dally said they have been approved by the
Planning Commission.
Inquiry on the Council President Van Dusen asked what the Council would like to
status of Sign Code. do with the sign code. Several letters have been received.
requesting some action. It has been requested that we extend the
present sign code to take into account the economical effect it
would \have on businesses that are concerned. There .are threats
of 1 aw `'ssmi is . The general request is to review the' present
*ordinance and make it more palatable to business:"
Councilman 'M elps asked about the scope of authority? She said
Mr. Dick Goe'had requested a citizen's committee address the
matter of the 9n ordinance with a projected meeting date of
April 16, 1981. \
Council President Va?' said the citizen's committee is going
to look at the present sign ordipance. As a member of the Board
of Adjustment, he gets most of letters about the present sign
code. \ .%
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL City Hall
'
--COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Council Chambers
M I N U T E S
Council President Van Dusen called the Committee of the Whole Meeting
to order at 8:40 p.m.
The City Council members looked at the inventory chart. Councilman
Bohrer said the development we are going to see will take all of
the trees off the top of the hill. It will be bare. This will
happen because the buildings are being sited where the trees
were. The time to consider this was when the Council approved the
project four years ago. We need to plan ahead or we get what we
bargain for.
Mayor Todd said the City needs` ither a new sign code or an
extension of the present: There re many concerns about what
will happen when the / enforcement date begins.
Jan Wiesner,
Chamber of Commerce, saidvt might be a good idea
to extend the date and then review the s1' n code with both the
City and the // business people offering inpu
Councilman,Phelps said at one time considerat n was given to the
possibility of an ad hoc committee composed of aff, businesses,
etc. Maybe there are industry standards that sho ld be known.
Mayor suggested extending the present sign ordi ance until
such time as a Planning Director is hired so his input be
considered.
Al Pieper, Building Official, asked that the Council repeal
Ordinance No. 1175 (present sign ordinance).
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING MINUTW' !
March 16, 1981
Page 2
OLD BUSINESS - Contd.
Inquiry on the
status of Sign
Code - contd.
Councilman Bohrer said part of the problem we had in 1980 was the
fact that a piece meal change was made. It appears that is what
is being asked for again, a piece meal change. Last year we
extended it with the anticipation that within three months we
would have a new sign code. We have just the same piece meal attempt.
This calls for a comprehensive approach. The City has had the
sign code since 1973. A number of businesses have complied with
it and some have nonconforming signs. The longer we try to
piece meal it the longer the problem exists. We seem to be in a
rift and just talk about it.
Al Pieper, Building Official, said he specifically asked the ,.
Council for suggestions, whether they wanted to amend, revise
or what the present sign ordinance. He said he did not receive
any directions. He said if they want a new code he did not want
to come to them with a piece meal revision. He said he,vas not
inclined to do anything with the code until the Councii'tells him
what they want. If a new code is wanted, one can be,drafted.
Before Ordinance No. 1175 was passed he said he did /hot have any
trouble with the sign code. The Planning Commissidn recommendation
for staff to put in ordinance form was not adopted. Ordinance
No. 1175 cannot be enforced. When businesses cone in with their
attorneys they . laugh at the ordinance. He ask e'd that the sign
ordinance be repealed.
Councilman Harris asked Mr. Pieper to specify the portion of the
sign code that is unenforcible. �`
Mr. Pieper said Paragraph 7 (A) which relates to signs on faces
of buildings is an example. The word/ "faces" is plural and could
mean anything. You can have one sign on each street that the
building faces. The implication is that you can have more than
one sign when the building faces / two streets.
The percentage chart in Ordina e 1175 is an improvement. He
said he spends a lot of time ,working with the ordinance.
Councilman Borher said muc,h'of the language of Ordinance No. 1175
that the Council is to repeal is the same as in the original
ordinance: f
MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE \PROCESS BE GIVEN TO
THE NEW PLANNING DIRECTOR, THAT IT BE A COMPOTE PROCESS, THAT
THERE BE SOME INVOLVEMENT TO BE DEFINED BY THAT INDIVIDUAL WHEN HE
COMES ON BOARD OF,THE CITY STAFF, THE COUNCIL AND THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY IN ESTABLISHING A NEW SIGN CODE. *
Council President Van Dusen said he was afraid the Cbuncil is going
to have to be /careful about what they are loading onte \the
new Planning Director. We have some really capable candidates
and it is intended that he be involved with the new zoniq ordinance.
Councilman Phelps said she was not really concerned about 1
the Planning Director with work because he has a capable sta
that will work with him to resolve the problems.
Mr. ,Pieper said the Planning Director, he was sure, would be
schooled in the planning field. The sign code is a regulatory code
and if there are revisions made it should be worked on by people
who are familiar with regulatory problems. That is the problem
he has with the sign code. The sign code itself is a good code,
except from a regulatory point of view it is hard to regulate. It
is ambiguous and a few things like that. He said he did not want
to step on any toes, but at the time the sign code was adopted
about 8 years ago, one of the problems that we had with it is that
it is quite obvious that the people who came up with the ideas,
and formerly the sign code, were not familiar with regulatory
procedures so he would say that the Planning Director and /or the
Finance Director and /or the Public Works Director is not the place
to put the sign code for revision. It should be kept in a
regulatory agency.
ading
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1370 Stewart Street Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
Attn: Don Daily
SUBJECT: SUNW00D CONDOMINIUMS -- PHASE II
City of Tukwila
Planning Division
6200 Southcenter Boulevard* .
Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845
Office of Community Development
10 September 1980
The letter of 3 September 1980 which I sent confirming the
Board of Architectural Review's decision of 28 August 1980
to approve the site, Architectural and Landscape concept
for Phase II is in error with respect to Stipulation #2.
The correct wording for Stipulation #2 should be as follows:
2) Exterior finish of all buildings is to be consistent
with the following:
a. Exterior finish is to be six or eight inch
cedar channel siding or comparable materials.
b. Carports to be of wood.
c. T -1 -11 (or comparable materials) are not to
be used as the exterior finish material of
any'structure material.
Please excuse us for any inconvenience which our mistake
may have caused you.
MC/ j as
d. All structures except carports shall be
limited to the use of shake roofing material.
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT.
Mark Caughey
Acting Director
City of Tukwila
Planning Division
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845
Office of Community Development
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1370 Stewart Street Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
Attn: Don Dally
SUBJECT: SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUMS -- PHASE II
3 September 1980
This letter confirms the action of the Tukwila Board of Architectural
Review at its 28 August 1980 meeting to approve site, architectural and
landscaping plans for Phase II of the Sunwood project. Stipulations of
the approval are as follow:
1) The alignment of the major internal access road serving Phase II
as depicted on Exhibit "A ", where said road is shown to connect
with fire access lane on the north edge of the project's R -1 area,
is subject to final plat approved under Application 80 -31 -SUB.
2) Exterior finish of all buildings is to be consistent with the fol-
lowing:
a. Exterior finish is to be six or eight inch cedar channel siding
or comparable materials.
Structures larger than four- plexes: Exterior finish to be com-
bination of stucco and cedar or stucco and brick, depending on
building and fire code requirements.
b. Carports to be of wood.
c. T -1 -11 (or comparable materials) are not to be used as the ex-
terior finish material of any structure material.
Exhibit "A" is approved in concept only at this time. Prior to is-
suance of building permits for Phase II construction, the applicants
shall comply with Stipulation 6 of Exhibit "C" of Ordinance 1071.
Staff shall report to the B.A.R. following completion of the require-
ments of said Stupulation 6, including an inventory of trees to be
removed. Final site plan approval may be granted at that time.
Building permits for Phase II may not be released until a final site
plan Exhibit "A" is approved by B.A.R.
4) Prior to release of building permits for Phase II, the applicant shall
present for'staff approval a detailed planting plan for the northerly
15' wide portion of the R -1 District of the'Sunwood'site.
An excerpt from the minutes of the Board's proceedings is enclosed.
rage i
Planning Commission Meting
(cont')7. PROJECT, APPLCANTS SHALL SUBMIT FOR STAFF APPROVAL A COMPREHENSIVE
PLANTING PLAN FOR THE NORTHERLY 15' OF TRACT "B" OF PRELIMINARY
PLAT 80 -31 -SUB.
MOTION CARRIED 3 -0.
C) APPLICATION 79 -5 -CUP - SILVER CLOUD MOTEL - Modification of Conditional
Use Permit to allow temporary parking of trucks on the site's Phase II
portion. Existing motel is located on 48th Avenue South, approximately
600' east of Interurban Avenue.
Staff explained that the applicants were unable to be represented at tonight's
meeting, and asked that the hearing be postponed to the Commission's Regular
September meeting.
BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, THE COMMISSION POSTPONED THE PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION
79 -5 -CUP TO THE REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER, 1980.
VI) BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
A) LANDSCAPE PLAN - PARKWAY SQUARE - (Retail complex located on the
east side of Southcenter Parkway, 1/2 block south of Strander
Blvd.)
Mr. Caughey read the Staff Report.
George Erdenberger, landscape designer for the project site, explained concerns
they have with Staff Report conditions.
MOVED BY MS. AVERY, WITH MR. ORRICO'S SECOND, TO APPROVE THE LANDSCAPE /IRRI-
GATION PLAN FOR PARKWAY SQUARE, AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBITS A, B AND C OF THE
APPLICATION, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1) MODIFICATION OF EXHIBIT "A" TO REFLECT A MIXTURE OF EVERGREEN
AND DECIDUOUS SHRUB MATERIAL ON THE EAST AND SOUTH PERIMETER
PLANTING AREAS OF THE SITE.
2) INITIAL PLANTING SIZE FOR ALL TREES INSTALLED ON THE PERIMETERS OF
THE PROJECT SITE SHALL CONFORM TO THE TABULAR SPECIFICATION DEPICTED
ON EXHIBIT "A ".
MO ION CARRIED 3 -0.
B) DEVELOPMENT PLAN & LANDSCAPING - "SUNWOOD" PHASE II
Mark Caughey read the Staff Report introduction and recommendations.
Don Dally, representing Pacific Townhouse Builders, responded to proposed
conditions in the Staff Report. Regarding architectural materials, he noted
that they do not plan to use stucco on any Phase II structures; only cedar
siding or shakes will be used. Regarding the requirement for an automatic
irrigation system, he stated that Phase I was not required to install such
a system, and therefore Phase II should also be exempt therefrom.
rayC
Planning Commission Meeting
b. CARPORTS TO BE OF WOOD.
Mr. Satterstrom reviewed the B.A.R. File for Phase I, and was not able to
substantiate from the record that the board had consciously exempted Phase I
from an automatic watering system requirement.
MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MR. SOWINSKITS SECOND, TO APPROVE THE SITE, ARCHI-
TECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PHASE II OF THE SUNWOOD DEVELOPMENT, AS DE-
PICTED ON EXHIBITS A - E, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:
1) THE ALIGNMENT OF THE MAJOR INTERNAL ACCESS ROAD SERVING PHASE II
AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBIT "A ", WHERE SAID ROAD IS SHOWN TO CONNECT
WITH A FIRE ACCESS LANE ON THE NORTH EDGE OF THE PROJECT's R -1
AREA, IS SUBJECT TO FINAL PLAT APPROVED UNDER APPLICATION 80 -31 -SUB.
2) "EXTERIOR FINISH OF ALL BUILDINGS IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FOL-
LOWING:
a. EXTERIOR FINISH IS TO BE SIX OR EIGHT INCH CEDAR CHANNEL SIDING
OR COMPARABLE MATERIALS.
STRUCTURES LARGER THAN FOUR - PLEXES: EXTERIOR FINISH TO BE COM-
BINATION OF STUCCO AND CEDAR OR STUCCO AND BRICK, DEPENDING ON
BUILDING AND FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
c. T -1 -11 (OR COMPARABLE MATERIALS) ARE NOT TO BE USED AS THE
EXTERIOR FINISH MATERIAL OF ANY STRUCTURE MATERIAL.
d. ALL STRUCTURES EXCEPT CARPORTS SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE USE OF
SHAKE ROOFING MATERIAL.
3) EXHIBIT "A" IS APPROVED IN CONCEPT ONLY AT THIS TIME. PRIOR TO IS-
SUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR PHASE II CONSTRUCTION, THE APPLICANTS
SHALL COMPLY WITH STIPULATION 6.OF EXHIBIT "C" OF ORDINANCE 1071.
STAFF SHALL REPORT TO THE B.A.R. FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE REQUIRE-
MENTS OF SAID STIPULATION 6, INCLUDING AN INVENTORY OF TREES TO BE
REMOVED. FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL MAY BE GRANTED AT THAT TIME.
BUILDING PERMITS FOR PHASE II MAY NOT BE RELEASED UNTIL A FINAL SITE
PLAN EXHIBIT "A" IS APPROVED BY B.A.R.
4) PRIOR TO RELEASE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR PHASE II, THE APPLICANT
SHALL PRESENT FOR STAFF APPROVAL A DETAILED PLANTING PLAN FOR THE
NORTHERLY 15' WIDE PORTION OF THE R -1 DISTRICT OF THE "SUNWOOD" SITE.
5) ALL "FORMAL" PLANTING AREAS WITHIN PHASE II, AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBIT
"E", SHALL BE SERVED BY AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT. THIS REQUIRE-
MENT SHALL NOT EXTEND TO ANY PLANTED AREA IN THE R -1 DISTRICT OF THE
SUNWOOD SITE.
MOVED BY MR. SOWINSKI, WITH MS. AVERY'S SECOND, TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO
SPECIFY THAT ALL BUILDINGS SHALL UTILIZE 6 OR 8 INCH CEDAR CHANNEL SIDING OR
CEDAR SHAKE MATERIAL. AMENDMENT CARRIED, MR. ORRICO DISSENTING.
MOVED BY MS. AVERY, WITH MR. SOWINSKI'S SECOND, TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO
DELETE STIPULATION 5 THEREOF. AMENDMENT CARRIED, WITH MR. ORRICO DISSENTING.
THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED 3 -0, AS AMENDED.
AGENDA ITEM
DISCUSSION
Site:
INTRODUCTION
Stipulation 2(f) of Ordinance
1071 requires B.A.R. review
for each separate phase of
development within the total
"Sunwood" project. The appli-
cants are requesting B.A.R.
approval of the site, archi-
tectural and landscaping con-
cept for Phase II of the
"Sunwood" project.
A) Stipulation 2(a) of
Ordinance 1071 requires
that each phase of the
project retain similar
proportions of open
space. Phase I retains
approximately 53% open
space, Phase II, approxi-
mately 57% as noted on
Exhibit "A ". The stipu-
lation appears to be
satisfied.
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUM HOMES - PHASE II
"-1
,zt ! N rP,4 \. M ( ( \
ri9
1*"..°1 F"48 ..rave p
MH
- ' ° Ar
SITE
1'
pa , \ /
RI 1 '1'_� \ i IMr f-'' C.• ll1V AI-1
44,4_,m) r ' �� RFAi ,� 0.a : � .` f, �
. ; 0.MH �� " 744:--1 0.r. \ c-2 + 3 P= IS 9�` � . L 1 1 r '; . • qy y La Gy.
GIB C.Mc: �, M1
.._.7........=_-_ ' ,/ .
q 0.1.,4 r I (/ NH
)
«1 % /)/
B) Stipulation 2(b) of Ordinance 1071 requires close matching of overall
density levels between the project's multi - family phases. Phase II's
proposed 86 units equal a density level of 16 D.U. /AC. compares favorably
with Phase I's 92 units or 17.5 D.U. /AC density. The City Council author-
ized 180 units total for the multi - family portion of the Sunwood site;
the applicants now propose to reduce that figure to 178 units.
C) Driveway length in front of garage doors for duplex units 14,17, 18 and
19 appear to be shorter than 20' in some cases. Since some residents may
prefer not to garage their vehicles, the potential to overhang into the
24' wide main roadway exists. The applicants may wish to study this
Page 2
C f'
relationship once again and increase the length of the driveways serving
these units.
D) Alignment of the secondary fire access lane to correspond with the north
edge of the R -1 District should be viewed as conceptual only, and should
be subject to approval fa-the final plat for the R -1 District.
Architecture:
A) Scale & Style Concept - The proposed structures are similar in exterior
appearance to those constructed in Phase I. Although the elevation draw-
ings on Exhibits B through D lack specific material specifications as
required by stipulation 2(f) of Ordinance 1071, Staff suggests that B.A.R.
approval of Phase II require compliance with stipulation 4 of the "Concomit-
tant Zoning Agreement" pursuant to City Ordinance 1071, which states as
follows:
"Exterior finish of all buildings is to be consistent with the following.
a. Four - plexes and smaller: Exterior finish is to be six or
eight inch channel siding or comparable material.
b. Structures larger than four - plexes: Exterior finish to be
combination of stucco and cedar or stucco and brick, depend-
ing on building and fire code requirements.
c. Carports to be of wood or comparable materials.
d. T -1 -11 or comparable materials are not to be used in the ex-
terior of any structures."
In addition to the foregoing, we suggest that a similar condition be
imposed requiring the use of shake roofing material on Phase II units,
as was used on Phase I structures.
C) Architectural treatment for freestanding carports has not been provided
on Exhibits B through D. We suggest that these units be constructed in
a manner closely - resembling those of Phase I.
Landscape:
A) Staff finds the "formal" planting aspects of the landscape proposal
adequate and similar in character to that already approved for Phase I.
B) Exhibit "C" of Ordinance 1071 contains standards for the preservation
and removal of existing trees and other vegetation on the site. Stipu-
lation 6 thereof provides as follows:
"At the time each phase of the project is submitted to the Planning
Commission for review, the developer shall stake all proposed building
sites in that phase. The sites shall be inspected by an official from
the Department of Community Development. After inspection, the deve-
loper shall make minor adjustments where feasible in the building lo-
cations in order to preserve as many trees as possible on the site..."
Page 3
As of this writing, Phase II has not been inspected by the Planning
Division. We suggest that the B.A.R. grant tentative approval to
site Exhibit "A" at this time and instruct the applicants to proceed
with staking as specified in Ordinance 1071. Staff will then inspect
the results in the field, work with the applicants to make minor
adjustments if necessary, and report back to the B.A.R. at a future
meeting. At that time, final site plan approvals may be granted and
Phase II Building permits released.
C) Exhibit "E" proposes landscape treatment for the northerly 15' of
the fire access lane at the north edge of the R -1 District. As
this buffer is of crucial concern to the established residents ad-
joining the Sunwood project, and as the level of detail depicted on
Exhibit "C" is insufficient to judge the functional adequacy of this
landscape area, we suggest that the board require a detailed plan
to be reviewed and accepted by Staff prior to release of building
permits for Phase II.
RECOMMENDATION
c
Staff recommends approval of site, architectural and landscaping for Phase
II of the "Sunwood" development as depicted on Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, sub-
ject to the following conditions:
1) The alignment of the major internal access road serving Phase II
as depicted on Exhibit "A ", where said road is shown to connect
with a fire access lane on the north edge of the project's R -1
area, is subject to final plat under Application 80 -31 -SUB.
2) "Exterior finish of all buildings is to be consistent with the fol-
lowing:
a. Four - plexes and smaller: Exterior finish is to be six or
eight inch channel siding or comparable material.
b. Structures larger than four - plexes: Exterior finish to be
combination of stucco and cedar or stucco and brick, depend-
ing on building and fire code requirements.
c. Carports to be of wood or comparable materials.
d. T -1 -11 or comparable materials are not to be used in the ex-
terior of any structures."
e. All structures except carports shall be limited to the use
of shake roofing material.
3) Exhibit "A" is approved in concept only at this time. Prior to is-
suance of building permits for Phase II construction, the applicants
shall comply with Stipulation 6 of Exhibit "C" or Ordinance 1071.
Staff shall report to the B.A.R. followign completion of the require-
ments of said Stipulation 6, including an inventory of trees to be
removed. Final site plan approval may be granted at that time.
Building permits for Phase II may not be released until a final site
plan Exhibit "A" is approved by B.A.R.
Page 4
C
Prior to release of building permits for Phase II, the applicant
shall present for Staff approval a detailed planting plan for the
northerly 15' wide portion of the R -1 District of the "Sunwood"
site.
5) All "formal" planting areas within phase II, as depicted on Exhibit
"E ", shall be served by automatic irrigation equipment. This require-
ment shall not extend to any planted area in the R -1 District of the
Sunwood site
Si' air
WI
Sot
at
*V . J. 1 011 - 0(1
INN
.0 —.OE • .1
NV 31IS
•••! .... - 4
• 5 t•a 6,1
- r
6 .1d
( 1 • .." t''s•
5.111,14 10 t.I
•7tu. 5.111.0 J.
•ner,
or S11, 99 i.v • 9.* •
If • v."• •32•• St
tilw 2_
: VI::
. J • 5 iiiIit., I 9
ors', • •rs 999 9 •99.• • •
• ..9•9 •••■!•• it
Otis,. it S911 Vt
:,1,11■15
/101/9 •0•1^1 ,•■•", .01
00,0.3 len
•,,1111,,,a, al 1,1,,elle
..,..> 1.4
_ „ Z.v •I-V •,.• z
is 0055 -
NI 'LI ',I •, I ••1 . i.LA
(61 'It '5 'Mt
00 •ifI, -
is 55( •
,./5 - • 7•5 £11454'
050- •■•S s14 -
tot - •/ Olv • •••••:::::::::
• 01 •11 .
It 0 •: :, ....itp -
0•S SSCrIr •
•
• 4,AG
14+,
OM.
331/dS N3910
.\\
,, • ••\
• \-•/
4.
O
d:6
6.‘
ENTRY ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 2
A
VIEW ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 2
kl , T.;;*",,..
ENTRY ELEVATION BLDG TYPE
VIEW ELEVATION BLDG TYPE I
END ELEVATION ewe TYPES I & 2
6X1-iitglf
ENTRY ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 4
VIEW ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 4
END ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 4
frf:. b' C ...s -'? r?-Q2 .., tF /... . -. . . .. -. ,. >. iK ._ .,_ - .?Z. . r `.v ...i<..L ^::Y' •p- ,:5 + :. - - - r .....,... ,z _. ._.._ __ . -. ...,.' , .... , .... _ .. <_.
ENTRY ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 3
VIEW ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 3
.
ENTRY ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 5
VIEW ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 5
END ELEVATION BLDG TYPE 5
I NOTES
1 LEGEND
U&C;ESTEp pT C4OIGE.5
• A.L r..A..rs TO 55. mEA AND TRJE To T{ra•
•PLA.r■Na TYPES 55i V 0E ADJUSTED To Ac-c-OVCDATE CEPI-ALENNEKT
gEZEJIEED VER. CAP
Acg KIJERUM, LIDUIDMASAR STYKAL/FLUA, QuERco
(r ED Svoteraums, ScAKET 0A
e
fit
'As
Aceg CARGNATUM, CoCNOS C00, , opiRAx JAPCSICL,
(NSNE MAPLE', KouSA COGWCOD, JAPANESE 41,, TREE)
Izatucxwa.a. MENZIES,I. PINUS
(Ocua:-As P P.ItS)
e,Hui• DONITOKTA, ISUOA cANADENers O MEKTENSANA, MUJA (1..ICATA
Ot■OKE ANS cmnolks, CR nta..NrAN HEMLOOK, WESTERN ftep Cz7Ac)
gdo2cognipsoN AZALEA VAR, VIEURNUN VAg., AREL/TUS UNEOO,
VAC.couum OrATuon
(Nyero RHOgorlENDRON4, avERGREM j DEGOL)0O5 AZALEAS, VIBURNUNS,
STRAWft( KITRZE, EVERG-g-EEN HUGRLE/SERE.4) . ,
713
c-onnme-nrn5
SMALL To ,ytE00 DecirAloUS AMP
FLONEX TRESs.
ARETOSTAPAiLos 1.10'L4. ut sAAL4o1, C. Pr000N5ENG, MA ilo.CA .0CV &DONP C0VEz..6
TOLNSTicliUM PAAVIruM, ERICA vAg.
(Kew■WININIc, WINTERGEEEN, LOW CCEGONGEAPE,WesTERA 5#4.2aPegrA
ilaTpieg vuueves.)
(5LeP,emetir EMSTINOt veae.TATION wrrrI GROUND czWEK6)
LAWN
GROWTH (RESERVATION ZONE — EXiSTiNel VEGETATION To ROMAN
MEDIUM TO LARGE DEG-MUCUS TREES.
MEDIUM TO LARGE oR FAST 420WINGI
CowirEss.
ZMALL TO MEDIUM CC 51-00i-aKorOAIG
COMIFEKS.
PLowekinic. 514IZUE•s
6 Wier
AVg
no
1.5
AM
zos
ZOO
Mg
4VPPIJMILE
eUrrIlL /Cr
EV LAMM _
• r'
MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
NOTE: Please write legibly or type all requested information -- incomplete
applications will not be accepted for processing.
SECTION I. GENERAL DATA
Pacific Townhouse - Parke Place
;;,,4) APPLICANT'S NAME (Don Daily, Partner) TELEPH3NE:( 206) 682 -7830
1370 Stewart St. Suite 100
2) "'pPPLICANT'S ADDRESSSeattle, Washington ZIP: 98109
3) ' PLZ'7PERTY OWNER'S NAME Same as Above TEIEPHONE. ( ) same
4)' 1 !PFOPERIY OWNER'S ADDRESS Same as Above ZIP:
LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.) Lots 8,' and 10
Interurban Addition of Seattle
6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) "Sunwood"
KROLL PAGE:
SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Planning Commission approval of
7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: Phase II, 86 condominium units as
required by Ordinance 1071, Paragraph F. 2, One year a tension.opff Zoni
(Ordinance 1071,• Paragraph G). 3. Relocation of tire tire as illustrated
on six -lot single - tamely preliminary plat, revised August 1, 1980, and on
site plan, Sunwood Phase II.
8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT IN PHASES?
9) PROJECT DATE
145 stalls
a. NET ACRES N/A c. PARKING SPACES (86 covered)
232,355
b. GROSS ACRES 5.33 acres - d. FLOORS OF
crION 2 and 3 story
(3..0 acres)
e. LOT AREA COVERAGE BLDG. 41, 470SQ.FT. LAN)SCAPE 3 31 , 377 SQ. FT.
PAVING 59,508 SQ. FT. (18%)
10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 10 %? D YES D
11) EXISTING ZONING R- 4,R -3,& R -2 12. EXISTING COMP.PLAN
13) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION NO
ON THE CITY'S ENVIROMIENI'AL BASE MAP?
14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER
DOOMMITS SENT TO ADDRESSES OTHER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER, PLEASE
LNDICATE BELOW.
a. Don Dally
b NAE Dick Gilroy
FEES:
RCPT.
M.F.
EPIC.
DNO
ADDS 1370 Stewart Street #100, Seattle 98109
ADDRESS: 1115• - 108th Av. N.E. Bellevue , 98004
/s 2 4.40 .7y /��%_ -..3
I Lv h qt/ f(
OVER
SECTION III: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT
Don Dally , being duly sworn, declare that I am the
contract purchaser or owner of the property involved in this application and
that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information
herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS - PARKE
DATE A 7
gnature -o
Don Dally, Partner
Subscribed and sworn before me
this 7 day of 4- , 19 E1 i
/ . .14/1tri
N• IV. 1n • or a ate o as ington
resi• / ///
PLA
SECTION IV: SUPPORTING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS
NOTE: All applications require certain supporting documents and
information which'are described in the following table:
TYPE OF APPLICATION (CHECK BOX(ES)) SUPPORTING INFORMATION REQUIRED
REZONING 1E, 2 , 3.,. 5, 7 , 11
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1C, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11
VARIANCE . 1F, 4, 7, it or 17
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 1D, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12
SHORELINE MGMT. PERMIT' 1B, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13
SHORELINE MGMT PERMIT REVISION 4, 10, 16
WAIVER 1A, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13
SHORT PLAT 4, 5, 9
BINDING SITE DOROVEMENT PLAN 4, 5, 8
,_,iRCHITEGTURAL REYIEVL, 11', 12, 13
LANDSCAPEREVIEW 14
SUBDIVISION 4, 5, 6, 15
SIGN VARIANCE 4, 6, 16,.17
* *See TABLE 1 for detailed description