Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L93-0068 - TURNER HOWARD / MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT - CIRCUIT CITY DESIGN REVIEWl93-0068 223 andover park east mcconkey development superceded by l94-0043 circuit city design review 223 Andover Park East Tukwila, WA 98188 ' 223 ANDOVER ` '""^ EAST r" City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the City of Planning Commission will be holding a public hearing on December 16, 1993 at 8:00 p.m. located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the following: PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L93 -0064: Plato's Pocket APPLICANT: Heath Signs, Lori Langton REQUEST: Request special permission to construct an oversized sign based on a large setback. LOCATION: 17740 Southcenter Pkwy., Tukwila, WA. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L93 -0068: McConkey Development APPLICANT: Howard Turner REQUEST: Demolition and remodel of an existing industrial building to create an 87,255 sq. ft. retail/commercial building with 165 parking spaces, on a 3.2 acre lot. The building will have a maximum height of 36 feet. LOCATION: 223 Andover Park East, 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 Division. The City encourages you to notify your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above items. Published: Seattle Times December 3 and 10, 1993 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 RECEIVED SEP 2 1993 CUMMUNI T'( DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila Board of Architectural Review Design Review Application McConkey Development Auto Parts Club 1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE A. This site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian movement. Response: This site has a wonderful, 20 -year old, mature, groundcover planter strip along Andover Park East which, along with new landscaping, provides an excellent buffer between the busy arterial and the interior of the site. The proposed side walk is located inside of this buffer, bringing pedestrians away from vehicular traffic. The sidewalk is buffered from the parking lot by new landscaped planters which are designed to enhance and go with the existing landscaping. Additional plantings adjacent to the buildings complement the other landscaping, providing the desired transition. B. Parking and service area should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. Response: The Parking areas are well designed, moderating their visual impact. The most visible half of the parking is adjacent to the substantial, 20- year -old. established mature landscaping mentioned above. Note that no parking is more than 35 feet from an existing or new landscaping planter. Particular attention has been paid to the service area. The dumpster areas are enclosed, and the enclosures are screened from view from adjacent properties, the street and the retail parking area. The full - sized loading docks are recessed into the building . Tire recycling areas are also recessed inside the building, as are the tire mounting bays for the retail tenant, Auto Parts Club. City of Tukwila Design Review Application C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to its site. Response: This area of Tukwila is very homogenous in height and scale. The existing building, which is being remodeled from an industrial warehouse to a retail store, is 25 feet tall, similar to its neighbors to the west, north and south. The addition of the retail entry, windows, and canopy elements on the north and east wall of the proposed, add modulation to the building. Windows, doors, and canopy elements are being added to the relocated concrete panels along the north side of the building . 2. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged Response: The reuse of existing concrete tilt -up panels with their painted finish assures that the proposed remodeled retail building is in harmony with its neighbors, especially the recently remodeled Computer City Supercenter to the south, which was designed similarly by the same architect. The preservation of the existing mature landscaping ties in with similar plantings on the site to the north and south across Strander Boulevard. B. Appropriate landscaping transitions to adjoining properties should be provided Response: Existing landscaped buffers to the north and south are to be preserved. New landscaping is being added at the west property line where none now exists. C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. Response: Not applicable City of Tukwila ( .. Design Review Application D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. Response: Truck entry to the site is restricted to the north driveway. Trucks will travel directly to the truck maneuvering area, which will be segregated in the middle of the site away from parking and pedestrian activity at either end. Retail customer vehicles and pedestrian traffic will primarily congregate around the retail entry at the east end of the building, and can use the driveway closest to the building entry at the southeast corner of the site. E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. Response: The two existing driveways are being widened to promote safer access to the site, one lane in, and two lanes out to allow for traffic in Andover Park East. 3. LANDSCAPING AND SITE TREATMENT A. Where existing topographical patterns contribute to the beauty and utility of a development they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. Response: Not applicable. B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Response: We are voluntarily proposing a sidewalk along Andover Park East , to run primarily inside of the existing mature, 20- year -old landscaping, similar to the recently redeveloped site to the south. Pedestrian traffic from adjacent properties to the north and south are accommodated with handicapped- accessible ramps leading to the well- buffered, inviting, and stable pedestrian circulation sidewalk. From there, access to the parking areas and the building entrance is convenient and clearly recognizable. Pedestrians coming from parking in the rear and north lots are provided with sidewalks and stairs along the north side of the building. City of Tukwila, Design Review Application C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. Response: The existing mature, 20- year-old groundcover along with new street trees provides the entire site with an effective barrier from the busy, adjacent arterial. These trees provide shade, as well, for the proposed sidewalks and parking areas. New landscaping along the building's west, south and north sides reinforce these attributes while moderating the scale of the 25 to 30 -foot building walls. A view corridor east to west through the site is created by the partial demolition of the northwest portion of the building. D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrians or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken. Response: Cast -in -place concrete curbs and sidewalks protect all new and existing landscaping. E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged Response: Approximately 10% of the site is planted. Planters are located every 8 stalls and at the ends of all parking rows and at corners of the building. F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accommodated by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and summer. Response: The four full -sized truck loading bays are recessed into the building. A mix of evergreens and deciduous trees and shrubs, fencing, and enclosure walls assure year-around screening of the dumpster areas. City of Tukwila ... Design Review Application G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls , and paving of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used. Response: Planters are provided along all required buffers, except where fire truck access requires a 15' wide fire lane along the southwest side of the building.There, a fence with trailing ivy is provided. H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscaping. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and retrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. Response: Lighting emphasis will be on the retail entry. The north and west sides with their immediately adjacent neighbors, will be lit for security criteria only. All proposed fixtures on site will be shielded types. The proposed parking lot light standards will be less than 15 feet high. 4. BUILDING DESIGN A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to surroundings. Response: The existing building is the best looking, concrete tilt -up panel type building in the area. Its painted finish is of very fine quality and has been well maintained over the years. These panels are being relocated on site and integrated into the proposed structure in an attractive fashion, and many interesting addition materials are being added. The surrounding area is almost completely of similar scale and building types, though generally not as nice as this building. City of Tukwila Design Review Application B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Response: The surrounding area is nearly completely of similar scale and building types, though not as nice as this one. The building immediately to the south has been recently redeveloped in a similar fashion. 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. Response: The main retail area will be a well - proportioned portal component. Windows are being added to provide a more inviting appearance. Landscaping adjacent to the building will add human scale to those walls which are not being enhanced by the entry areas. D. Colors should be harmonious , with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. Response: The building will remain primarily of painted finish. However, bright color will be introduced at the north and east elevations. E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground of buildings should be screened from view. Response: Mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened from view and held back away from the edge of the building. F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design. Response: Exterior lighting fixture will not be a primary architectural feature. All building mounted fixtures will be harmonious with the exposed aggregate finish. City of Tukwila Design Review Application G. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting should be used to provide visual interest. Response: Although similar, none of the adjacent buildings are of the same painted finish. 5. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE A. Miscellaneous concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale. Response: Not applicable. B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines acceptable to site, landscaping and buildings. Response: Not Applicable: INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT 1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. Response: The largest natural amenity in the area is the existing, mature 20 -year -old landscaping along the north and south property lines and Andover Park East. These are being preserved and made a key part of the proposed landscape design. 2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. Response: Lunch and break areas for employees are being provided at the planter areas around the building. City of Tukwila Review Application 3 The proposed development should provide for and convenient on -site pedestrian circulation. Response: Sidewalks along the east and north building sides and between parking areas promote this. 4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. Response: The site to the south and across Andover Park East were recently remodeled for other retail users with.similar bulk / retail use. Many of the other buildings on this block are being considered for similar redevelopment. 5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environment impacts. Response: The proposed development actually reduces the building area on the site and increases the amount of landscaping. 6. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features of the area. Response: Not applicable. Howard R. Turner, AIA City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 16, 1993 Rick Beeler, Director Mr. Meryhew called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. Members present were Messrs. Meryhew, Haggerton, Flesher, Knudson, Malina, and Clark. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu, and Sylvia Schnug. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: MR. FLESHER MOVED TO NOMINATE JIM HAGGERTON AS THE 1994 CHAIRMAN. MR. CLARK SECONDED THE MOTION. MR. KNUDSON MOVED TO NOMINATE SCOTT CLARK AS THE 1994 VICE CHAIRMAN. MR. MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTIONS WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. L93 -0064: Plato's Pocket Vernon Umetsu presented the staff report. He entered into the record the staff report as the first exhibit and distributed color drawings as the second exhibit. The proposed sign is located in the middle of the CBD. The applicant is proposing an increase of 10.6 sq. ft., which is the maximum allowed increase given the wall area and its location. This would allow a 46.8 sq. ft. sign instead of the standard 36.2 sq. ft. sign. Staff concludes that this increase is justified based on its location in a commercial district and the sign's location which is over 480 feet from the street, which well exceeds the minimum 40 foot doubling of the building setback needed. Based on these criteria, staff recommends approval of the sign increase to a total of 46.8 sq. ft. Mr. Malina asked if the temporary sign up currently was the actual dimensions of what would be proposed. Mr. Umetsu said the temporary sign exceeds what would be allowed. Mr. Malina asked if the setback was 480 feet rather than 450 feet. Mr. Umetsu said that the staff report shows approximately 482 feet from the front line. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 1993 Mr. Malina said that the applicant's letter indicates that the setback is 450 feet. Page 2 Lori Langton, Heath Signs, 11805 Kirkland, WA. The sign area that identifies the shop is under the allowable square footage. The only thing that is making the sign over size are the two logo boxes on each side of the sign which are 6.25 sq. ft. Mr. Malina asked if the sign would be illuminated. Ms. Langton said that it would be illuminated with channel letters with the logo boxes will be illuminated. Mr. Meryhew closed the public hearing. Mr. Haggerton said that he didn't like the fact that the word "Tukwila" was mis- spelled on the drawings. MR. CLARK MOVED TO APPROVE L93 -0064: PLATO'S POCKET AS SUBMITTED. MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION. During discussion, Mr. Knudson asked if there was a way this type of application could be handled administratively. Mr. Pace said that the ordinance requires specific procedures and staff cannot modify that without going through a legislative process. The Code specifically says that this has to go to the Planning Commission. These are the things that need to be considered when revising the Sign Code. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Meryhew opened the Board of Architectural Review public hearing. L93 -0068: McConkey Development Vernon Umetsu presented the staff report. The site is located on Andover Park East, just north of Strander Blvd. It was the old "Schucks" warehouse distribution and office center. The proposed action is to develop a 87,255 sq. ft. retail/commercial warehouse building on 3.2 acres of land. The structure occupies 40% of the entire site. It has two entries, one on the east wall and one half way back, facing toward the north. The design focal point is based on two items: the colors and the entry canopy on the east face of the building. The entry canopy is two extruded blocks rising to 25 feet. Planning Commission mutes December 16, 1993 Staff recommends the following changes: 1. Staff is proposing that the pedestrian system be up- graded and connected from the rear of the building to the front. A continuous raised sidewalk is required under the Zoning Code because of the rear parking lot. In some sections there is a three foot sidewalk, and in the loading dock area, there is no sidewalk at all. Page 3 2. Staff is proposing that the 28 foot access aisle be decreased by three feet to a 25 foot access aisle, and increase the sidewalk to a 5 foot sidewalk which provides a more usable area. 3. Staff also proposes that the sidewalk system be completed through the truck loading area. This can be accomplished with a four foot raised sidewalk with a ramp or with a rolled curb, to allow trucks to go over the sidewalk. 4. Staff is proposing that the facia over -hang be continued all the way across. It could then protect pedestrians from the weather and provide an architectural accent. Mr. Meryhew asked why they would encourage pedestrian traffic in the loading area. Mr. Umetsu stated that it would not be a truck terminal. These are docks to service a retail use and another wholesale type use. Staff does not anticipate a lot of truck traffic. The pedestrian traffic is going to occur whether the sidewalks are there or not. He clarified that it is one building, but two tenants. Mr. Knudson said that they would be in for potential liability encouraging pedestrians to walk in the loading area. 5. Staff is recommending to increase the size of the planter areas to allow for more interior trees. An additional landscape island would be located at one end of the front parking area. 6. Staff is proposing that the north islands be planted with large stature trees and that the two new islands have an accent cherry tree. 7. Staff is proposing additional glass to better accent and dress up the front and give it more architectural quality. 8. Staff has proposed that the front canopy, the focal point, be approved subject to further revisions in the proportions and better architectural detailing. The existing level of detailing, proportions, doesn't reflect a high quality commercial design. Examples might be adding capitals to the tops of the columns or using different materials that reflect the metal facia. Planning Commission IJri lutes December 16, 1993 9. Staff is proposin the dumpster. Page 4 revisions with regard to the dressing of the dryvit enclosures for 10. Staff is proposin the extension of the parapet return. Mr. Haggerton asked if a• ding curvatures to the canopy entry would help since it looks boxy. Mr. Umetsu said that wo Id be the only place that occurred and there would not be any continuity, but maybe th re doesn't need to be. 11. Staff proposes a ontinuous row of shrubs. Howard Turner, Archite t, 18420 24 Pl. NE., Seattle, 98155: Mr. Turner said that the Building was originally built in 1968 -1969. The part of the building that extends to t e property line on the north will be torn down. They are trying to recycle as much of the materials as possible. The building should not just be re- clothed in new materials, it woul I be economically unfeasible. The site plan was devised to accommodate two users, one retail and one warehouse. They have to be careful to maintain a view corridor for the warehouse tenant which sits further back. The loading area was recessed in the building between the two tenants, buffering the potential different types f users. There is not a real clear connection between the two users. The loading area s not a place where you would want people walking. The parking is run deep and j st because there is parking, does not mean they have to have planters. There is not a ea of parking. The front tenant will be have 30,000 sq. ft. similar to a "Silo ", "Computer ity" or "Office Depot ". They will want prominent presence on Andover Park East, par ng in front of the entry and signage visibly displayed. The rear space will accommodate a host of users including show room, wholesale, or warehouse or maybe all three. The de ign challenge is to provide an upgraded look within the owners budget and schedule, an limiting new materials to an accent. With regard to staffs recommendation of continuing the facia and the sidewalk along the east and north sides of t e building, they agree with that except that the sidewalk does not need to continue across he dangerous truck traffic. There is not a strong enough argument for taking ped strians across that area on foot. It's possible that the subiitittal will be revised and some of the current panels will be replaced with doors. The driveway has been designed at 28 feet because of the truck traffic. Therefore, the si B ewalk size is adequate at three feet and the parking aisle size should not be decreased With regard to addition .1 landscaping, they have proposed a variegated, well designed landscape plan with low- r plantings. They would hate to see more trees be put in the way of the sign. It could be etrimental to the tenant in the back. Planning Commission 1vLnutes Page 5 December 16, 1993 The applicant agrees with staffs proposal to redesign the light pole as a wall mounted light. With regard to the redesigning of the entry, they are being asked to stand to some quality which has been established. Staffs recommendation is too open ended and the design team would like to have specifics. They have already made significant cost increases at the request of staff, which they feel were made for the improvement of the design. Staffs comments are a repeat of what they were told at the first meeting, leading them to believe that the changes they have made, have had no effect. With regard to the windows and the entry, they are asking for some very specific guidelines to go by. Mr. Clark asked if the windows on the elevation drawings were real windows or false windows. Mr. Turner said that windows belong in some stores and not in others. The windows that were proposed at first, were high windows and they were brought down in a cascading effect. They are now being asked to bring the windows all the way to the floor. The windows are real. Mr. Clark asked if they would be tinted. Mr. Turner said they would be slightly tinted for energy considerations. Mr. Clark asked if the columns were structural or just dryvit accents. Mr. Turner said they were metal accent columns placed in front of the sidewalk. They form a covered walkway. Mr. Clark asked the size of the windows. Mr. Turner said they were 3' X 3'. Mr. Turner continued by saying that they agreed with recommendation #1, except for the continuous sidewalk. They disagree with recommendation #2 completely. They disagree with the four easterly trees in recommendation #3. They agree with recommendation #4. They agree with recommendation #5 as long as they can get specifics. They disagree with recommendation #6. They disagree with recommendation #7. Planning Commission IJuutes December 16, 1993 Page 6 They disagree with recommendation #8, the columns are in the right spot. They agree with recommendation #9 in the same way they agree with recommendation #1 in that it not be continuous. They agree with recommendation #10. They agree with recommendation #11. They agree with recommendation #12. Mr. Clark asked if the echo blocks on the south side of the building were grasscrete. Mr. Turner said that they were. Mr. Clark asked if there was a sidewalk along the southern portion of the building to the doorway, beyond the grasscrete. Mr. Turner said that it is also the walking surface. Mr. Clark asked if the cable stays for the parapet were little tiny things or massive. Mr. Turner said they were meant to look like massive escutcheons, but they are made out of sheet metal. They are meant to give a level of detail to the building. Mr. Clark asked if they were tie rods or cables. Mr. Turner said they would be which ever is cheaper. They have not been designed yet. Mr. Clark asked if there was just one screened dumpster area for garbage and recycling. Mr. Turner said there are two dumpster locations of equal size for recycling and garbage. Mr. Clark asked if he thought the east entry was adequate the way that it is. Mr. Turner said that he didn't mind further talks, but he wanted guidelines and limits placed around the issues. Fred McConkey, Owner, 3006 Northrup Wy., Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98004: With regard to the front entrance, they are willing to upgrade it, but the constraint that they have is that some of the national tenants have a distinct look that they want to have so they need to have some flexibility. Planning Commission Aiiiutes December 16, 1993 Mr. Meryhew said that recommendation #5 is worded the way that they want it because it is not specific and allows flexibility. They only need to get the Planning Director's approval. Therefore, maybe they should agree to it the way that it is. If the Planning Commission tries to give direction, it may be a direction that the applicant does not want to go. Page 7 Mr. Knudson said that it appears that they have come to a stand still with staff. Mr. Malina said that the "Target" and "Burger King" national chain facilities are more distinctive looking and have a better design in Tukwila, and the applicants have ended up liking it better in the end. Mr. McConkey said that some of the retailers have distinctive entry ways. Mr. Clark asked if Mr. McConkey was dissatisfied with the cost concessions that he has made. Mr. McConkey said it has cost an extra $100,000. He added that the improvements were good ideas and the building looks better than originally designed. The trees in the center parking lot that block the visibility to the rear is pretty critical because the back tenant will be 240 feet from the street and if there are trees in full bloom, it's going to be almost impossible to see him. He asked that they reconsider that. With regard to the glass on the front, the retailers want every square inch for their racking and they will rack in front of the windows, so they don't effectively work as windows. Mr. Knudson asked Mr. McConkey his feeling on recommendation #2 and reduce the parking aisle from 28 feet to 25 feet to increase the sidewalk. Mr. McConkey said it would be more difficult to Iease the space. There would not be as much turning radius for someone who might have a big van. The tenant in the back would probably prefer to have more maneuvering room rather than a wider sidewalk. There won't be a lot of traffic back there. The sidewalk conforms to the Code as it is designed. Mr. Meryhew asked if they were agreeable with recommendation #5 now as it is worded. He asked what they thought about changing the seven foot entry. Mr. Turner said that was a real sticking point with staff. The seven foot entry is not restrictive and it is the minimum required by Code. Except for that, the wording in #5 is o.k. Mr. Meryhew asked his opinion on recommendation #8. Mr. Turner said that they don't function on the ground level. The column can't be in the middle of the ramp leading to and from the parking area. He said that may have not been explained well to staff. Planning Commission lniiutes December 16, 1993 Page 8 Mr. Haggerton asked if the colors will be as presented. Mr. Turner said they will be as presented, but they would be willing to work with staff. Mr. Haggerton said that the trees along Andover change the boxy look of the entry. Mr. Umetsu said that he has had a good working relationship with the applicant. Mr. Umetsu said that staff still feels that five foot sidewalk is important. Especially if new office areas are going to be opened up in the back. Three feet is not enough. An alternative, is to put in a five foot sidewalk to the western glass edge . There is a Code requirement that a minimum three foot sidewalk, raised a minimum of six inches is required from the back of the building to the front of the building. It is a requirement that staff is not allowed to deviate from. The facia overhang provides weather protection. A successful retail business in the front area, will require more parking and they will be parking in the rear. Therefore, they need a place to walk. Staff would propose a four foot sidewalk as something that's workable and a facia overhang that will provide design continuity and enhance the on -site circulation. Mr. Haggerton said that he could not think of a building in Tukwila that had sidewalks from the rear of the building to the front. Mr. Turner added that in truck bay #1, that truck will have to come in very close to the wall and a raised sidewalk might knock the load sideways. A rolled edge might work. He said that they were proposing paint stripes to indicate where people would continue to walk. Mr. Meryhew said that wouldn't satisfy the Code. Mr. Clark asked if the sidewalk had to be concrete or if it could be asphalt. Mr. Umetsu said he would have to look that up. He added that with regard to the trees, a business locating 300 feet back will probably not require street presence. The freestanding sign will let people know what business is on that site. Mr. Umetsu said that colorful shrubs might substitute for the trees. Also, the rear of the building is about six feet taller than the front. This allows a tremendous amount of sign area, and the proposed trees at maturity wouldn't block that. Mr. Knudson noted that some jurisdictions are having problems with trees near their sidewalk areas. They are causing considerable damage. Mr. Umetsu said that they had discussed this with the Engineering Department. The key is selecting the right type of tree and having it installed correctly. Planning Commission 1i„iutes December 16, 1993 Mr. Turner said that if people are driving by at 35 mph, they aren't going to have a good opportunity to see the business. Page 9 Mr. Malina said they will be looking at the freestanding sign. Mr. Umetsu said that with regard to recommendation #5, staff is fine with the seven foot height, as long as it is in proportion to the rest of the canopy. Staff feels strongly about the glass panels. Moving the glass panels around the corner is a very effective way of punching out the quality of the building for southbound traffic. Mr. Umetsu said that with regard to recommendation #8, staff did not realize that this was a ramp down, and so they accept the column location. Mr. Umetsu said with regard to recommendation #7, those would be fake windows and they would tie in with the other windows. The Commissioners agreed that recommendations 8 -12 were o.k. Mr. Clark said that he disliked false windows. He said design accents are better if they are discontinuous. He added that he didn't feel the need for trees as a landscape element, especially deciduous trees. The Commissioners agreed to replace trees #1, #2, and #3 with shrubs. Mr. Meryhew said he liked Mr. Umetsu's suggestion of having the five foot sidewalk to the glass point, and then having a three foot sidewalk the rest of the way back. Mr. Knudson said a three foot sidewalk doesn't do anything for him. Mr. Malina said he would prefer four feet. Mr. Umetsu noted that if the glass is not continuous, then the little strip of about six panels towards the center doesn't make sense and should be taken out. Mr. Clark said that would be fine with him. Mr. Umetsu said that staff feels strongly about the glass panels on the bottom. It provides a finish to the architectural continuity. Architectural elements tend to be in three's. Mr. Clark said that he didn't feel the glass was a pivotal design element. He added that the same geometric pattern could be achieved by using a different colored dryvit in three by three squares and make it continuous. Planning Commission A„utes December 16, 1993 Page 10 Mr. Umetsu said that different colored dryvit as an accent has been tried in other buildings and it has not been as effective as a different surface treatment. Mr. Clark suggested using ceramic tile. Mr. Umetsu said it depends on the color used. He agreed to use some sort of window treatment in that same geometric pattern using a higher reflective material. Mr. Clark suggested that ceramic tile be used in a continuous' geometric pattern, in conformance with staffs recommendation and in a contrasting color. Mr. Knudson agreed with that suggestion. The Commissioners agreed that it did not have to be ceramic tile, but some reflective material. Mr. Meryhew closed the public hearing at 10:25 p.m. MR. CLARK MOVED TO APPROVE L93 -0068: MCCONKEY DEVELOPMENT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A FOUR -FOOT RAISED SIDEWALK ON THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE NEXT TO THE LOADING AREA, WITH RAMPS ON EACH SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK INCORPORATED INTO THE NORTHERN EDGE OF THE BUILDING. THE SIDEWALK BE FIVE FEET TO THE EDGE OF THE HANDICAPPED PARKING SLOT AND BE REDUCED TO THREE FEET CONTINUOUSLY TO THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE BUILDING. 2. THE NORTHEASTERLY THREE MAJOR TREES THAT WERE REQUESTED BY STAFF BE REPLACED WITH LOW GROWING EVERGREEN SHRUBS. 3. THE LIGHT POLE NEXT TO THE INTERIOR BUSINESS ENTRY SHALL BE REDESIGNED AS A WALL MOUNTED LIGHT. 4. THE CANOPY BE REDESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT MUTUALLY REACHED BETWEEN THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE APPLICANT; AND THAT THE SEVEN FOOT ENTRY FACIA HEIGHT REMAIN AS IT IS PROPOSED. THE DIRECTOR OR THE APPLICANT MAY ALSO REQUEST FURTHER APPROVAL OF THE REVISED DESIGN BY THE BOARD. 5. RECOMMENDATIONS #6 AND #7 ARE DELETED, AND IN THEIR PLACE HAVE SOME KIND OF REFLECTORIZED DESIGN CONTINUOUS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ALONG THE NORTH BORDER OF THE BUILDING AND ALONG THE EAST FACE. 6. THE COLUMNS SHALL REMAIN AS SHOWN ON THE APPLICANT'S RENDERINGS. Planning Commission luutes December 16, 1993 Page 11 7. THE NORTHERN FACIA OVERHANG BETWEEN THE TWO MAIN ENTRIES OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE CONTINUOUS. 8. THE SOUTHERN PARAPET RETURN SHALL BE LENGTHENED TO MATCH THE NORTH RETURN. 9. DUMPSTER SCREEN WALLS SHOULD INCLUDE REVEALS WHICH REFLECT BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL ACCENTS AS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. 10. HVAC UNITS TO BE FULLY SCREENED FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES (E.G., ROOFTOP UNITS ARE NOT TO EXCEED PARAPET HEIGHT AND BE PAINTED TO MATCH ROOF COLOR. 11. THE APPLICANT SHALL RETURN TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SIGN DESIGN AND COLOR SCHEME. MR. KNUDSON SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. During the Director's report, the Commissioners agreed to meet at 7:00 p.m. for their meetings. Jack Pace reviewed recent Council action. He noted that the Planning Commission would begin reviewing the Comp Plan in February. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director STAFF REPORT TO '1'HE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Prepared December 10, 1993 HEARING DATE: December 16, 1993 FILE NUMBER: L93 -0068 (McConkey Development) APPLICANT: Turner and Associates REQUEST: Design review approval to renovate an existing office /warehouse into a retail /commercial building. LOCATION: 223 Andover Park East, in the NE 1/4 of Section 26, Township 23, Range 4; Tukwila, WA ACREAGE: 3.20 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial ZONING DISTRICT: C -M (Industrial Park) RECOMMENDATION: Approval with twelve conditions. STAFF CONTACT: Vernon Umetsu SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non - Significance (12- 10 -93) ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map and Description B. Site Plan C. Building Elevations D. East and North Elevation Details E. Landscape Plan F. Perspective of Building Frontage G. Perspective of Second (Rear) Business Entry. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 H. Revised North Elevation Showing Semi- Continuous Facia I. Applicant Responses to B.A.R. Design Criteria J. Colored Perspective (to be presented at hearing) K. Colors and Materials Board (to be presented at hearing) L. Staff Recommended Revisions to the Site Plan and Landscaping M. Staff Recommended Revisions to the Building (Elevation) Design Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review FINDINGS VICINITY SITE INFORMATION: L93- 0068:McConkey Development Page 3 Project Description: Significantly modify an existing warehouse /office in an 87,255 s.f. retail/commercial building. The project is described in attachments A through K. The structure including a 2nd story mezzanine, would be generally 32 ft. high, and have with a rear portion (325 ft. from the road) being 36 ft. high. The structure covers about 40% of the site. It is supported by 165 parking spaces. Surrounding Land Use: Adjacent uses are the new Computer City retail store and a soon to be renovated (for retail) industrial building to the south, office and upscale auto sales buildings to the west, small wholesale /industrial buildings to the north, and office buildings (across the road) to the west. These buildings are two to three stories in height and have a general building foot print covering 40 -50% for retail oriented buildings and 50 -70% for industrially oriented buildings. Terrain: The terrain is flat, with buildings providing topographic relief. Access: Vehicular access is provided via Andover Park East, which lies on the site's eastern boundary. BACKGROUND This building renovation follows a trend of converting 1960's concrete warehouse /industrial buildings, into retail/commercial uses. This would be the third conversion of the five buildings on this block. A fourth building is scheduled for design review in January, while the draft improvements for the fifth building have been submitted for an interdepartmental, pre- application meeting. DECISION CRITERIA This project is subject to Board review as a development in excess of 10,000 s.f. (TMC 18.60.030(A)(ii)) and because exterior improvements exceed 10% of the building's assessed valuation (TMC 18.60.030(B)). Board review criteria are shown below in bold, along with a staff discussion of relevant facts. The applicant's responses to the BAR criteria are shown in Attachment I. Staff Report to the L93- 0068:McConkey Development Board of Architectural Review Page 4 18.60.050: General Review Criteria. (1) Relationship of Structure to Site. a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movements b. Parking and service areas should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. c. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to the site. The building is set back 83 ft. from the street /property line, except for the entry canopy which is set back 67 feet. Transition from the street to parking lot is provided by a six ft. wide sidewalk and 10 ft. landscaping strip. A double row of parking, landscape and interior sidewalk lie between the landscaping and building(see Landscaping and Site Treatment). The entry canopy provides an architectural transition to the building. The two story building has a height and scale which is similar to surrounding two story structures (see Surrounding Land Use). Parking areas are aligned perpendicular to the street. End -of -aisle landscape islands could be particularly effective in screening the large paved areas from the road if the low shrubs are supplemented with trees. One additional landscape island in a key front area could also further reduce the affects of the paved parking area (see Landscape and Site Treatment). (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony on texture, lines and masses is encouraged. b. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. c. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. d. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. e. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. Transition to the north is provided by a five ft. wide landscape strip, a double row of parking with landscape islands, and architectural glass and facia, as shown on the building's north elevation. Transition to south is provided by a 5 to 20 ft. wide landscape strip, while transition to the west is a circulation aisle, parking, and sidewalk. Both of these areas are currently industrial in nature and are not visible to the general public. Transition to the east has been discussed in Criteria 1 (transition to the street). The primary vehicle access is provided by the northern driveway, with a secondary right- out -only driveway on the south and a rear access alley to the west. On -site vehicular circulation is shown on Attachment B. Staff Report to the L934068:McConkey Development Board of Architectural Review Page 5 Pedestrian access • to the site is provided by a four foot wide sidewalk in the middle of the property, leading directly to the entry canopy, and at the south property line. On -site circulation is generally provided by a 3 -5 ft. wide, raised sidewalk system along the building with a weather protecting canopy. Minor adjustments to the north driveway aisle could increase the building sidewalk width from three to five feet. The interior raised sidewalk and facia overhang is interrupted at the truck loading area, where striped paving is proposed. The striped section is not consistent with the Zoning requirement for: "...a sidewalk of at least a three -foot section, adjoining the building, curbed or raised six inches above the driveway surface." (TMC 18.56.040(D)). A rolled curb sidewalk in this area would satisfy the Zoning Code requirement and allow truck access. (3) Landscaping and Site Treatment a. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized, preserved and enhanced. b. Grades of 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 unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination. g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, 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. Landscaping is primarily the 10 ft. wide, treed streetfront strip, and landscape islands in the parking area (Attachment E). A landscape island in a key location at the north end of the parking row adjacent to the eastern building face could be added, and landscape islands adjacent to the dumpster sites could be enlarged; without loosing any parking. The proposed shrubs and groundcover along the front perimeter have a wide mixture of heights, and materials not normally found in frontage landscape designs. Landscape materials in several islands are composed only of low shrubs, which would be fully hidden by parked cars. Some revision to the landscape plan will be needed to reflect recent site plan revisions. No irrigation system has been identified although staff and the architect have discussed the components of an automatic system. Staff Report to the • L93- 0068:McConkey Development Board of Architectural Review Page 6 The site is flat with area buildings being the most significant topographic features. Parking and pedestrian facilities do not have significant grades. The truck loading and dumpster areas have been concentrated in the north - central building area (Attachment B). Truck loading spaces have been incorporated within the building, while dumpster areas face the loading area. Dumpster areas are screened with concrete walls with gates made of the same materials of the building facia. No details of the concrete walls have been shown. Repeating of the window grid pattern on these screen walls would help to integrate the structures with the building. No exterior lighting structure information has been provided at this time. (4) Building Design a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to its surroundings. b. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and in harmony with permanent neighboring developments. c. Building components- such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure. d. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. e. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from view. f. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards, and 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. The proposed building would retain a shape and design similar to its industrial origins. A prominent entry canopy, glass windows, overhanging facia, and colors have been proposed to project a more retail image. The design of each building face is discussed below (see attachments C, D, and H). East Face and Entry The focal point of the east face is an entry canopy generally centered on a dryvit refinished wall. The canopy is two blocks which extend to the top of the entry stairs. The front block provides the minimum U.B.C. allowed, seven foot height in a perimeter wall. The canopy then opens up to an 8.5 ft. ceiling height. The canopy is detailed with a grid of reveals, which mirror the glass panes, and a tight series of round columns provides a visual anchor to the ground. The architect states that this canopy configuration provides a dramatic entry as individual users enter the building. Under canopy areas would be illuminated by lights which bounce off of the ceiling (sofit lights). Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review L93- 0068:McConkey Development Page 7 The remaining wall is accented by a five foot overhang with vertical, metal facia (a colors and materials board to be provided at the public hearing), rounded columns, and decorative glass panes. The building entry consists of six glass doors. To the rear, the building rises an additional four feet where a second business entry is to be located. This second area is architecturally accented with the taller building wall and glass panes which mirror the streetfront glass pattern. North Face The north building face is largely industrial in nature. It would be accented with a series of reveals outlining panelled in loading doors, a five foot wide overhang with metal facia and decorative glass panes. The overhang and facia should be continuous to the second business entry, to provide continuous weather protection and design continuity. The rear one -third of the building will be simple tilt -up concrete walls. The relatively bare building design is moderated by its 300+ ft. distance from the road, the narrow cone of vision from the road, and landscape trees which break up the building wall. South and West Faces The south and west building faces are plain tilt -up concrete walls. No enhancements are proposed due to their minimal public exposure and the industrial nature of adjacent areas and structures. (5) Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture Two free - standing dumpster areas have been proposed in relatively prominent locations (Attachment B) as previously discussed in Landscaping and Site Treatment. HVAC units will be screened. CONCLUSIONS Relationship of Structure to Site. 1. The relationship of the proposed building height and scale to site, is similar to the building to lot relationship of surrounding structures. 2. Transition with the streetscape, and moderation of the paved parking area, satisfy the minimum criteria subject to enlarging the landscape islands in the north, and establishing a new front landscape island as shown in Attachment L. Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review L93- 0068:McConkey Development Page 8 Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. 3. The proposed building is harmonious with the surrounding structures which have similar heights and masses. Site vehicular access and circulation is compatible with the adjacent road system. The site's proposed sidewalk and landscape design are generally harmonious with adjacent properties. Landscaping and Site Treatment. 4. A continuous, quality on -site pedestrian circulation system which satisfies the minimum Board criteria, could be provided by widening the northern sidewalk from 3 ft. to 5 ft. (by reducing the vehicle circulation aisle from 27 ft. to 25 ft.) and adding a raised sidewalk through the loading area to join the east and west sidewalks (see Attachment L). The facia should also be extended to provide a continuous cover, and the entire facia overhang should be improved. The truck loading area sidewalk could be reinforced and designed with a rolled curb or ramp, to allow truck access to the loading dock area. This would also satisfy the minimum Zoning Code standard for a raised sidewalk from front to rear. 5. The visual impacts of the parking area would be moderated by continuing the frontage pattern of Tulip trees in landscape islands along the northern perimeter and planting flowering plum trees in all interior landscape planters (see Attachment L). New plum trees in an enlarged dumpster planter would also better screen these facilities. 6. The affects of the front parking strip on the streetscape and adjacent sidewalk could be moderated by using a continuous hedge with a three foot height, to safely separate auto and pedestrian environments, and present an orderly appearance to match the building design. 7. An automatic irrigation system with moisture sensors should be provided to ensure plant growth as presented, and prevent over watering. 8. A maximum light fixture height of 20 ft. would be in scale with the building and parking lot size. Shielding to eliminate direct vision of the bulb at the property line would eliminate off -site glare as required. 9. The light pole next to the interior business entry should be relocated as a wall mounted light to reduce conflict with a recommended landscape tree and concentrate light in a potential blind spot (where the sidewalk runs between the building and dumpster in a five. to six foot alley). r Staff Report to the Board of Architectural Review Building Design. L93- 0068:McConkey Development Page 9 10. The eastern entry canopy area is the design focal point of the entire project. It is essential that this element be possess a scale and level of design quality which will "carry" the rest of what is generally an industrial building. In order to do this, the entry must reflect the highest quality of architectural design and detailing. 11. Building design quality would satisfy Board criteria with, the following changes (see Attachment M): a. Adding a final row of two glass panes to the stepped glass elements at the streetfront building corners. This provides a balancing proportion and vertical "grounding" of glass elements, and design continuity with the stepped glass area in the rear business, b. Continuing the top row of glass panes to the canopy area would provide a design linkage between the building edges and the center, c. Eastern columns should be centered at the corners so that the distance from each edge is the same, as much as possible, and d. The southern parapet return should be lengthened to match the return on the north side. This would provide additional vertical relief/modulation, in addition to design consistency. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture. 12. Dumpster screen walls should include reveals which reflect building architectural accents, in order to enhance design integration with the building and provide a level of architectural quality to a very publicly located structures. 13. HVAC units should be screened from adjacent properties in an architecturally integrated manner. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Department recommends approval of the proposed project, subject to the following conditions: Relationship of Structure to Site (recommendations are illustrated in Attachment L) 1. A raised minimum 4 ft. wide sidewalk segment through the loading area shall be provided. This segment should be reinforced and designed with a rolled curb or ramp (with minimum 2 inch lip), to allow truck access to the loading dock area. The facia overhang should be extended to provide continuous weather protection. Staff Report to the L93- 0068:McConkey Development • Board of Architectural Review Page 10 2. The parking aisle in the western half of northern parking lot should be reduced from 28 ft. to 25 ft. wide and the sidewalk adjacent to this segment widened to five feet. Landscaping and Site Treatment (recommendations are illustrated in Attachment L) 3. Additional landscape island area, trees, and shrubs shall be provided as shown in Attachment L. 4. The light pole next to the interior business entry shall be redesigned as a wall mounted light. Building Design (recommendations are illustrated in Attachment M) 5. The focal entry canopy shall be redesigned to reflect the highest level of architectural design and detailing as discussed in Conclusion 10. The redesign shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director. The redesign considerations should include reconsidering the 7 foot entry facia height. Later such significant changes shall be administratively reviewed by the Planning Director to ensure that the entire frontal building design continues to reflect the high quality BAR design. The Director or the applicant may also request further approval of the revised design by the Board. 6. A bottom row of two glass panels shall be added to all stepped glass areas in the northeast and southeast building corners. 7. The top row of glass panes from the northeast and southeast building corners (along the eastern face) shall be continued to the canopy area. This may be waived by the Planning Director if a revised canopy design provides an alternative linkage between building edges and the center focal point. 8. Columns shall be centered at the corners so that the distance from each edge is the same, as much as feasible, in light of pedestrian ramp requirements. 9. The northern facia overhang shall be provided between the two main entries, to provide continuous weather protection and design continuity. 10. The southern parapet return should be lengthened to match the north return. 11. Dumpster screen walls should include reveals which reflect building architectural accents as approved by the Planning Director. 12. HVAC units to be fully screened from adjacent properties (e.g., rooftop units are not to exceed parapet height and be painted to match roof color. 0— T REF: 1 -BAR 1 2 21 L! •i-• f:". 1 CC1 1 •ncisr-; REF: 2 -BAR 2 J.? E5 ta3 < 3 0 g ITT/II:122Z imw RECEIVED SEP 2 1993 l..vcv1IVMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila Board of Architectural Review Design Review Application McConkey Development Auto Parts Club 1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE A. This site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian movement. Response:. This site has a wonderful, 20 -year old, mature, groundcover planter strip along Andover Park East which, along with new landscaping, provides an excellent buffer between the busy arterial and the interior of the site. The proposed side walk is located inside of this buffer, bringing pedestrians away from vehicular traffic. The sidewalk is buffered from the parking lot by new landscaped planters which are designed to enhance and go with the existing landscaping. Additional plantings adjacent to the buildings complement the other landscaping, providing the desired transition. B. Parking and service area should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. Response: The Parking areas are well designed, moderating their visual impact. The most visible half of the parking is adjacent to the substantial, 20- year -old. established mature landscaping mentioned above. Note that no parking is more than 35 feet from an existing or new landscaping planter. Particular attention has been paid to the service area. The dumpster areas are enclosed, and the enclosures are screened from view from adjacent properties, the street and the retail parking area. The full - sized loading docks are recessed into the building . Tire recycling areas are also recessed inside the building, as are the tire mounting bays for the retail tenant, Auto Parts Club. City of Tukwila f Design Review Application C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to its site. Response: This area of Tukwila is very homogenous in height and scale. The existing building, which is being remodeled from an industrial warehouse to a retail store, is 25 feet tall, similar to its neighbors to the west, north and south. The addition of the retail entry, windows, and canopy elements on the north and east wall of the proposed, add modulation to the building. Windows, doors, and canopy elements are being added to the relocated concrete panels along the north side of the building . 2. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged Response: The reuse of existing concrete tilt -up panels with their painted finish assures that the proposed remodeled retail building is in harmony with its neighbors, especially the recently remodeled Computer City Supercenter to the south, which was designed similarly by the same architect. The preservation of the existing mature landscaping ties in with similar plantings on the site to the north and south across Strander Boulevard. B. Appropriate landscaping transitions to adjoining properties should be provided Response: Existing landscaped buffers to the north and south are to be preserved. New landscaping is being added at the west property line where none now exists. C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. Response: Not applicable 4i City of Tukwila Design Review Application D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. Response: Truck entry to the site is restricted to the north driveway. Trucks will travel directly to the truck maneuvering area, which will be segregated in the middle of the site away from parking and pedestrian activity at either end. Retail customer vehicles and pedestrian traffic will primarily congregate around the retail entry at the east end of the building, and can use the driveway closest to the building entry at the southeast corner of the site. E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. Response: The two existing driveways are being widened to promote safer access to the site, one lane in, and two lanes out to allow for traffic in Andover Park East. 3. LANDSCAPING AND SITE TREATMENT A. Where existing topographical patterns contribute to the beauty and utility of a development they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. Response: Not applicable. B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Response: We are voluntarily proposing a sidewalk along Andover Park East , to run primarily inside of the existing mature, 20- year -old landscaping, similar to the recently redeveloped site to the south. Pedestrian traffic from adjacent properties to the north and south are accommodated with handicapped - accessible ramps leading to the well - buffered, inviting, and stable pedestrian circulation sidewalk. From there, access to the parking areas and the building entrance is convenient and clearly recognizable. Pedestrians coming from parking in the rear and north lots are provided with sidewalks and stairs along the north side of the building. City of Tukwila Design Review Application C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. Response: The existing mature, 20- year-old groundcover along with new street trees provides the entire site with an effective barrier from the busy, adjacent arterial. These trees provide shade, as well, for the proposed sidewalks and parking areas. New landscaping along the building's west, south and north sides reinforce these attributes while moderating the scale of the 25 to 30 -foot building walls. A view corridor east to west through the site is created by the partial demolition of the northwest portion of the building. D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrians or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken. Response: Cast -in -place concrete curbs and sidewalks protect all new and existing landscaping. E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged Response: Approximately 10% of the site is planted. Planters are located every 8 stalls and at the ends of all parking rows and at corners of the building. F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accommodated by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and summer. Response: The four full -sized truck loading bays are recessed into the building. A mix of evergreens and deciduous trees and shrubs, fencing, and enclosure walls assure year- around screening of the dumpster areas. City of Tukwila Design Review Application G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls , and paving of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used. Response: Planters are provided along all required buffers, except where fire truck access requires a 15' wide fire lane along the southwest side of the building.There, a fence with trailing ivy is provided. H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscaping. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and retrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. Response: Lighting emphasis will be on the retail entry. The north and west sides with their immediately adjacent neighbors, will be lit for security criteria only. All proposed fixtures on site will be shielded types. The proposed parking lot light standards will be less than 15 feet high. 4. BUILDING DESIGN A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to surroundings. Response: The existing building is the best looking, concrete tilt -up panel type building in the area. Its painted finish is of very fine quality and has been well maintained over the years. These panels are being relocated on site and integrated into the proposed structure in an attractive fashion, and many interesting addition materials are being added. The surrounding area is almost completely of similar scale and building types, though generally not as nice as this building. City of Tukwila Design Review Applidcion B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and. stable appearance. Response: The surrounding area is nearly completely of similar scale and building types, though not as nice as this one. The building immediately to the south has been recently redeveloped in a similar fashion. 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. Response: The main retail area will be a well - proportioned portal component. Windows are being added to provide a more inviting appearance. Landscaping adjacent to the building will add human scale to those walls which are not being enhanced by the entry areas. D. Colors should be harmonious , with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. Response: The building will remain primarily of painted finish. However, bright color will be introduced at the north and east elevations. E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground of buildings should be screened from view. Response: Mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened from view and held back away from the edge of the building. F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design. Response: Exterior lighting fixture will not be a primary architectural feature. All building mounted fixtures will be harmonious with the exposed aggregate finish. City of Tukwila k„.... Design Review Application G. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting should be used to provide visual interest. Response: Although similar, none of the adjacent buildings are of the same painted finish. 5. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE A. Miscellaneous concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale. Response: Not applicable. B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines acceptable to site, landscaping and buildings. Response: Not Applicable: INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT 1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. Response: The largest natural amenity in the area is the existing, mature 20- year -old landscaping along the north and south property lines and Andover Park East. These are being preserved and made a key part of the proposed landscape design. 2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. Response: Lunch and break areas for employees are being provided at the planter areas around the building. VN:.4 %):.. iGY t: tl:± i.: k. i cw.J"F.�ISi:nn�:t145.nuulawurvw v4 n. ■••■ .n... wnwvrxmMn• •••,,,.1tn2iiCYti•4s' '1.0.1; D. f.J '.•.'1!T'1,;41,!'S'•'../,'1 :`, , 1 • Y • • City of Tukwila Design Review Applkation 3 The proposed development should provide for and convenient on -site pedestrian circulation. Response: Sidewalks along the east and north building sides and between parking areas promote this. 4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. Response: The site to the south and across Andover Park East were recently remodeled for other retail users with similar bulk / retail use. Many of the other buildings on this block are being considered for similar redevelopment. 5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environment impacts. Response: The proposed development actually reduces the building area on the site and increases the amount of landscaping. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features of the area. Response: Not applicable. Howard R. Turner, AIA Cncl. 2/Rec. 3 Landscape Islands enlarged to allow better area screening. 8 COMPACTS (6 6-64' 7' U C EXISTING CO!' � \Is1 14,' \ �` Qr1 toA 1_i- \ i 4' \ \.'- ' :` t, f cu t Ito Vg D. EXISUIC 2, A1 --- RICFROCAL ACC&1D'SS 'r / . EA EkENT-FTlovtY NEW ASPHALT P tyD 0---i - _A_ 0 F17E TRUCK ACCESS *` I . a&Y PROVCED v1A aTY `y' ._ — RECURLED FMGASEI.ENT--1 32.9 ALMJSS ADJAa11T PRU'ERTY TO J SOAR ARMCO/ED zr— RR. EASEI.(NT T PAW 10 0 85=85' SCA BLCG- 1 7' U STANDARDS 0 85=85' iu REG VFD F.YISTrx S88 25 If Ye IN TIMINUrIMIII>♦MMIION11!♦1111tYl 4 WALL I.O1t1TED •9 ELOCD 104 S 16 C.ArACT C rA IC• NEW EXIT as' ACCerS AIC Cr Itl i TANDA'AD [TACO SECT IOA! A -A FlJ%n DO_t�l RETAIL SPACE 'B' I 42,250 SF. RETAIL IIHCLUDING LOADING MAYS/ Cncl. 4/Rec. 2 Modify parking dimensions to provide a 5 ft. sidewalk. NEW EXIT y ISLIOVE EXTSTTG DOD, I LM1*NG NO STARS • 114.6' 208' USE OF ECO-DLOCK FOR FRE LATE SLFFICES FCR 5' LN,OSCAPE OFFER SITE fPLAN 1 SC.7D 23-A U SI AWARDS 0 RS'=85' 7' • CONCRETE ELDG. 4 L140.09 •.�, i u, s, —_-5_OSL.NO 13'413'48 1 CAU CONCRETE EIICL O45.4811 0.0 CONCIEIE DEL TRUCK UNIUEVER INC 'N ASPHALT PAVIN 510 I:'46 UT K Cncl. 4/Rec. 1 New 4 ft. raised sidewalk to complete ped. system. U STMDAROS Cncl. 2/Rec.3 Add new landscape Island. 10 STANDARDS 0 9'=90' 75.1' S88 25' 14-E 505.43' NEW ASPHALT Ir '" G STD W 85=31 8 STANDARDS C 8S 68 8.5% 1 8 51MDAR05 W '=68' III FLMITER REMOVE EXIST I(: DOOR, ---1•---------II----- Cncl. 4/Rec. 1 & 9 ' Ensure weather protection over entire facia overhang. RETAIL SPACE((' 'A' 30,400 SF. RETAIL —I—�I INCLUD I NG LOADII,G MATS) II IL_—___ SALES I PLMITFR — I I I 4(U)(0 7 WALL LIOUI17ITEDITS EXISTINC EXIT I I I NEW EXIT I 182' 1 1 ELC. • IJ-t.�L-i_I I '_liLLL WIDE FiG. ACCESS _ 5' BUILDING SETBACK AND LiANDSCAPEI— N98 25' 27'W 05.43' 1 _ I 124' >;0' 9' Ir 25' 19.5' 6' 8 771sm7,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,�,,, I I I- FREEST/ *GG 974 1 II v Ic rCW 35'CCiE ETE ID(*VEWAY I 1 t� I < I UJ EXISTING CONCRETE BLDG. EXISTING CONCRETE BLDG. 5' RE O LMDSCN E I BITTER FF'AVLCD N 2 PARTS D'IPLMITER Ni0 SCSTEEEWALK IRT TF jES MD 6' X p/ I c- r~EXST/13 ROADWAY I I-4 I I I ANDOVE CO(I1Or3A4 6' SCEWMY 14TH CO.(LTER OTY NOTES • _ :.'�� }/.CONI(MY OMVMLOCMMNT COI4rANY _ "" Hb ...' nr. 1.0, NI . ..n..... =A N.el TURNER AND ASSOCIATES SITE PLAN REVISIONS urt 6ryLw µyxVlN$ n'2.[y!S SHEET PARKING REQUIRED: PARKING PROVIDED: RETAIL 29,300 SF. 0 2.5/1000 SII0AR00A/RETAIL 31,300 SF. 0 2.5/1000 TOTALwAREBOUSE 12,650 SF. A 1/1000 TOTAL 72,650 SF. STANDARD INC. COMPACT (30S ■ ROD 163 STALLS) PLUS 2 TOTAL = 73 = 78 = 12 = 163 = 108 . 5 - 51 - 164 - IIcCLYI<EY DEvtLOFLLtIT Ht4.0EL =' 1 I L%\7 & ) G CRANIIUY;GI( OICXID WAR/. DAU: ArsD/Rs pN) 1.1au1 I,rII") III OM SCALE: f.M Per Cncl.'s 5 & 6/Rec. 3 Tulip trees to be added to landscape islands. Flowering plum trees to be added to landscape Islands. 00000c00000t Continuous shrub row. cc, N / �/%% El ,1-.0/l : 31vOS Il'r1�CX'(]U:1 SOUS 1g1:1. Gt. 1!1IVL S1J31111D1IV 7M n,u IOW (I:w t.lt ftl lst[I .•. 11 (t�1, S-J 'J S-d S-d )WO 9-d S-d y d :-e 'Sim] l.O ln/.71 SI1X0110 low 711530 Su= WO hill SH]mHo21120 LYOlIIIDIS IS'.1TIONYIN Y)1 13JYHYd / 1II2L5 71L 1!W -MIS 10 IQ3SA5 oil 11HwJ/IQ1L5 ]YNI aP .0 1111510 IU3515111A1A 1111.6 ;. � 1111510 Su MAW MAO[Z �.�nim5iows5uvna tY re Z9 IY 42 5L Et Sti/OCAO 71VO wow Ya '••••11•. • 111 moo *Am ..t1••M tow A11VL1\O] tN.11L 01.A70 AIN NO]iri '1111'AO O31q)0 115 ,All IutVIX1 i11VO15,1 :311 ISv3 Nhd 111n0it/V SZZ 11M WID721 130QY1t11N1XO13A33A3X103]Y1 S31VIJOSSV ONV a3Nanl ono S31O1,1 133HS SNOISIA3a 5NOI1VA313 .Bll lamb leanpauy3Je ppe of saued ssel6 Onn; Jo MOJ wouoq ppd 9 'oad/e L L '13u3 Op •sluawala ssel6 only ay1 dull o1 saued ssel6 ppd z. 'oad/q I. L '13u3 11 1_IIiiii II. ll_IT_/ ELL -I Ll , 1_11.1.1_1_l_1111_1C1_I-'L I L-L_Ljl_Ll-(..1_l.l1 LI_Liil.r 1_l.._l,1]_j ,jl AI_I-11-1-1-j.j=j_1(,14-_, z dVo-z :33J 11 „O-,l=„ 9/t =31VOS NOftVA H 1svI 1S •lenoidde mog JO anl1 J1slulwpe oL pa(gns uBlsap swab! 'oad/0 L 'lou3 l 2JVE1-1. :338 „ O--,l=„ 2/l :31V3S NOIIVAI11I HD:ION •6uegJano LIUM eloe; 6ulla;oid 1ayneaM snonulsuoo 6'8 I. '001:1/0 'lou5 r1 El Vi 1 Pl BOARD OF ARC TECTURAL REVIEW RECEIVED DESIGN REVIEW SEP 2 1993 APPLICATION CITY OF TUKWILA nu »lv"v -' ENT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 FOR STAFF USE ONLY 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: F.E�u t.. &-145T T NJ (v (k46-00-(7-7,€- )1 LATtf I'ROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and sub- division; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) i fl o-kAS-7._ (,-134-P-,;(" ,--P , T (1 1 Li) - Quarter: N Section: 2 C-D Township: L _5 Range: G- (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT:* Name: ' C..W- -11,9M 1 1 fk(A - 11.RN" Z ASSQC. . Address. 1 B4 ZD 243-4" PL to 1 �� (,\ 3 9 2 SS Phone. 1-0 L, '? l.-/ S 14-3 Signature: b...Y l.L.. • Date: 25 r `Z' / "I" * The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP. 4. PROPERTY Name: �o key E± i e ' c Z.s� F I v OWNER J Address: ,,c-`E1Ai,p� ,- c� -�'(�- I,a wtk-q Phone: � G� $$ �i / ' 0 - Z- C,3(n I /WE,[signature(s)] 4A4 O''[Y '4 C' swear that I /we are the owner(s) or contract pyrF lasers) of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing state nts and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLI( TION . ; Page 2 CRITERIA The following criteria will be used by the BAR in its decision - making on your proposed project. Please carefully review the criteria, respond to each criterion (if appropriate), and describe how your plans and elevations meet the criteria. If the space provided for response is insufficient, attach additional response to this form. 1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping, and pedestrian movement. B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to it site. RESPONSE: `-t✓ arTiStfrj ) 2. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged. B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. RESPONSE: S i - J'm u-ktP BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLI( .TION Page 3 3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken. E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encour- aged. F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accom- plished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and summer. G. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls, and pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used. H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining land- scape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. RESPONSE: 1)66' F .i .l t7 4. BUILDING DESIGN A. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to surroundings. B. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and be in harmony with permanent neighboring de- velopments. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLIt ,TION �w. Page 4 . C. Building components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets - should have good pro- portions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure. D. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from view. F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all ex- posed accessories should be harmonious with building design. G. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting should be used to provide visual interest. RESPONSE: 5. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architec- tural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale. B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. • RESPONSE: '5 j1Y tfi BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPL( .TION Page 5 INTERURBAN SPECIAL REVIEW DISTRICT The following six criteria are used in the special review of the Interurban area in order to manage the development of this area, to upgrade its general appearance, to provide incentives for compatible uses, to recognize and to capitalize on the benefits to the area of the amenities including the Green River and nearby recreational facilities, to encourage development of more people - oriented use, and to provide for development incentives that will help to spur growth. Please describe how your proposed development relates to the goals for this District. Use additional response space, if necessary. 1. The proposed development design should be sensitive to the natural amenities of the area. 2. The proposed development use should demonstrate due regard for the use and enjoyment of public recreational areas and facilities. 3. The proposed development should provide for safe and convenient on -site pedestrian circu- lation. 4. The proposed property use should be compatible with neighboring uses and complementary to the district in which it is located. 5. The proposed development should seek to minimize significant adverse environmental im- pacts. 6. The proposed development should demonstrate due regard for significant historical features in the area. BOARD OF ARCH! -CTURAL REVIEW DESIGW REVIEW APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 The following materials must be submitted with your application. This checklist is to assist you in submitting a complete application. Please do not turn in your application until all items which apply to your proposal are attached to your application. If you have any questions, contact the Department of Community Development at 431 -3680. ►RN THIS CHECKLIST WITH YOUR APPLICA:TI GENERAL Application Form Design Review Fee — $900.00 x �YA Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Fee — $225 00 PLANS �r Seven (7) copies of the set of plans are required. The scale shall not exceed 1 " =30', with the north arrow, graphic, scale and date all identified on the plans. Also, the license stamps of the architect and landscape architect shall be on each appropriate plan. The following information should be contained within the plan: A. Vicinity map showing location of site and surrounding prominent landmarks. xi B. Property dimensions and names of adjacent roads. C. Lot size and impervious (paved and building areas) surface calculations. D. Existing and finished grades at 2' contours with the precise slope of any area in excess of 15 %. E. Location and dimensions of existing and proposed structure(s), accessory structures with appropriate setbacks, parking and loading area dimensions, and driveways. xi F. Existing (6" in diameter) trees by species and an indication of which will be saved. Proposed landscaping: size, species, location and spacing. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC 'ION CHECKLIST Page 2 izG. Location and size of proposed utility lines and a description of by whom and how water and sewer is available. xiH. Location, dimensions and nature of any proposed easements or dedications. I. For commercial and industrial uses, gross floor area by use and parking calculations. nJ. For multiple residential, location, dimensions and description of common open space and recreation areas. MK. Dimensioned elevations of building drawn at 1/8" = 1' or a comparable scale. Elevations should show the type of exterior materials. glL. Location and elevations of exterior lighting for buildings and parking areas. gM. Location and elevations of dumpster screens. xiN. Color and material sample board for exterior building and accessory structure colors and material. SIO. Perspective drawings, photographs, color renderings or other graphics which accurately represent your proposed project. P. One (1) Photomaterial Transfer (PMT) of each drawing reduced to 8.5" by 11" (most printing companies can make PMT's). PUBLIC NOTICE XI A mailing list with address labels for property owners and residents within 300 feet of your property. (See attached "Address Label Requirements ") A King County Assessor's Map which identifies the location of each property ownership and residence listed. The maps may be ordered from the King County Public Works Map Counter at 296 -6548. ADDRESS LABEL REQUIREMENTS CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3680 Notification of persons of certain types of pending applications is required in order to encourage citizen participation in the land use process. Applicants are required to submit a mailing matrix and one photocopied set of labels which show: 1. The name and address of all owners of property lying within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property for which a permit is sought; and 2. The address of all residents of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of property. Property owner names and addresses can be obtained from the King County Department of Assessments located on the 7th floor of the King County Administration Building, Room 700, 500 Fourth Avenue, Seattle. To compile the information: 1. Obtain the assessor's map(s), which contains your property and all abutting property within 300 feet. (See diagram.) You may use the maps on file in the Assessor's Office or they can be purchased from the King County Department of Public Works Map Counter on the 9th floor of the Administration Building. It is suggested that assessor's maps be ordered several hours in advance of the time you would like to pick them up. 2. Then, obtain a computer batch order form from the Department of Assessments, list on the batch order form the property tax account numbers shown on the assessor's map(s) and submit the batch order form to the Department of Assessments together with the required fee for a printout of the information. Assistance with the tax account numbers may be obtained through the Assessor's Office or the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development (DCD). King County labels are not acceptable because they cannot be duplicated. Resident names and addresses are researched by the applicant. Kroll maps located in the DCD have buildings and street names and addresses. The information on the mailing matrix may refer to "Resident" or "Tenant ", with the proper mailing address, if the specific name is unknown. 12/14/90 . JVtcCONKEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Acquisitions • Development • Property Management December 17, 1993 Mr. Vernon Ometsue City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Vernon: Please find enclosed, for your files, a reduced size picture of the building which was used at the December 16, 1993 BAR hearing. I appreciate your cooperation in working with us on this project. Happy Holidays, 44602 Fredrick W. Mcdoi ey Encl. FWM: slk cc: Howard Turner REcE vE .r . 1=' `t 01 E CUivi i'ii .J ,'s DEVELOPMENT MDCAND1OMErSUE.LTI 3006 Northup Way, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98004 Fredrick W. McConkey PRESIDENT & MANAGING GENERAL PARTNER PHONE (206) 889-1180 FAX (206) 822-9393 `.; :%�s ■ To: Vernon Umetsu, Planning Division From* John A. Pierog, PW Development Engineer Dat : January 3, 1994 Subject: McConkey Development 223 Andover Park East Project No. PRE93 -011 SEPA Review Activity No. L93 -0069 Modified Southern Driveway This is in response to your December 3rd revised site plan submit- tal for the subject project. I discussed the proposed right -out only southern driveway with the City Engineer. This. is acceptable to Public Works as long as the driveway is a minimum of 12.5' wide. The northern curb return on this driveway can be constructed to discourage left turning move- ments. If you have any questions concerning the above, please let me know. JAP /jap Attachment: marked -up plan sheet cf: Development File (w /copy of marked -up plan) RECEIVED. :.)PN 0 ,3 1994 cOMIVMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P 0 DEVELOPMENT cCONKEY 1.1 N 1 =15V3 Navel 01 1L1LLLLPW.IUJL CODE INDEX CONSULTANTS SHEET INDEX ARCHITECT IL /LANDSCAPE /SURVEY U 0 < V 0 CO -4 Zall) Z 0 1 TURNER AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS N 2 01 z 4 \ 'STREET MAP 1 1..1 .1 s it dj{� §. 1,0.1 1 - 111 LLt11 a5Zz '� .. jNN2 tl me 6 H6 -m o i Y Z v - 1 V ' Me 111.1SON∎ "I u, CODE INDEX CONSULTANTS SHEET INDEX ARCHITECT IL /LANDSCAPE /SURVEY U 0 < V 0 CO -4 Zall) Z 0 1 TURNER AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS N 2 01 z :0301A02id ONI% X I 0I rn 0 11 11 11 11 01 10 8 4-- up, z 0 1 11 0 ; 9g 8 8 31VIDOSSV aNV 1I3N2if11 9 NV1d 311S c.n '. 8 CaPACTS 0 8' -64' 7'. 10 C(k.FACTS 0 8' =80' ..7,_i' 110 STANDARDS 0 8.5' =85 7 10 STANDARDS 13 8.5' =85' 7' 10 STANDARDS 0 9' =90' iD STANDARDS 0 9' =90' 251 1 I EXISTING C4-N(StETE BLDG. 1 Lt EOq n� BLDG. I I /- 000 SF. , DOSING CONCRETE a_DG.; F ESTA SAN, 88 25'27.E 08.90' I S88 25'14 E 140.09' S88 25' 14 "E 505.43' A ii j- L_ L PLANTER 1 J_ S ANO LANRSCBQE BUFFER 1 L _A I • \ RAMP\DOWN NEW ASPHALT PAVNG LIGHT STANDARD (TYP.)� Ra--- !E DCVr� F 10' +10' +8N CMl NEW ASPHALT PAVING I NG 'XI 1 I AY i ! 175' STD 0 85 =85' `8.5'� 4 0 95' =3»' i 2 HC =25• . 4 8.5' =3e' 19' 79' CONCRETE ENCL. ,STD 0 BS' =3�y B STA;,DAR05 0 BS' =68• �8__5'LI 8 SiANDARDS 0 8.5' =68' 19li: 5' , 25 j j I I I l I I i cap 1 7A. ,- — FL-: ITC 1 :'to +eE j I I I „�, _ ', 7I 1 c TRUCK MPNUEVERING ii r T I-( I I )♦ 1 1 3'3r1xkPT' 1 1, , l ' l q l , .,.. NEW ASPHALT PAVING 1 1 I I l 'J °, z n• 1 ..I 200' I I EXIT 3 DOYRLK]1T9 RANTER REMOVE EXLSTNG DOOR 1 ¢ w 1 Mp�OpVE DH. . _ I PER OVERHANG -.-- _HONG ) STARS a ■ PARTS: 10'PLANTER In: j� ', 1• • 1451f1�0ED IKTiT9D I m ..... ..I . . d 11 I If 11 j SIRttl TREES AND 6' s a wM:IMmu�1 1.... . SCEWALKI 0.. '�---- ---- - ^-- -- -- -- ---�-- -- -- - -- --- G. DOCKS NEW „I a-m 1 0 ♦ I I I (k) RECESSED 1.' +6,. t3' �'. DOCK -HI TRU• E IT I ci Q 0 z 'i I 1 I I LOAD INC BA 1 I I I w : 1 I \ •, 6 Z 4 2 ; LEI O 1 \ m �� I I 1 m m m m ? I SALES I SALES II I a 'in' I R n l j. L, 1 1 %W''� I j = w j j I • I .3. I I \ I _ ----- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- O O O O I LtE OF EXI�TNC MEZZ I I ■ °if T�--- EXS ROADWAY; j i I \ ,. i ' DOCK J I DOCK I I I �I ENITRY 1 I N i m I �� 11 a • I RETAIL SPACE 'B' 1 I 0'I t - ` .mod -_ -_- • f , RETAIL SPACE] ______ I i j 1e '''I ¢ cm \"�' P 1 42,250 SF. RETAIL 30,400 SF. RETAIL it I\ ' - r� INCLUDING LOADING 1 YSI I (INCLUDING LOADIIIG NATS) II I • �I I 1" \I� \�a I I I I — - -' — — I —' — — `I i aj EXISTNC24'4-\1 N3 • r ® _W —._�. i• \ EC E A U ! lc, Q 1 RECPROCAL I EA €NT- P °� Z • 1� NEW HC. ERE. 1 1 I �1� a ° NEW ASPHALT P4 82 •�,o��,' EXIT RAMP 1 I I '°n SALES • SALES Fi_AIJTER 1 N a' • • ® 1 • 3 PLANTER 1 1 I 1 01 p } I `0 • I NEW EXIT ,I- REMOVE DOSING DOOR 1 7 WALL MOUNTED EXISTING N i n 1= I O 1 Z '_^ \ m / • LRCM AND STARS 9-QD1 LKSiTS EX T NEW 1 1 1 1 , (m 111111 l I �;� !/ 1 „ I 208' I EXIT • i 182' 1 ELEC. _ 1 `` 0 FRE TRUCK ACCESS a` 1 I I 1 4 WIDE H . ACCESS I 1 1 I i 1 1 1 144 5' BUILDING SETBACK AND L' DSCAPElI I ^I I -I I ONLY PROVDED VIA CITY -j-- _ wrs w REOLREED EASEAENT .� • , , N88 25' 27 W — — 505.43 — —I — I �J •w•- ' i_ j • ACROSS CENT F HJ i 1 t I I I -Y-� PROPERTY T O C> O,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,0,,,,,,,,, »,,, O O � t t t ii SOUTH 32.9' 1 114.6' 124' 150' J,1 17 25 19.5' 6 5 I I 1 ABANDONED 27— ' LSE OF ECO -BLOCK FOR FRE LANE SUFFICES FCR 5' LANDSCAPE 3FFER ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,1.,,� Y- COCRCNA ' 6' SDEWALIII EXISTING CONCRETE BLOC. RR EASEMENT 1-SITE PLAN EXISTING CONCRETE BLDG. ` , 1 WITH I TER I va, r r =20' 0' BUILDING SETBACK LINE- 11 18. 9 CaPACTS B'L-72' LOANG BAY 01 LOA6t43 BAY #4! b STIS 8. 'L-51 22' L 18'1 11 7 5 DS (15) 8 5. 49 .5 T 12' 8' NEW ASPHALT PAVING 10 COMPACTS © 8..80 18' 1111111111111111111111111131111111131231111=COINIC EIIRU MEP 0 i= LLJ _J 0 Z Z 0 1; 1= ff L.L.ro UJ LIJ < z 0 1- L.L.1 --1 D. ■,0 0 CD 1- uJ N rn 0 ELEVATIONS g s a 7 TURNER AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS E , 2 k atlI1112211 RECEIVED COMMUNITY T)EV ELOPMEr! NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" REF: 1-BAR 1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1.-0" REF: 2-BAR 2 TURNER AND ASSOCIATES 1/8" ELEVATIONS REVISIONS SHEET MVO SYSTD.IONSTEEL ERASING ORYVR SYS1FL ON STEEL rRA1 >r IR0MT s0551 a S i Sa:A STEELLFAMEDSCREEN / PARAPET ORYVR lrSTLM CN STEEL FAMED /NAC SCREEN / PARAPET PEW EX5T.0 OK r IEW OH DOORS D6rND HitOUT DOORS PEW NLL DOT ODES L1cCON(EY DEVELCPI+ENT REMODEL WN BY: SR OECXED SY. Hi T. )004 North, We, I.II. III • Witt.. WA sl/a. DATE: 8/30/93 Oa) ui.3De n. PIN) 81Lp13 SCALE: 1/8"=1' COMMUNITY DVE1,...OPMEN1' PERSPECTIVE FROM NORTHEAST EEC -Tgo Devulaftmoir NOTES 03-1 TURNER AND ASSOCIATES YHm MI RACE fiG ARCHITECTS YAlnE r+srcla Seas ,. , SITE PLAN REVISIONS SHEET 3 Mr ...n....r...o. « ..m.. ... MM. Q/ /9 am Q/04/93 MO MINIM h. OM) PTO. SCALE: PERSPECTBVEE OF WAREHOUSE RECEIVED DEC - 11le NOTES 1 Q — /1/Y Q I' I °Crab t _ M.CONI(IY DIVILOPWIN2 COMPANY TURNER AND ASSOCIATES SITE PLAN REVISIONS SHEET AUTO PARTS CLUB. TU(YL-A. WA D O U n.:) 6MI 5-w a AL ARCHITECTS SEMPLE WASMCiOV SLtb (2f16) ]ES-]A31 .[e LACSIBA r DEvnaaLct+r rsua+Et ---- RE LCSiBAR7 --------- DRAAN BY: SN OEOQD BY. MT. ]III Newts. Way. I.hu 01 . I.IM.. WA WAN DATE 9/27/93 0I11 MI-.I1N In (III) n.-IBI SCALE: ARCHITECTS Barghausen Consulting Engineers Inc. Land Planning, Survey a Engineering Specialists Preliminary Landscape Plan !ECEMZD 2 PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN SCALE T . 20' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDING SURVEY DATA: OWN SOULEVARD LEGEND: UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: McConkey Development Company topographic survey barghausen consulting engineers RECEIVED SEP2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ■• I /V19° 2-re.2 kv -• • . - • • • • Ott BAI,<ER BLVD ; 11/444 zept Z. r /4.2.70 Rot- eips tttcfgr, (suNA14,„,. t1 SIN4V AV( tt) V5. \ 411 0' r 73 34 ittivez. 9.,L,49° c .0 Ca4AeA, (4,e R) TR. 8 run 4 `4) • STDS"6 .0e) 3.b 15- 7-9 • e,e) oi• C - M TR.9 8862s,.z. 7A kr Zoe. Oc VE'AR' cor) Z ,A/E- 545 .Ge, 224,03 A,040)st (,),N4Aik5-1 6 Zra ) 0 '0U) o 0 / 0 51!, 80 '4 0 . ev 0•51- - 0 7 ` 2va /4* tca 'or,. 2 4: 411:9- 3.3 ..k•-• -43c _a ST RANbER BLVD. 41A \ 40111A4,9X."-t SciA\c-ti. ?vo.cit_ orract, p -sitS 4cir. ,fr) mItt \,V 13,8 5+ 0 a 4) ri;f2,,:.::"•;1 in! 30 BANER V 4. 1,- y ctILL.6.4 V;:4.7(7-", bVartt0-147PAIsf 1\ - rn 9 0 tEk P440 P (.166 itN.)s BLVD 0 • 7 . 3 4 4S4 tQ .%‘ • le Qt • 340 ea 80 2 4. 9 ,3 •S", • la> 0 618 4 as ' 7 ' 27 TR. 11,0 /0 '041 Ei* SO5 7R.0 • • f 0 r7) V •OS-. -.fa • eV ere- a 7 •P"' 249. %Or Z 741 -7e/ 0 ti• tals 0 S. N8 -54-. 2 to 0 / r. 227 0 sst, 'Z1 3 #cw 1., 0 0 -‘--- 4RP' 6*.4'. /$- 33 AO% 43C .1_2 STRANbER BLVD. • 4CiL — 34 Aszr47.uor//74.5-"_—so,*) 4-01/1„ tr) .74 t , ADS , I V-4 P(51,781, Dif;P-PA. t-•\i-elsti14- as .,• •15-Dti-') • L: t-rt kJ r■J i'4; txDial)k-L. P l.; l'Ye4 elAD cu 01 '7.0 t,--C), c7t 6, .9. 6 0'32 6 r t • • • i 0 — .,' .0 ' . • 343'. o '.(,..,• : • . . .'0,..'9.10,,::•-•. I .. 27 w' STOSt 1-'011.3 134° t 44" • cAk4 eloo 941S•2. ?* kr" 4o 51P10 `5-9- er.9- .3.3 AP. -4113G • ActoRc.,V. 'oc Oic 43:0,t/Ap ()cc) .4•Z/.Ces c '1, • rLP cJ 6Cbctow .\\i'Vc)AlPs9i rJ C■1 z Nrcill7rAlt ere - th-a -474. ..s> ell A 'LSO 41r, „ 1 00,0- • ' cc, cel - • • 2 ,Lte 6 4 197 22. 204 •37C., 72 374., .53 .504$ .50" ‘.)5 3 E34)-5 SCAt\51( (• ' r- TRECK .O8- - DRIVE 4 3 I • •t;i c IC 0.1f M, S7S 2.7 "' v 34° 1 E o,�a ►a :c" 73 . �o ± TR.9 N849°..25'2,7" w k4 0 0/0 iJ 22 4t .:).3 SOS'. 93 %ee- rs--a7. 44" 2/8./4' x ^t) (/s0 • U/. % ea ••••/. "tea 2 0 227 K1: 1 1�,'°ZZ 9 0 -. s 46-4 //‘..0 &A- .!' AA- /6- 33 AY. -43c .23 ST RANI) ER BLVD. �-►. 94- -4 • 411 c';,-; „a 30 N 0 ivr 30 45 is/ 0 ti9 0.99. 284.96 N.8Q-�4 -$4w' ti10, jW o o 2,97. 8 2 7s. -76, `�19C ao,�2:. 74.c9f -+ 498 - 54.54f. l..'• -r. J PQe /0•/./s." 4c.-3 .704. 79 U1 u-, • . • • • 7 9. 9 pit' � 'e 2. C)Vo ' ��:i r IC^^AP o 20 1 � J .ss 30 30 �O S+ OS x'15 VA p f ? Tel At, • or,, z X25 L �1( • v'y., 00'4 5 197 22 sea - e. • mi 6403 8 J`a .5. 498- 'G• /'E 1 �\ F V.'�l G7�'`� r 0 I'J TRECK DRIVE �b9 43 3 *5 30 CMG sw •.h „ OJ n off, 499- /a -/7 Mr 2. 0, 3 0'39 0 • 2/O '.'+ • c:.',v. r,.s O�Zbu`4_ (:tom- P