Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning 2021-12-09 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET
City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierlof,, AICP, Director CHAIR LOUSIE STRANDER; VICE -CHAIR KAREN SIMMONS; COMMISSIONERS DENNIS MARTINEZ, SHARON MANN, DIXIE STARK, ANDREA REAY AND APNEET SIDHU CITY OF TUKWILA BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW (BAR) PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA VIRTUAL MEETING VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS DECEMBER 9, 2021 - 6:30 PM To Participate in the Virtual Meeting at 6:30 pm: By Phone: Dial +1 253-292-9750„939363678# Access Code: 939 363 678# Online: To join the meeting online click here Click here to join the meeting FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT DURING THE MEETING YOU MAY CALL 1-206-433-7155. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ATTENDANCE M. ADOPT 8/26/21 MINUTES IV. CASE NUMBERS: L19-0077 PURPOSE: Public hearing design review for a new three-story mixed-use building. The new building will be located to the north of the existing restaurant, which is proposed to remain. The proposal includes one commercial tenant space, indoor recreation space, and a parking garage on the first story. A total of nine dwelling units are proposed on the second and third stories. LOCATION: 14181 Interurban Ave S (new building address); 14201 Interurban Ave S (existing restaurant building address). Tax parcels: 3365901515, 3365901505, 3365901480, and 3365901470 V. DIRECTOR'S REPORT VI. ADJOURN Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION (PC) PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES Date: August 26, 2021 Time: 6:30 PM Location: Virtual meeting via Microsoft Teams Present: Chair Louise Strander, Vice Chair Karen Simmons, Commissioners Sharon Mann, Dixie Stark, and Apneet Sidhu Excused Absence: Commissioners Dennis Martinez and Andrea Reay Staff: Nora Gierloff, Director, Department of Community Development (DCD); Emily Miner, Assistant City Attorney; Nancy Eklund, Long Range Planning Manager; and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission (PC) Secretary Protocols: Nora Gierloff, Director, DCD went over the virtual meeting protocols. Adopt Minutes: Commissioner Mann moved to adopt the 7/22/21 minutes. Vice Chair Simmons seconded the motion. Motion passed. Commissioner Mann moved to adopt the 6/24/21 minutes. Commissioner Stark seconded the motion. Motion passed. Chair Strander opened the public hearing for: CASE NUMBERS: L21-0096 Zoning Code Amendment E21-0009 SEPA Checklist PURPOSE: Consider amendments to Tukwila's Zoning Code to bring it into alignment with recent FCC regulations for small wireless communication facilities. These regulations include the presumptively reasonable review timelines, fee thresholds, and design and aesthetic requirements. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments and make recommendations to the City Council for review and adoption. LOCATION: Citywide Chair Strander swore in persons wishing to speak. Nora Gierloff, Director, DCD, gave opening comments for staff. She said the item before the PC was a somewhat technical issue on changes to Federal regulations around communication. The City is required to review the Zoning Code and amend the code to bring it into alignment with the new Federal regulations. She stated that Assistant City Attorney Miner is an expert on the subject. Assistant City Attorney Miner worked with DCD staff and industry partners to help make sure it is legislation that works for Tukwila and protects the visual environment. This team also worked to meet the communication needs of the community and the industry. Director Gierloff turned it over to Assistant City Attorney Miner to give the presentation. Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 1 PC Public Hearing 8/26/21 Page 2 Emily Miner, Assistant City Attorney, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the wireless code update and provided background information. In 2016 technology was upgraded and changed to increase capacity with small cells. Small cells are smaller antennas that go on telephone poles. This technology densifies the network. Between 2016-2018 cities prepared for the deployment of the small cell technology. In 2018 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an Order due to lots of restrictions and barriers by cities. The Order gave cities less authority to regulate these types of facilities and streamlined how local cities and governments were regulating. She noted that every jurisdiction across the United States has been affected by the FCC Order. In 2019-2021 cities updated codes to reflect necessary changes. She showed examples of small cells installed on wooden utility poles, as well as non -wooden poles called smart stacks that have the equipment installed inside the pole. The City's intent is to create design regulations with cleaner non -wooden pole aesthetics. The FCC regulation requires aesthetic standards be published in advance and be reasonable. For example, antennas should not be required to be underground. The City's standards will be tested against the following FCC language: "Materially limits or inhibits the ability of any competitor or potential competitor to compete in a fair and balanced legal and regulatory environment." - California Payphone (1997 — FCC Case) To date the City has performed these actions: Adopted an emergency interim code; adopted the non -wooden design standard; conducted internal review and update of the wireless code to bring it into compliance with FCC Orders; and conducted industry and SEPA/GMA reviews; as well as this PC review of the proposed ordinance. An overview was given on the key elements of macro tower facilities and small wireless facilities and where they can be located - new poles or decorative poles and eligible facilities request. Industry comments were received from Extenet, AT&T, Verizon, and Crown Castle. Following are comments previously received and accepted: - Updates to account for recent changes in the newest FCC Order. - Suggestions to remove redundancies. - Clarification related to permitting and construction. Assistant City Attorney Miner and Director Gierloff addressed questions from the PC. Kim Allen, Wireless Policy Group, representative for Verizon, addressed questions from the PC. Gregg Busch, Wireless Policy Group, representative for AT&T, addressed questions from the PC. Commissioner Mann asked about limiting the quantity of towers located in an area. Assistant City Attorney Miner stated that a spacing requirement can be included. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Gregg Busch, Wireless Policy Group, representative for AT&T, noted the City has a provision in the code to address spacing limitation requirements of poles in the right-of-way. Mr. Busch said while small wireless facilities are the topic of the meeting, traditional macro facilities, such as cell towers, will continue to provide the backbone to service wireless networks across the county. They provide service over a wide area, and they have generators attached to them, so if the power is cut, they will continue to operate. Small wireless facilities do not have generators. AT&T small cells are not designed to use battery backups and if 2 Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov PC Public Hearing 8/26/21 Page 3 the power is cut, they stop functioning. Therefore, macro facilities are very important to the network, especially in emergency situations. AT&T is requesting the following amendments: - TMC 18.58.060(G)(5), pg. 19, add language, "such that it is necessary to provide separation and/or clearance from electrical or wire line facilities." - TMC 18.58.060(F)(1), pg. 17, add language, "City consider whether locations for macro facilities are for sale or for lease when deciding where to put the macro facilities." - TMC 18.58.060(B)(2)(i), pg. 15, add language, "allow the applicant to show that the alternative for deciding a macro facility was not available for lease." (Mr. Busch noted: Amending small wireless facilities application requirements to recognize that Puget Sound Energy performs its own structural analysis for small wireless facilities on Puget Sound Energy poles.) Asking for consistency with standard practices in the area. Kim Allen, Wireless Policy Group, representative for Verizon, said they concur with AT&T's request for TMC 18.58.060(B)(2)(i) Verizon is requesting the following amendments: TMC 18.58.060(G)(7), pg. 19, strike language, "underground if applicable." - TMC 18.58.160(E)(1)(a), pg., 43, strike language, "...to look on private property before being allowed to install a new pole in the right- of-way"- if language is not amended, add language, "...limit the search area to 200 ft.", amend last sentence to read; "...whether by roof or building mount." Commissioner Strander closed the public hearing. DELIBERATIONS / MOTIONS: Commissioner Mann moved to amend 18.58.060(B)(2)(i), pg. 15, to add language, "allowing commercial financial feasibility to be a factor in demonstrating the ability to co -locate." Vice Chair Simmons seconded the motion. Commissioner Stark opposed. Motion passed. Commissioner Mann moved to amend 18.060(G)(5), PG. 19, to add language, "Permitting up to 15 ft. taller unless additional height increase is required for vertical separation and is the minimum extension possible to sufficiently separate from electrical and wire line facilities." Commissioner Stark seconded the motion. Motion passed. Commissioner Mann move to amend 18.060(G)(7), pg. 19, replace "if applicable" with "if feasible." Commissioner Stark seconded the motion. Motion passed. PC were in consensus that staff will look into requests made by AT&T for 18.58.110(F), pg. 27, "...that the pole owner should be exempt from this requirement because they are exempt from the international building code." If the Building Official confirms this, then this item will move forward. Commissioner Stark moved to amend 18.58.160(E)(1)(a), pg. 36, last sentence, replace "panel" with "building", strike "or separate structure". Commissioner Simmons seconded the motion. Motion passed. Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 3 PC Public Hearing 8/26/21 Page 4 Commissioner Sidhu raised the issue regarding limiting the quantity of wireless facility applications that can be submitted. He expressed concern that staff could be inundated with applications, and he also wanted to make sure the applicants meet all the requirements. He recommended creating an on-line application form that wireless providers need to submit to the City. Commissioners Mann and Stark were in consensus. Assistant City Attorney Miner thanked Commissioner Sidhu for raising the issue and said they will do everything possible to make the process efficient. Director Gierloff said she appreciated his concern, but she was not overly concerned because the City has been working closely with the wireless carriers. Nancy Eklund, Long Range Planning Supervisor, DCD, suggested that if a form is created it be a pdf with fillable fields. FINAL MOTION: Commissioner Mann moved to approve Case Number L21-0096 Zoning Code Amendment and E21-0009 SEPA Checklist as amended and forward to City Council for their review. Vice Chair Simmons seconded the motion. Motion passed. DIRECTOR'S REPORT - Director Gierloff informed the PC that the next project they review will be a design review application. The PC Secretary informed the PC they are required to complete mandatory Equity Training due to the policy adopted by the City Council. Ideally, staff would like to hold training in September, and will poll the PC for availability and schedule. Adjourned: 9:15 p.m. Submitted by: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretary 4 Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierloff, A!CP, Director HEARING DATE: STAFF CONTACT: NOTIFICATION: STAFF REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Prepared November 30, 2021 December 9, 2021 Jaimie Reavis, Senior Planner • Notice of Application posted on site and mailed to surrounding properties and agencies with jurisdiction on July 16, 2020. • Notice of Public Hearing published in the Seattle Times, posted on site, and mailed to surrounding properties and agencies with jurisdiction November 24, 2021. FILE NUMBERS: L19-0077 (Public Hearing Design Review) ASSOCIATED FILES: L19-0078 (Lot Consolidation) PL19-0060 (Parent File) L03 -017/E03-003 (Design Review and SEPA for Restaurant Building) APPLICANT: David Thorstad, for Mario Galliano REQUEST: LOCATION: Public hearing design review for a new three-story mixed-use building. The new building will be located to the north of the existing restaurant, which is proposed to remain. The new building is proposed to include one commercial tenant space, indoor recreation space, and a parking garage with 13 parking spaces and trash/recycling area on the first story. A total of nine dwelling units are proposed on the second and third stories. 14181 Interurban Ave S (new building address). 14201 Interurban Ave S (existing restaurant building address). Project parcels include 3365901515, 3365901505, 3365901480, and 3365901470. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATION: Regional Commercial Mixed -Use (RCM) Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 5 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 2 of 23 SEPA COMPLIANCE: New construction of up to nine residential dwelling units is exempt from SEPA review under flexible thresholds the City of Tukwila has adopted under TMC 21.04.110, consistent with allowable flexible thresholds in WAC 197-11-800 (1)(c). PUBLIC COMMENTS: Two comment letters were received from neighboring residential property owners in response to the Notice of Application for this project, they are included as Attachment B to this report. RECOMMENDATIONS: L19-0077 Public Hearing Design Review Staff recommends approval with conditions of the Public Hearing Design Review application. ATTACHMENTS: A. Applicant's response to design criteria B. Comment Letters and Responses C. Geotechnical Report, dated October 2018 and Review Letter from Geotechnical Engineer titled Geotechnical Review of Final Plans, dated August 10, 2021 D. Review Letter from Waste Management E. Plan Sheets • Site Plans: Site Plan (1), Site Plan (1) - with Fire Department Redlines • Building Floor Plans: First Floor Plan (5.5), Second Floor Plan (7.5), Third Floor Plan (9.5) • Building Elevations (12, 13) • Landscaping Plans (L1.1, L1.2, L3.1, L3.2, L3.3) • Site Survey (Sheet 1 of 2, Sheet 2 of 2) • Site Lighting Plan 6 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 3 of 23 FINDINGS PROJECT BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing to construct a three-story mixed-use building at the southwest corner of Interurban Ave S and 58th Ave S. Proposed uses within the building include one commercial tenant space and nine apartments. The first floor of the building will consist of the commercial tenant space and areas associated with the apartments, including the apartment building entrance and lobby, an indoor recreation space/gym for apartment residents, and a parking garage with 13 parking spaces and the trash/recycling area. Additional parking spaces for the uses within the building are proposed outside of the building, in the rear area of the property (south of the new building and behind the restaurant). The second floor of the building will have five dwelling units, including four 2 -bedroom units and one 1 -bedroom unit. The third floor will have four dwelling units, including two 2 -bedroom units and two 3 -bedroom units. Each dwelling unit includes a private balcony area. The building's floor area is approximately 20,407 square feet and will have a footprint of approximately 7,400 square feet. ZONING The project is located within the Regional Commercial Mixed -Use (RCM) District which allows up to 14.5 dwelling units per net acre. The purpose of the RCM district per TMC 18.26.010 is as follows: It is intended to provide for areas characterized by commercial services, offices, lodging, entertainment, and retail activities with associated warehousing, and accessory light industrial uses, along a transportation corridor and intended for high-intensity regional uses. Residential uses mixed with certain commercial uses are allowed at second story or above. The zone's standards are intended to promote attractive development, an open and pleasant street appearance, and compatibility with adjacent residential areas. Almost all the properties with frontage along Interurban Ave S are zoned either RCM or Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI). Residential areas of Tukwila are generally located west of the project site, although there are a few areas of the frontage of Interurban Ave S zoned for residential development, including the Foster Greens apartments located approximately % mile to the north. Other nearby residential zones and development along the corridor tend to be located on the hillside above the street -level of Interurban Ave S. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Development The site is currently made up of four parcels that were developed in 2003-2004 with a 3,000 square foot restaurant and deli and 48 parking stalls. The applicant has submitted a lot consolidation application to combine all four lots into one property, which is proposed to include the restaurant, new mixed-use building, and associated parking and landscaping for both. Figure 1 shows the development site including all four parcels; Figure 2 shows the specific area of the site where the new building and associated improvements are proposed. 7 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 4 of 23 Figure 1: Overall Project Site (including restaurant building and parking area to the south) Figure 2: Building Site L19-0077 Staff Report Page 5 of 23 14143 Intenrban Ave S 9 Tukwila, Washington Street View - Sep 2018 Figure 3: Project Site Frontage along Interurban Ave 5 Figure 4: Project Site Frontage along 58th Ave 5 Surrounding Land Uses: Offices and casinos are located across the street adjacent to Interurban Ave. S. There are a handful of single-family residential structures to the south, the nearest of which have been converted to an office and a church. To the north, on the other side of 58th Ave S is located a one-story shop housing a plumbing business. Single-family residential properties are directly adjacent to the property's west side where the homes are located at least 65 feet up above the elevation of the project site, at the top of the slope on S 142nd St. and 59th Ave S. The yards of 9 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 6 of 23 these residential properties include the heavily vegetated hillside which slopes down to the project site. Figure 5: Surrounding Land Uses and Development Topography: The portion of the site that will be developed is flat except for a drainage swale along the western edge proposed to be filled in with structural fill. Immediately west of the drainage swale is a steep hillside, which is an environmentally critical area containing Class 3 landslide hazard areas (see Figure 6). The hillside is heavily vegetated and on residential property belonging to the adjacent single-family residents. 10 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 7 of 23 Figure 6: Site, Topography, and Adjacent Development Vegetation: Existing vegetation on the site includes trees, shrubs, and groundcover planted as part of development of the restaurant. A total of six trees planted as part of the original restaurant development landscaping are proposed to be removed and replaced with new trees and other required landscaping as part of the new mixed-use building development. All vegetation on the hillside is on adjacent residential properties and is required to be protected by City code. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS — REGIONAL COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE (RCM) The following development standards apply to projects within the RCM zoning district; an analysis of project compliance is included below: • Setbacks, minimum: • Front (Interurban Ave S) = 20' — Complies • Second Front (58th Ave S) = 10' — Complies • Side (adjacent to restaurant building) = 10' • Rear (adjacent to hillside/LDR zone) = tiered as follows: o1st floor = 10' - Complies o 2"d floor = 20'- Complies 11 L19-0077 Staff Report 12 Page 8 of 23 0 3rd floor = 30' — Complies • Height, maximum: 3 stories or 35' — Building is 30 feet tall except for elevator shaft which comes up from the roof to a height of 34'6." - Complies. • Landscape • Fronts (Interurban Ave S and 58th Ave S) = 10', Type 1— Complies • Side and Rear: 10', Type 3 — Complies • Parking Lot Landscaping — Not applicable — There are no new surface parking areas proposed with this project. • Recreation space: 200 square feet per dwelling unit — Complies (see Table 1 below) • Parking — Complies (see Table 2 below) Table 1: Recreation Space Calculations Recreation Space Square Footage Shared Space Front Units Middle Unit (rear) Rear Units TOTAL First Floor 697 (indoor gym) Commercial Tenant Space Office use = 3/1,000 UFA Retail use = 4/1,000 UFA 622 square feet 697 Second Floor 1/100 UFA 96 (x2) = 192 280 290 (x2) = 580 1,052 Third Floor 96 (x2) = 192 516 (x2) = 1,032 1,224 TOTAL 697 square feet (SHARED) 2,276 square feet (PRIVATE) 2973 (average of 330 sf/unit) Table 2: Parking Calculations Land Use Parking Spaces Required by Zoning Code Number of Dwelling Units/Usable Floor Area (UFA) Total Parking Spaces Required Dwelling Units 2/unit 9 units (each is 3 bedrooms or less) 18 Commercial Tenant Space Office use = 3/1,000 UFA Retail use = 4/1,000 UFA 622 square feet 2 Existing Restaurant 1/100 UFA 2,600 square feet 26 TOTAL SPACES PROPOSED = 46 46 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 9 of 23 DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA The project is subject to Public Hearing Design Review as required by TMC 18.26.070. The Multi -Family, Hotel and Motel Design Review Criteria contained in TMC 18.60.050 (C) are the criteria applicable to this project. The review criteria are divided into four sections, including (1) Site Planning, (2) Building Design, (3) Landscape and Site Treatment, and (4) Miscellaneous Structures. The following is a discussion of the proposal in relation to the criteria. Design review criteria are shown in italics, followed by staff's analysis in regular text. For the applicant's response to the criteria, please see Attachment A. • SITE PLANNING a. Building siting, architecture, and landscaping shall be integrated into and blend harmoniously with the neighborhood building scale, natural environment, and development characteristics as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. For instance, a multi family development's design need not be harmoniously integrated with adjacent single-family structures if that existing single-family use is designated as "Commercial" or "High -Density Residential" in the Comprehensive Plan. However, a "Low -Density Residential" (detached single-family) designation would require such harmonious design integration. • The proposed height and scale of the project, at three stories, is in keeping with office and residential development along Interurban Ave S. The project has a tiered setback on the rear side of the building where it is adjacent to residential properties. • Located on a visually prominent corner property, the proposed mixed-use building is adjacent to the 58th Ave S gateway/entry point to the Tukwila Hill neighborhood and will provide a blend of commercial and residential uses where the commercial development typical along Interurban Ave S transitions to the residential neighborhood above. Figure 7: Corner Site/Gateway to Residential Neighborhood b. Natural features, which contribute to desirable neighborhood character, shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Natural features include, but are not 13 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 10 of 23 limited to, existing significant trees and stands of trees, wetlands, streams, and significant topographic features. • An area of dense vegetation including many significant trees is located on the hillside owned by the residential property owners to the west. This area is not proposed to be disturbed with the current project. The hillside and associated vegetation will continue to provide screening and separation of development along Interurban Ave S from residential properties to the west. Figure 8: Vegetated Hillside at Rear of Site c. The site plan shall use landscaping and building shapes to form an aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian scale streetscape. This shall include, but not be limited to facilitating pedestrian travel along the street, using architecture and landscaping to provide a desirable transition from streetscape to the building, and providing an integrated linkage from pedestrian and vehicular facilities to building entries. • The proposed mixed-use building is sited to face the main street of Interurban Ave S, with paved walkways linking building entrances to the public sidewalks along Interurban Ave. S. and 58th PI. S. 14 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 11 of 23 d. Pedestrian and vehicular entries shall provide a high-quality visual focus using building siting, shapes, and landscaping. Such a feature establishes a physical transition between the project and public areas and establishes the initial sense of high-quality development. • The landscaping plan shows pedestrian walkways connecting from the sidewalk along Interurban Ave S to each of the main building entries. The pedestrian access connecting to the commercial tenant space is aligned symmetrically with the center of the building facade and a concrete seating wall planter located in between the entry doors of the commercial tenant space and the gym/indoor recreation space for apartment residents. • Location of vehicular entries are separated from public and pedestrian - oriented areas at the front of the building. Vehicular entries include a driveway off 58th Ave. S. connecting to a garage door on the north side of the building, and another driveway connecting to a garage door and surface parking areas on the south side of the building. e. Vehicular circulation design shall minimize driveway intersections with the street. • The site design makes use of the existing driveways used by the restaurant. The project proposes to have the existing access off Interurban Ave S on the north side of the restaurant be a shared access and service drive located between the new building and the restaurant. The driveway off 58th Ave S Garage driveway (exit only) .1, _t tgiCh 2111-1.: Figure 9: Existing Driveways Shared driveway Additional Shared Driveway Figure 10: Proposed Driveways 15 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 12 of 23 f. g. will be controlled access, with use limited to those who have garage openers (i.e., apartment residents and commercial tenants). Site perimeter design (i.e., landscaping, structures, and horizontal width) shall be coordinated with site development to ensure a harmonious transition between adjacent projects. • Landscaping, pedestrian and vehicular access, parking, utility design, and lighting has been reviewed with respect to the existing restaurant building and the public frontage. • City staff has been coordinating with Mr. Galliano and Seattle City Light to ensure the diagonal overhead power is undergrounded to the new building as required. Varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents shall be provided, increasing from the public right-of-way to common areas, to individual residences. This can be accomplished through the use of symbolic and actual physical barriers to define the degrees of privacy appropriate to specific site area functions. • The site design provides for varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents. The graphics below include a figure from the Multifamily Design Guidelines that illustrates how a site should be designed to provide physical cues indicating a transition from public to private space. The public, semi- public, semi -private, and private areas have been highlighted in the site plan in the graphic at right and are described below: • SlkSEMI•PRIVA C nat 1111. • . • arr• • PUBLIC S1) A G 1NtiN31 1NVN31 P' -:SEM RIV TE F' rE PUBLIC f Figure 11: Site Design Transition from Public to Private Space o Public: Sidewalks along Interurban and 58th Place S. o Semi -Public: Landscaping at the back of sidewalk will consist of groundcover and shrubs in the area immediately adjacent to the sidewalk along Interurban, creating an open, semi-public transition to the site. o Semi -Private: The existing hedge will remain on site and provides a symbolic barrier between the semi-public and semi -private space. 16 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 13 of 23 The semi -private space includes the sidewalk and lawn areas, bike rack, seating wall, and exterior entryway areas to the apartments and tenant spaces along the front of the building. o Private: The walkway leading to the customer entrances of the tenant spaces in the building is aligned with the center of the building, creating a more visible and public entrance for visitors to those spaces. The apartment entrance is on the left side of the building fagade, away from the public entrance to the commercial tenant space. While being visible from the public street, the residential entrance is designed to be more private by not being in the center of the building. h. Parking and service areas shall be located, designed, and screened to interrupt and reduce the visual impact of large, paved areas. • Parking and service areas are largely screened from view due to their location either within the parking garage on the first floor of the proposed building, or at the rear side of the property where their prominence is minimized. A total of 13 of the 20 required parking spaces are located within the parking garage, which also contains designated space for the trash and recycling bins. The remainder of the parking spaces for the new building will be surface parking spaces located on the south side of the building, in the area at the end of the access drive off Interurban Ave S shared by the restaurant and the mixed-use building. i. The height, bulk, footprint, and scale of each building shall be in harmony with its site and adjacent long-term structures. • The building footprint is generally square at 86 feet by 86 feet, with modulation along the front and rear of the building. The proposed height of the building is generally 30 feet. The elevator shaft extends up from the roof to a height of 34 feet, 8 inches. On the rear side of the building adjacent to the hillside, the building has been designed with a tiered setback as required due to its location adjacent to the Low -Density Residential zoning district. Per requirements of the RCM zone, if any portion of a side or rear yard is within 50 feet of a residential district, the setback of upper floors is required to be set back an increasing amount from adjacent residential properties. The first floor is set back 10 feet from the rear property line; the second floor 20 feet, and the third floor 30 feet. This design also allows for units on the rear side of the building to have decks that are 10 feet in depth. • Nearby buildings in the RCM zone include buildings with smaller and larger footprints than the building proposed and range in height from one to three stories. Buildings with smaller footprints tend to include large areas of the site devoted to surface parking. Parking inside the garage within the first floor of the proposed building allows for increased infill development on the site and provides screening of parking areas. 17 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 14 of 23 Figure 12: Interurban Ave S Commercial Development (north of project site) Figure 13: Interurban Ave 5 Residential Development (north of project site) L19-0077 Staff Report Page 15 of 23 • BUILDING DESIGN a. Architectural style is not restricted; evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its ability to harmonize building texture, shape, lines and mass with the surrounding neighborhood. • The building design includes a flat roof consistent with nearby commercial development and typical of modern apartment buildings constructed in Tukwila and the region. The building design includes symmetrical, vertical modulation along the front elevation: the narrowest portion of the fagade is in the center of the building, and the building becomes wider in portions set back farther away from the street front. This creates a tiered setback of the building footprint along the front property line adjacent to Interurban Ave S. Horizontal modulation is included on the rear side of the building, also creating a tiered design of the building profile along the rear yard setback. b. Buildings shall be of appropriate height, scale, and design/shape to be in harmony with those existing permanent neighboring developments that are consistent with, or envisioned in, the Comprehensive Plan. This will be especially important for perimeter structures. Adjacent structures that are not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan should be considered to be transitional. The degree of architectural harmony required should be consistent with the nonconforming structure's anticipated permanence. • The building design and scale blends the predominantly commercial development typical of the RCM and C/LI zones along Interurban Ave S with the residential development located on the hill above the site, as well as the apartments along Interurban within the MDR zone to the north. The flat roof design is consistent with nearby commercial development. The inclusion of roof overhangs and corbels, along with a rich, warm color scheme that makes use of stone veneer, lap siding, and trim is consistent with nearby multifamily and single-family residential development. c. Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, parapets, stairs and decks shall be integrated into the overall building design. Particular emphasis shall be given to harmonious proportions of these components with those of adjacent developments. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with the anticipated life of the structure. • Proposed building components, including windows, doors, corbels, the building parapets, decks, and railings are integrated into the overall building design through use of matching or complementary colors and materials to the main structure. Each floor of the building is visually separated by two horizontal bands made up of contrasting colors - a white (Chantilly Lace) color and a deep brown (Benjamin Moore North Creek Brown). The white color of the horizontal bands helps to accentuate white -colored building details which include trim around the doors and windows, corbels, and deck railings. The deep brown trim color matches the siding color used on the 19 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 16 of 23 ground floor. A lighter shade of brown (Benjamin Moore Deep Ochre) is proposed on the second and third floors. Stone veneer is proposed on the most prominent portions of the first floor facing Interurban Ave S and 58th PI S and is carried up to portions of the second story. The stone veneer ties together the two shades of brown colors proposed for the siding and the dark brown color proposed for windows and doors (including the garage doors). Figure 14: Building Colors and Materials Each floor is separated visually by bands of white and brown contrasting colors d. The overall color scheme shall work to reduce building prominence and shall blend in with the natural environment. • The earth tone color scheme proposed works to reduce the building prominence and helps the building blend in with the adjacent vegetated hillside. e. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects shall be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting shall be used to provide visual interest. Otherwise monotonous flat walls and uniform vertical planes of individual buildings shall be broken up with building modulation, stairs, decks, railings, and focal entries. Multiple building developments shall use siting and additional 20 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 17 of 23 architectural variety to avoid inappropriate repetition of building designs and appearance to surrounding properties. • This building is a relatively small nine -unit residential apartment building. The design includes both vertical and horizontal building modulation. The front building facade is proposed to have a seating wall planter located in between the front entry doors of the tenant space and indoor recreation space and will create a focal point aligned with the primary pedestrian connection to the building from Interurban Ave S. A variety of colors and materials are proposed on all building elevations to provide visual interest. • LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT a. Existing natural topographic patterns and significant vegetation shall be reflected in project design when they contribute to the natural beauty of the area or are important to defining neighborhood identity or a sense of place. • The development site is flat, with a steep slope adjacent to the property on the rear side of the proposed building. The dense vegetation on the hillside INTERURBAN AVE S i0 -.1 3 O4, - Ci 241 210 :s.x: I.-26- — - Figure 15: Tree Removal Plan 21 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 18 of 23 is not on the development site. Tree protection fencing is proposed to ensure there is no disturbance to this area during construction. The dense vegetation on the hillside will help provide privacy between the new multifamily units and the single-family dwellings at the top of the hillside. • Existing street trees and mature landscaping originally planted as part of the restaurant development is proposed to be retained to the extent possible. Figure 15 shows existing trees and vegetation on site. The trees proposed to be removed are indicated with red circles around them. b. Landscape treatment shall enhance existing natural and architectural features, help separate public from private spaces, strengthen vistas and important views, provide shade to moderate the effects of large, paved areas, and break up visual mass. • The landscape treatment helps to frame the driveway areas and walkways connecting to the building. Foundation landscaping is proposed, enhancing the front entry area. A raised -bed planter centered in between the front door of the tenant space and the indoor recreation space is consistent with the symmetrical design of the building facade and enhances the design of the pedestrian building entry. c. Walkways, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas shall promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Direct pedestrian linkages to the public street, to on-site recreation areas, and to adjacent public recreation areas shall be provided. • Direct pedestrian linkages are provided from the sidewalk along Interurban Ave S to the front entrances to the tenant space, indoor recreation space, and the apartments. This is shown in Figure 16, where direct pedestrian Ow curt) cul WM 16 TENANT PARCEL L3 Type 111 Lard.np,N GARAGE ype III Landscaping I SPRINKLERS PARCEL C Figure 16: Pedestrian Access 22 PARCEL B GALLIANO RESTAURANT L19-0077 Staff Report Page 19 of 23 linkages from the sidewalks are shown with arrows, walkways are the shaded reddish/brown areas, and pedestrian entrances to the building are circled. Walkways are framed by landscape areas, and curbs are located along the driveways and drive aisle to prevent damage from vehicles. d. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided. • Perimeter landscaping is proposed as required along the front, second front, and rear of the property. A narrow landscape strip adjacent to the shared drive aisle is proposed. Except for the six trees to be removed, existing landscaping associated with the restaurant and the rest of the site is proposed to remain as -is. • MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES a. Miscellaneous structures shall be designed as an integral part of the architectural concept and landscape. Materials shall be compatible with buildings, scale shall be appropriate, colors shall be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and structure proportions shall be to scale. • Miscellaneous structures proposed are the bike racks and the concrete seating wall planter, which are proposed to be in front of the building where they will be visible from the commercial tenant space. The bike racks will be of a standard design, in the form of a staple rack, and will be of a neutral color consistent with the design of the building. The location and space provided for the bike rack is not shown consistently among different site plans, and only one bike rack is required. Staff recommends a condition to require that the details of the bike parking design be worked out as part of the building permit, in a way which meets the required number of bike parking spaces while at the same time preserving as much green space as possible in front of the building. • The Fire Marshal's Office has reviewed the plans submitted for design review for compliance with emergency access requirements. Items noted in review comments and redlines to the site plan include adjustments to the location of the building address, fire department connection and associated equipment, location requirements for a new fire hydrant, and requirements to have a KNOX eLock key box for the building and a CLICK 2 ENTER for the parking garage door. Additional permits from the Tukwila Fire Department are required, and conformance with redlines will be reviewed as part of construction permit submittals. b. The use of walls, fencing, planting, berms, or combinations of these shall accomplish screening of service yards and other places that tend to be unsightly. Screening shall be effective in winter and summer. • The trash and recycling bins are proposed to be stored inside the parking garage where they will be screened from view. c. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from view. Screening shall be designed as an integral part 23 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 20 of 23 of the architecture (i.e., raised parapets and fully enclosed under roof) and landscaping. • Mechanical plans submitted for the project show that there will be equipment visible on the building exterior, including vents, exhausts, and louvres. No rooftop mechanical equipment is shown at this time, and utility boxes and meters are also not shown. As a condition of approval, staff recommends that all mechanical equipment located on the building exterior be painted to match the color scheme of the building. If any rooftop mechanical equipment is necessary, it shall be setback from the edge of the roof and screened by the height of the parapet or otherwise screened from view. Ground equipment, including utility boxes and meters, shall be screened by project landscaping. Additional landscaping from what is shown on the plans may need to be added during project construction to screen this equipment since it has not yet been shown on the plans and is often added to a site after the building permit has already been issued. d. Exterior lighting standards and fixtures shall be of a design and size consistent with safety, building architecture and adjacent area. Lighting shall be shielded and restrained in design with no off-site glare spill-over. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors shall not be used unless clearly demonstrated to be integral to building architecture • A combination of building -mounted lighting and pole -mounted lighting is proposed, with high lighting levels proposed within the shared drive aisle and parking areas. This will promote safety in the surface parking area on the south side of the building, to be used by those apartment residents and commercial tenant occupants/visitors who do not have a dedicated space within the parking garage. The cut sheets below are the proposed light fixtures. The Tukwila Police Department reviewed the proposed lighting levels and agreed that lighting levels are high enough to promote safety according to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles. .WEASPTE LIG1 it R FEATURES - Low pa" k LFD roea rte La-.ra re w n a Wei/ at ES 0s7Wlbrw hr Scta 3amtr acne sucnas Wall, cwrrRrcvt ana an*Pn pagWts • peatuang ro5r11R'Lptcs rYaUa maamaastagat axe dkanaaon rot mv+a.al wsm M Y.e hasp. -s+41.. rodovny aght an:pass nsws • vawr canlart sta caw - Compact ane hotoells%0oups erti Ida EVA • 3G woe lar hyQh .cn as epple sans lMackv Ima e5 ant vwrpm's • Can7W opupa$ aVLeng Gaua canal C.m.pa, y st"M1"g, e.'% @gr4hsd aaaasyeace'and 7-tal.31t atais • Best r Crass Sage pra-,ecvan avataee CATALOG* RELATED PRDOVCT5 Figure 17: Lighting Fixtures 24 snawn in• a ranee L19-0077 Staff Report Page 21 of 23 PUBLIC COMMENTS Two public comment letters were received by email from neighbors who live on properties above the site which include the adjacent hillside. Letters were submitted by Michelle Ricks (14428 59th Ave S) and Benjamin Boyles (14234 59th Ave S). Original copies of the letters and Mr. Galliano's responses to the letters are included as Attachment B and are summarized below. Both neighbors had variety of concerns about the project, however the main areas of concern were the project's potential impact to hillside stability (1), the potential removal of trees from the hillside (2), and a concern about how garbage would be handled to prevent attracting pests to the site and surrounding area (3). 1. Hillside Stability Staff coordinated with the applicant, who confirmed that the proposed grading and site work will not disturb the hill and will follow the recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared for the project. A follow-up letter was provided from the geotechnical engineer, who stated the following: "The proposed excavation for the building foundation footings will not adversely affect slope stability." Additionally, "On site geotechnical inspections are required to verify that actual construction complies with the City of Tukwila approved plans, the requirements of the Civil Engineer and this Geotechnical Engineer." 2. Potential for Tree Removal on the Hillside Sheet L1.2 of the landscaping plan set submitted for the project shows tree protection fencing along the inside of Mr. Galliano's property in vicinity of the project site. Two trees which appear to straddle the property line will remain and will be protected during construction. Mr. Galliano confirmed in responses to comments that "no hillside or tree cutting exists for this project." Per the Environmentally Critical Areas Chapter of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC 18.45), tree removals on the hillside require permits due to their location within a steep slope critical area. City code related to tree removals within critical areas has recently been updated to include penalties and remedial measures for removal or damage of trees(s) without applying for and obtaining required City approval. Penalties include a fine of $1,000 per tree, or up to the marketable value of each tree removed or damaged as determined by a Qualified Tree Professional, whichever is greater. Additionally, the Director shall require any person conducting work in violation of the critical areas chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 3. Garbage The trash and recycling location for the new building is located inside of the ground floor parking garage. Waste Management reviewed the proposed location and confirmed that the design of the trash and recycling area is feasible for trash collection. Mr. Galliano's response stated he is not aware of a rodent issue. However, it is typical for there to be rodents in urban and residential areas of Tukwila. It is important for businesses and residents to keep trash secure to try to keep from attracting rodents and other pests. 25 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 22 of 23 CONCLUSIONS Site Planning: • A network of sidewalks accommodates pedestrian access separated from vehicular traffic by curbs and landscaping. Landscaping helps to frame pedestrian entries to the site, accentuate building entryways, and create privacy. • Parking and service areas are largely screened from view due to their location either within the parking garage on the first floor of the proposed building, or at the rear side of the property where their prominence is minimized. • An area of dense vegetation including many significant trees is located on the hillside owned by the residential property owners to the west. This area is not proposed to be disturbed with the current project, and will continue to support slope stability, screening, and separation of development along Interurban Ave S from adjacent residential properties on the hillside adjacent to the project's west/rear side. Building Design: • The building design and scale blends the predominantly commercial development typical of the RCM and C/LI zones along Interurban Ave S with the residential development located on the hill above the site, as well as the apartments along Interurban within the MDR zone to the north. • The building includes both vertical and horizontal modulation. Vertical modulation is provided in a symmetrical design along the front of the building adjacent to Interurban Ave S. On the rear side of the building where it is adjacent to residential properties and the LDR zone, a horizontally tiered setback is proposed as required by zoning setbacks to reduce the bulk of the building. • The flat roof design is consistent with nearby commercial development. The inclusion of roof overhangs and corbels, along with a rich, warm color scheme that makes use of stone veneer, lap siding, and trim is consistent with nearby multifamily and single-family residential development. Landscaping and Site Treatment: • Existing street trees and mature landscaping is proposed to be retained to the extent possible. Six trees are proposed to be removed and will be replaced with landscaping. • Perimeter landscaping is proposed as required along the front, second front, and rear of the property. A narrow landscape strip adjacent to the shared drive aisle is proposed. Existing landscaping on other areas of the site (associated with the restaurant and the parking area on the south side of the restaurant) is proposed to remain as -is. • Landscaping plans show tree protection fencing adjacent to the hillside to protect trees on the adjacent properties. 26 L19-0077 Staff Report Page 23 of 23 Miscellaneous Structures • Miscellaneous structures proposed are the bike racks and the concrete seating wall planter, which are shown to be in front of the building where they will be visible from the commercial tenant space. • The location and space provided for the bike rack is not shown consistently among different site plans, and only one bike rack is required. Staff recommends a condition to require that the details of the bike parking design be worked out as part of the building permit, to provide the required number of bike parking spaces while at the same time preserving as much green space as possible in front of the building. • The trash and recycling bins are proposed to be stored inside the parking garage where they will be screened from view. • Mechanical plans submitted for the project show that there will be equipment visible on the building exterior, including vents, exhausts, and louvres. No rooftop mechanical equipment is shown at this time, and utility boxes and meters are also not shown. As a condition of approval, staff recommends that all mechanical equipment located on the building exterior be painted to match the color scheme of the building. If any rooftop mechanical equipment is necessary, it shall be setback from the edge of the roof and screened by the height of the parapet or otherwise screened from view. Ground equipment, including utility boxes and meters, shall be screened by project landscaping. Additional landscaping from what is shown on the plans may need to be added during project construction to screen this equipment since it has not yet been shown on the plans and is often added to a site after the building permit has already been issued. • A combination of building -mounted lighting and pole -mounted lighting is proposed, with high lighting levels proposed within the shared drive aisle and parking areas. The Tukwila Police Department reviewed the proposed lighting levels and agreed that lighting levels are high enough to promote safety according to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the construction of the Galliano Mixed Use Building with the following condition(s): 1. Details of the bike parking design, including the rack and the size of the concrete pad, shall be worked out as part of the building permit to provide the required number of bike parking spaces while at the same time preserving as much green space as possible in front of the building. 2. Mechanical equipment located on the building exterior shall be painted to match the color scheme of the building. 3. If any rooftop mechanical equipment is necessary, it shall be setback from the edge of the roof and screened by the height of the parapet (or otherwise screened from view). 4. Ground equipment, including utility boxes and meters, shall be screened by project landscaping. Additional landscaping from what is shown on the plans may need to be added during project construction to screen this equipment since it has not yet been shown on the plans and is often added to a site after the building permit has already been issued. 27 28 A Discussion of Project Consistency With Design Criteria This project has been designed by a team of professionals who have been educated and licensed in their fields of expertise. All of the team members have spent countless hours on the preliminary design, design development, and working drawings for this project. The drawings and calculations that we provide are, by definition, the proof of consistency with, not only the very superficial Tukwila design criteria, but with all of the specific design criteria that we consider in every project that we undertake. Consequently we feel that the work product that we provide speaks for itself, and that esoteric prose describing the project will not serve to enhance our design. If the city officials who bear the responsibility of approving our project can point out specific deficiencies in our work, then we will be more than happy to correct those deficiencies. But for now we prefer to offer our project without further written discussion or needless explanation. See the attached design criteria checklist. ATTACHMENT A 29 g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials soca as fences, walls, and paving of wood, brick, stone or gravel may he 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. 4. Building Design a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of design and relationship to surroundings. b. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and he 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 building projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form and fitting should be used to provide visual interest. 5. Miscellaneous Structures and Street Furniture a. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should he 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.. Consistency with adopted plans and regulations (TMC 18.100.030) 6. Demonstrate the manner in which the proposal is consistent with, carries out and helps implement applicable state laws and the regulations, policies, objectives and goals of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the City of Tukwila's Development Regulations and other official laws, policies and objectives of the City of Tukwila. CRITERIA FOR MULTI -FAMILY, HOTEL AND MOTEL DEVELOPMENTS (TMC 18.60.050(B)): Applies to all multi -family, hotel and motel projects except for projects in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor (see TMC 18.60.060(C)) and projects in Tukwila Urban Center (See TMC 18.28 and Southcenter Design Manual). 1. Site Planning a. Building siting, architecture, and Landscaping shall be integrated into and blend harmoniously with the neighborhood building scale, natural environment, and development•characteristics as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. For instance, a multi -family development's design need not be harmoniously integrated with adjacent single family stnictures if that existing single family use is designated as "Commercial" or "High Density Residential" in the Comprehensive Plan. However, a "Low Density Residential" (detached single family) designation would require such harmonious design integration. Natural features which contribute to desirable neighborhood character shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Natural features include, but are not limited to, existing significant trees and stands of trees, wetlands, streams, and significant topographic features. c. The site plan shall use landscaping and building shapes to form an aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian scale streetscape. This shall include, but not be limited to facilitating pedestrian travel along the street, using architecture and landscaping to provide a desirable transition from streetscape to the building, and providing an integrated linkage from pedestrian and vehicular facilities to building entries. d. Pedestrian and vehicular entries shall provide a high quality visual focus using building siting, shapes, and landscaping. Such a feature establishes a physical transition between the project and public areas, and establishes the initial sense of high quality development. e. Vehicular circulation design shall minimize driveway intersections with the street. W\@.SNEPOiNT FOLDER RESTRUCTUREU2eference\APPLICATIONS - Land Use Apps & Handouts\CURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS\Design Review -Public Heanng docx •�t f Site perimeter design (i.e. landscaping, structures, and horizontal width) shall be coordinated with site development to ensure a harmonious transition between adjacent projects. g. Varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents shall be provided; increasing from the public right--of-- way, to common areas. to individual residences. This can be accomplished through the use of symbolic and actual physical barriers to define the degrees of privacy appropriate to specific site area functions. h Parking and service areas shall be located, designed, and screened to interrupt and reduce the visual impact of large paved areas. i. The height, bulk, footprint, and scale of each building shall be in harmony with its site and adjacent long-term structures. 2. Building Design a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its ability to harmonize building texture, shape, lines and mass with the surrounding neighborhood. b. Buildings shall be of appropriate height, scale, and design/shape to be in harmony with those existing permanent neighboring developments which are consistent with, or envisioned in, the Comprehensive Plan. This will be especially important for perimeter structures. Adjacent structures which are not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan should be considered to be transitional. The degree of architectural harmony required should be consistent with the non -conforming structure's anticipated permanence. c. Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, parapets, stairs and decks shall be integrated into the overall building design. Particular emphasis shall be given to harmonious proportions of these components with those of adjacent developments. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with the anticipated life of the structure. d The overall color scheme shall work to reduce building prominence and shall blend in with the natural environment. e. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects shall be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting shall be used to provide visual interest. Otherwise monotonous flat walls and uniform vertical planes of individual buildings shall be broken up with building modulation, stairs, decks, railings, and focal entries. Multiple building developments shall use siting and additional architectural variety to avoid inappropriate repetition of building designs and appearance to surrounding properties. 3. Landscape and Site Treatment a. Existing natural topographic patterns and significant vegetation shall be reflected in project design when they contribute to the natural beauty of the area or are important to defining neighborhood identity or a sense of place. b. Landscape treatment shall enhance existing natural and architectural features, help separate public from private spaces, strengthen vistas and important views, provide shade to moderate the affects of large paved areas, and break up visual mass. c. Walkways, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas shall promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Direct pedestrian linkages to the public street, to on-site recreation areas, and to adjacent public recreation areas shall be provided. Jd Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided. 4 Miscellaneous Structures a. Miscellaneous structures shall be designed as an integral part of the architectural concept and landscape. Materials shall be compatible with buildings, scale shall be appropriate, colors shall be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and structure proportions shall be to scale. b Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, shall be accomplished by the use of walls, fencing, planting, berms, or combinations of these. Screening shall be effective in winter and summer. c. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from view. Screening shall be designed as an integral part of the architecture (i.e., raised parapets and fully enclosed under roof) and landscaping. . d Exterior lighting standards and fixtures shall be of a design and size consistent with safety, building architecture and adjacent area. Lighting shall be shielded, and restrained in design with no off-site glare spill over. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors shall not be used unless clearly demonstrated to be integral to building architecture. .._ W \C'SHAREPOINT FOLDER RESTRUCTURE\Reference\APPLICATIONS - Land Use Apps & Handouts\CURRENT LAND USE APPLICATiONS\Design Revie31lic Hearing docx =. --Consistency with adopted plans and regulations (TMC 18.100.030) 5. Demonstrate the manner in which the proposal is consistent with, carries out and helps implement applicable state laws and regulations and the regulations, policies, objectives and goals of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the City of Tukwila's Development Regulations and other official laws, policies and objectives of the City of Tukwila. ~CRITERIA FOR BAR REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (TMC 18.60.030 and 18.60.060(C)). Applies to all developments in the Tukwila International Boulevard Corridor. I. Site Design • a. Site Design Concept. • Organize site design elements to provide an orderly and easily understood arrangement of building, landscaping, and circulation elements that support the functions of the site. b. Relationship to Street Front • Organize site design elements to create a distinct street edge, and minimize parking between structures and street. • Orient at least one building entry to a major public street. c. Street Corners • Emphasize the importance of street corners through building location, the provision of pedestrian access, special site features and/or landscape features. d. Continuity of Site with Adjacent Sites • Maintain visual and functional continuity between the proposed development and adjacent and neighboring properties through setbacks, building massing, circulation and landscaping, where appropriate. e. Shared Facilities • Incorporate opportunities for joint development of sites where there is potential for common building walls, shared driveways, Landscaping, or other shared facilities. f. Site Design for Safety • Minimize conflicts between drivers and pedestrians through the siting of structures, location of circulation elements, landscape design, and placement of signs. • Design and site structures to maximize site surveillance opportunities from buildings and public streets. • Provide adequate lighting levels in all pedestrian areas, including building entries, along walkways, parking areas, and other public areas. • Design landscaping so that long term growth will not interfere with site lighting and surveillance. • Use durable, high quality materials in site furnishings and features for ease of maintenance. Siting and Screening of Service Areas • Minimize the visual and aural impacts of service areas such as loading docks, trash and recycling collection points, utility maintenance areas, etc., through site design, landscaping and screening. h. Natural Features and Sensitive Areas • Preserve natural features such as existing topography, significant trees or wooded areas, wetlands and/or watercourses and incorporate them into the overall site, where appropriate. • Design and site structures on hillsides to minimize the visual and environmental impact of development in these locations. • Employ site design techniques that take advantage of and/or enhance visual focal points along the corridor, where feasible. g. i. Surface Stormwater Detention Facilities • Integrate water quality treatment techniques such as bio filtration swales and ponds with overall site design, where possible and appropriate. W \@SRAREPOINT FOLDER RESTRUCTURE\Reference\APPLICATIONS - Land Use Apps & Handouts\CURRENT LAND USE APPLICATiONS\Design Review -Public Hearing docx A Discussion of Project: Consistency With Design Criteria ECEJVED 4.»9 ity 1. Site Planning E' ,,:.p rneni a. Yes, the building siting, architecture, and landscaping integrates and blends harmoniously with the neighborhood building scale, natural environment, and development: characteristics as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. There are no mixed use buildings in the immediate vicinity. b. No, there are no natural features which contribute to desirable neighborhood character. The proposed development area is currently an asphalt parking lot. c. Yes, the site plall uses laIldscaping and building shapes to form an aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian scale streetscape. d. Yes, the pedestrian and vehicular entries provide a high quality visual focus using building siting, shapes and landscaping. e. Yes, vehicular circulation design minimizes driveway intersections with the street. f. Yes, site perimeter design coordinates with the development to ensure a harmonious transition between adjacent projects. g. Yes, varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents is provided, increasing from the public right-of-way, to common areas to individual residences. h.,Yes, parking and service are located, designed, and screened to interrupt and reduce the visual impact of large paved areas. 1 Yes, the height, bulk, footprint, and scale of the building is.in harmony with it's site and adjacent long-term structures. 2. Building Design a. Yes, the project harmonizes building texture, shape, lines and mass with the surrounding neighborhood. b. Yes, the building is of appropriate height, scale, and design/shape to be in harmony with existing permanent neighboring developments which are consistent with, or envisioned in, the Comprehensive Plan, c. Yes, building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, parapets, stairs and decks are integrated into the overall building design. cl. Yes, the overall color scheme works to reduce building prominence and blends in with the natural environment. e. Yes, variety of detail, form, and siting is used to provide interest. 3. Landscape and Site Treatment a. Yes, existing natural topographic patterns and significant vegetation is reflected in project design. b. Yes, landscape treatment enhances existing natural and architectural features and helps separate public from private spaces. c. Yes, walkways, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Direct pedestrian linkages to the public street, to on-site recreation areas, and to adjacent public recreation areas. d. Yes, appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties is provided. 4. Miscellaneous Structures a. Yes, the structure is designed as an integral part of the architectural concept and landscape. Materials are compatible with buildings, scale is appropriate, colors are in harmony with buildings and surroundings and proportions are to scale, 33 b. Yes, screening of the service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly are accomplished by the use of walls. c. Yes, mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings is screened from view. d. Yes, exterior lighting fixtures are of a design and sire consistent with safety, building architecture and adjacent area. e. The drawings, calculations and reports, nearly thirty pounds in weight, submitted by the architect, structural engineer, civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, mechanical engineer, landscape architect and surveyor demonstrate the manner in which the proposal is consistent with, carries out and helps implement applicable state laws and regulations and the regulations, policies, objectives and goals of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the City of Tukwila's Development Regulations and other official laws, policies and objectives of the City of Tukwila 34 11/22/21, 9:46 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Re: Concerns Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Thu 9/17/2020 5:53 PM To: Benjam n Boyles <benjam nm oyles@ m il.com Hi Benjam n, Thank you for sending in your com nts on this project. I'm currently reviewing the project and am expecting to send a correction letter out to the applicant soon. The corrections from all departm nts (Fire, Building, Public W rks, and Planning) along with public com nts received will be sent to the applicant and will need to be addressed in a satisfactory in order for staff to prepare recom ndations for review by the Board of Architectural Review. Additionally, com nts received on the project are included in the inform tion provided to and reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. From m review so far, the proposal does not involve rem ving vegetation on the hillside or m king changes to the topography of the hillside. M terials that have been subm tted so far include architectural plans showing the site layout and floorplans of the building, an architectural rendering, civil plans showing utility design, landscaping plans, lighting plans, and a geotechnical report. If there are specific documents that would be helpful for you to review I will need to scan them and send them to you. I can also potentially bring the paper copies of the plans and m et with you and neighbors som where outdoors, with COVID precautions (m sks, distancing, etc.) to show you the proposal. Let m know what will work best for you. By subm tti g com nts, you are a party of record, so I will keep you updated on the schedule as we get closer to being able to put this on the calendar for a public hearing by the Board of Architectural Review. Jaim e Jaim e Reavis Senior Planner 1 City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100ITukwila, W 98188 ph: (206) 431-3659 Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov 1 www.tukwilawa.gov The City of opportunity, the com nity of choice. From Benjamin Boyles <benjam nm oyles@ m il.com Sent: W dnesday, Septem er 16, 2020 7:44 PM To: Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Subject: Fwd: Concerns See below ATTACHMENT B 35 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 11/22/21, 9:46 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Begin forwarded m ssage: From Benjam n Boyles <benjam nm oyles@ m il.com Date: Septem er 13, 2020 at 20:18:20 PDT To: Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwila.wa.gov, benjam nm oyles@ m il.com Subject: Concerns M nam is Benjam n Boyles and I am the owner of the property above Gallianos cucina on interurban Ave. 14234 59th Ave S. I am concerned with the proposed construction of a 3 story apartm nt com lex with retail space below. M house sits directly on the hillside and I have concerns about this proposed plan. Is there a plan how this will be constructed? W at will the footprint of this site? W II the construction cut into the hillside? W II the trees be rem ved during the construction? How will this im act the geological structure of the hill? If these trees are cut down then m view will now be of the rock quarry and interurban Ave. This will decrease m property value and possibly m ke m hom unstable on the hillside. I would appreciate inform tion on this proposed construction and all the im acts it would have on m property. Thank you. Benjam n Boyles Benjaminm oyles@ m il.com 14234 59th Ave S Tukwila wa 98168 206-409-3945 CAUTIO : This em it originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachm nts or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 36 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 11/22/21, 9:48 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Re: PL19-0066 Galliano M xed Use Building Project Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Thu 9/17/2020 5:41 PM To: Shivery M on <ashiverym on@ m il.com Hi M chele, Thank you for sending in your com nts on this project. From m review so far, the proposal does not involve rem ving vegetation on the hillside or m king changes to the topography of the hillside. I'm currently reviewing the project and am expecting to send a correction letter out to the applicant soon. The corrections from all departm nts (Fire, Building, Public W rks, and Planning) along with public com nts received will need to be addressed in a satisfactory way by the applicant so that staff can prepare recomm ndations for review by the Board of Architectural Review. Additionally, com nts received on the project are included in the inform tion reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. By subm tti g com nts, you are a party of record, so I will keep you updated on the schedule as we get closer to being able to put this on the calendar for a public hearing by the Board of Architectural Review. Also, I'm happy to talk with you by phone and/or send copies of plans if that would be helpful. Jaim e Jaim e Reavis Senior Planner 1 City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100ITukwila, W 98188 ph: (206) 431-3659 Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov 1 www.tukwilawa.gov The City of opportunity, the com nity of choice. From Shivery M on <ashiverym on@ m il.com Sent: Friday, Septem er 11, 2020 10:31 AM To: Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Subject: PL19-0066 Galliano M xed Use Building Project Jam e, W are 40 year residents of the City of Tukwila. W have grave concerns over the proposed land use action above. W en Galliano's was first constructed, the owner was out on a Saturday, cutting trees from the hillside. I then contacted Carol Lum with the City of Tukwila and she noticed there was NO perm t given for the cutting of any trees on the property. This in turn, caused him fines and tim . 37 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 11/22/21, 9:48 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Since Galliano's has opened, it has caused nothing but rat problem here on the hill behind the restaurant. He intentionally leaves his garbage containers open so the crows, seagulls and rats can have easy access. I have contacted the city several tim s over this and nothing seem to change. W NEVER had a rat problem until this restaurant opened. This is still a continuous problem The stability of the hillside is our m in concern at this tim . Past behavior has proven that Galliano has no qualm about circum enting the laws of the city. If any trees are cut down, this will be disastrous for our com nity hillside. It is im erative that this land use action gets scrutiny im diately to prevent any degradation of our hillside. W would also like to know about the tim ng of construction and what assurances you can give that NO trees on the hill will be cut. Please get back to m at your earliest convenience. Best regards, M chele Ricks 14228 59th Ave S Tukwila, W 98168 206-683-8401 CAUTIO : This em it originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachm nts or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 38 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 11/19/21, 1:02 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Galliano M xed Use Project M RIO GALLIANO <gallianoscucina@ om ast.net> W d 10/7/2020 8:33 AM To: Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Cc: David Thorstad <dltarchitect@ om ast.net> G od m rning Jaim , Thank you for the correction letter. W are going to work on it. W are looking forward to getting perm t approval without additional, needless delays. In response to the 2 com nts from the neighbors. Regarding their baseless concerns of the hillside in question. I have owned this com rcial property nearly 20 years. 0 r 1st re-developm nt (this property has long been an active com rcial site- long before we owned it) in 2003, we had a professional G otechnical firm do city required analysis of the property and hill. It measured all relevant m trics regarding the hillside- the G otechnical com any's result was: it passed all m trics with flying colors. The city of Tukwila naturally approved the developm nt of the restaurant. Then again in 2018, another professional G otechnical analysis/report was conducted- required for perm tting of this new m xed use in question. And again, another round scientific excellent results- analyzing all core m trics by Professional engineers. It is noted this developm nt is proposing no work/activity on the actual hillside in question. W y do I raise these facts? The 2 neighbors with com nts and baseless opinions are engaged in classic subterfuge. They are raising a potentially legitim to subject- like G otechnical engineering- som thing they know nothing about, m anwhile their real selfish m tivation lies elsewhere- they sim ly do not want any new neighbors- under any circum tance. Although we can all relate to desiring less neighbors, their m tivation is selfish driven, m ritless, and defies m Itiple, professional G otechnical analysis, as well as m ltiple city perm t approvals. The law is on our side. They chose to purchase hom s, knowing full well, it was adjacent to com rcially zoned property- Interurban Ave So. Thank you for your consideration, and work related to this City of Tukwila perm t approval. Sincerely, M rio G Iliano O ner c 206-683-5059 CAUTIO : This em it originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachm nts or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 39 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 11/19/21, 1:23 PM it - Jaim e Reavis - 0 tlook Re: Responses to neighbor com nts-per correction notice Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Thu 3/11/2021 4:48 PM To: M RIO GALLIANO <gallianoscucina@ om ast.net> Thank you for sending this, M rio. The project is still under review by all departm nts. W will let you know if we have any questions as we continue our review. Jaim e Jaim e Reavis Senior Planner 1 City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100ITukwila, W 98188 ph: (206) 431-3659 Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov 1 www.tukwilawa.gov The City of opportunity, the com nity of choice. From M RIO GALLIANO <gallianoscucina@ om ast.net> Sent: M nday, M rch 8, 2021 9:06 AM To: Jaim e Reavis <Jaim e.Reavis@ ukwilaW .gov> Subject: Responses to neighbor com nts-per correction notice G od m rning Jaim , This letter serves as a response to the 2 sole em it com nters for this project/perm t. 1st em it comm nter: 1) rodent issue- we are unaware of any rodent issues at our restaurant property. The neighbor in question owns property that is heavily forested. Naturally, there exists wildlife- on their property. The furniture, fixtures, and debris on their landscape m y also be a source of rodents. According to the construction plans, the housing waste bin will have a fixed roof to m tigate/prevent bird activity. 2) Stability of hillside- No trees are being cut on the hillside. All landscaping architectural plans (no hillside work), are designed in accordance with the G otechnical engineer- Dennis Bruce for this project. It is noted, this neighbor in question owns m ture trees, these trees have visible poison ivy growing on them and give the appearance of "choking" the trees. This neighbor has been previously warned about not m intaining the trees on THEIR property. 2nd em it com nter: 1) Tree cutting & hillside- Sam as 1st em il. No hillside work or tree cutting exists for this project in question. It is noted the footprint of the building is located essentially above the current parking lot- where no trees exist. The landscape architect has m t or exceeded all of the City of Tukwila landscaping conditions and requirem nts. I appreciate the neighbors com nting and sharing of concerns. W share joint (along with the neighbors) interests in the com nity. Thank you Sincerely, M rio G Iliano LLC Property O ner c 206-683-5059 I 40 https://outlook.office365.com m it/deeplink?popoutv2=1 &version=20211115002.06 Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A• Geotechnical/Civil Engineer City of Tukwila c/o David L. Thorstad, Architect Subiect: Geotechnical Review of Final Plans Galliano Mixed Use Building 14181 Interurban Ave. S. August 10, 2021 L19-0077 RECEIVED 10/25/2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical review of the Final Plans for the Galiiano proposed mixed use building at 14181 Interurban Ave. S - as required by the City of Tukwila. References: - Project plans by Archt. D. Thorstad Geotechnical Report by D. Bruce, P.E. Oct. 20, 2018 City of Tukwila Correction Letter #4 dated July 6, 2021 Background: The geotechnical investigation verified dense native soils in the foundation zone for the proposed mixed use building. The rear slope was evaluated and found to be stable. No evidence of slides or erosional degradation was observed. See Oct. 20, 2018 report. Review of Final Plans: This Engineer has reviewed the Final Plans by D. Thorstad, and discussed geotechnical aspects of the project. The proposed excavation for the building foundation footings will not adversely affect slope stability. The foundation plans are geotechnically approved. ATTACHMENT C SOILS • FOUNDATIONS • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRAINAGE • DESIGN & PERMIT • LEGAL 41 Drainage Swale: As stated, the existing drainage swale will be filled. Proper drainage mitigation has been designed by the project Civil Engineer. See his response to the City of Tukwila Notice. Thus, future storm water will not be collecting between the west wall of the building and the slope. On site geotechnical inspections are required to verify that actual construction complies with the City of Tukwila approved plans, the requirements of the Civil Engineer and this Geotechnical Engineer. Retaining Wall Clarification: The geotechnical report included a section pertaining to retaining walls. The section was provided before Final Plans were available — and were intended to be used IF there were any retaining walls proposed in the design. The Final Plans do not incorporate any retaining walls — thus the geotechnical criteria for retaining walls do not apply. Summary: Final project plans are geotechnicaliy approved for construction — subject to on-site inspections. Excavation for the foundations will not adversely impact slope stability. Construction to comply with the drainage recommendations of the project Civil Engineer. If there are any questions, please contact this Engineer. F. Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. r Geotechnical / Civil Engineer 42 Dennis M. Bruce, P M . S. Ci . t=' .. !�•i . Ei . r. October 20. 2018 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect dltarchitect@comcast.net Geotechnical / Civil Engineer t'73=1,7 IFD Com mu li Development Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation — Foundation Recommendations Proposed New Mixed -Use Building Gallianos Cucina Property 14201 Interurban Avenue S, Tukwila, Washington This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the Galliano property at 14201 Interurban. Avenue S, City of Tukwila, Washington. This evaluation was required due to owner / architect concerns, as well as the City of Tukwila concerns regarding the proposed mixed-use building and geotechnical conditions— specifically the southerly slopes. REFERENCES: • Property Site Plan and development plans by Dave Thorstad, architect • Representative Photo Sheet by D. Bruce, P.E., attached • Geotechnical Report for the upslope property, dated August 25, 2014 by Geotech Consultants (14201 59th Place S) • Previous Geotechnical Reports and Inspection Reports by D. Bruce, P.E. for the current Gallianos Cucina Restaurant building BACKGROUND: See Site Plan for overall property of the existing Gallianos Restaurant and north and south parking lots. This engineer performed a geotechnical investigation and issued a report with foundation criteria for the construction of the Gallianos Cucina restaurant building in past years. Follow up inspections verified the stability of the foundations, and "no impacts" to nor from the adjacent (westerly) slopes. This engineer understands that Mario Galliano proposes to construct a new mixed-use building in the location of the current north parking lot. See architect plans. SOILS lU0 '; TONS SITE DEVELOPMENT INSPECTION DRAINAGE DESIGN a PERMIT LEGAL P.0 Box 55502 Shoreline. Washington 98155 (206) 546-9217 dbrucepe@gmail.com 43 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 2 The construction of the new building will be in close proximity to the toe of the adjacent (westerly) slopes. This engineer observed that the pre -application meeting form by the City of Tukwila required a foundation soil investigation and written report. Specifically, the City of Tukwila was concerned about the upslope property with regard to slope stability. EVALUATION: Visual evaluation of the existing restaurant building reveals no evidence of any geotechnical distress: no foundation cracking, no obvious settlements, nor any evidence of erosional degradation. Additional evaluation.of the current north parking lot revealed no evidence of subsidence, no settlements, nor any adverse drainage issues. See Site Plan and photographs. Visual evaluations of the slope face itself verified no adverse impacts: no slides, no soil tension cracks, nor any evidence of poor drainage controls or erosion degradation. The slope is heavily vegetated with mature trees and bushes. This engineer understands that the proposed new building will not impact the adjacent slope. The adjacent slope will not be excavated or undermined in any fashion. Hand dug soil test holes verified the following: 0" to 4" 4" to 30" Dense sandy loam Extremely dense consolidated glacial till CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with this property (historically), as well as similar properties in the area, the project for the new multi -use building at 14201 Interurban Ave S., is geotechnically approved, subject to the following: 44 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 3 • Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing pressure: 3,000 p.s.f. NOTE: Geotechnical investigations have verified that the existing parking lot contains compacted structural fill material that is suitable for new foundations. However, it appears that the new building will require nominal excavation (less than 3.0') for the new foundations. Approved. • Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 p.c.f. is recommended for any retaining wall design provided drainage zone is inspected and verified by this engineer. • For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55 and passive pressure of 350 p.c.f. • Geotechnical inspections by this engineer are required prior to any foundation concrete placement. The proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on undisturbed native soils or on structural fill placed above native soils. See the later sub -section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill for structural fill placement and compaction recommendations. Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (2.4) inches, respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) inches below the lower adjacent finish ground surface. Depending on the final site grades, some over -excavation may be required below footings to expose competent native soils. Unless lean concrete is used to fill the over excavated hole, the width of the over -excavation at the bottom must be at least as wide as the sum of two times the depth of the over -excavation and the footing width. For example, an over -excavation extending two feet below the bottom of a three-foot wide footing must be at least seven feet wide at the base of the excavation. Footings constructed according to the above recommendations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2,000) pounds per square foot (p.s.f.). A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is anticipated that total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent, native soils (or on structural fill up to five (5) feet in thickness) will be about one-half inch, with differential settlements on the order of one-quarter inch. 45 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 4 Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundations and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the foundations must either be poured directly against undisturbed soil or the backfill placed around the outside of the foundation must be level structural fill. We recommend the following design values be used for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading: Parameter Design Value Coefficient of Friction Passive Earth Pressure Where: 0.55 350 p.c.f. (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot. (2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. We recommend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design of the foundation's resistance to lateral loading. SLABS -ON -GRADE: Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these soils can be re -compacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel underneath the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of four (4) inches thick. We also recommend using a vapor barrier such as 6 -mil. plastic membrane beneath the slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes. PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS: Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. The following recommended design parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height, which restrain level backfill: Parameter Design Value Active Earth Pressure* Passive Earth Pressure Cdeffictent of Friction Soil Unit Weight 46 35 p.c.f. 350 p.c.f. 0.55 125 p.c.f. Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 5 Where: (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot (2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using equivalent fluid densities. For restrained walls which cannot deflect at least 0.002 times the wall height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be added to the active equivalent fluid pressure). The values given above are to°be used for design of permanent foundation and retaining walls only. An appropriate safety factor should be applied when designing the walls. We recommend using a safety tactor of at least 1.5 for Overturning and sliding. The above design values do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or Toads will be placed above the walls. If these conditions exist, then those pressures should be added to the above lateral pressures. Also, if sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, then we will need to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate design earth pressures. Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. Placement and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated equipment. Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any retaining or foundation walls should be free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater than four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt content, if the native soils are used as backfill, a drainage composite, such as Mirafi and Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. The purpose of these backfill requirements is to assure that the design criteria for the retaining wall is not exceeded bepause of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The 47 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 6 subsection entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls. EXCAVATION AND SLOPES: At the time of this investigation and report, it is understood that maximum excavation depths for the new mix -use building will vary in depth to a maximum of three feet (3.0'). Hence, no shoring is required. • Adjacent Slopes: This engineer read, reviewed and understands the geotechnical report dated August 25, 2014 (by Geotech Consultants) that addresses the immediately up slope property at 14201 59th Place S. This detailed report, including soil test pits, verified the extremely dense underlying soils described as "brown weathered sandstone — becomes very hard at 5.0' depths". Additionally, this August 25, 2014 report declares. "we observed no indications of recent instability on the steep slopes extending north and south of the site. This area is known to be underlain by sedimentary bedrock, and deep-seated slides are not common." Additionally, the report continues to provide normal and standard geotechnical criteria for any development at the top of slope. This engineer's previous and current investigations further verify the stability of the slope: extremely dense subgrade soils at shallow depths. Dense and mature vegetation on the slope face itself, with no evidence of erosional sloughing. Thus, the Galliano site itself and adjacent slopes are geotechnically stable. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For temporary cuts having a height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavation. Under specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, excavation cuts may be modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no 48 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 7 steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2H:1V. It is important to note that sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors should be made aware of this potential hazard. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings and retaining walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of one -inch -minus washed rock wrapped in non-woven,geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. No groundwater was observed in any of the four test holes during the fieldwork. Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if excavation occurs during winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. The excavation of the site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Any exposed slopes to be covered with plastic to minimize erosion. Final site grading in areas adjacent to buildings should be sloped at least two (2) percent away from the building, except where the area adjacent to the building is paved. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FILL: The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of all surface vegetation, all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill. NOTE: As stated, this engineer verified that the existing north parking lot contains compacted structural fill as subgrade. This compacted fill is approved for foundation bearing. 49 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 8 However, this engineer understands that actual footing depths will "most likely" be dug below the structural fill subgrade and into the extremely dense native subgrade soils. Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils needs to support loads. This engineer should observe site conditions during and after excavation prior to placement of any structural fill. AH structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. -The optimum moisture content is that moisture content which results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type, compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case should the lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. The following table presents recommended relative compaction for structural fill: Location of Fill Placement Minimum Relative Compaction Beneath footings, slabs or walkways 95% Behind retaining walls 90% Beneath pavements 95% for upper 12 inches of Sub -grade, 90% below that level Where: Minimum relative compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). Use of On -Site Soils If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the silty, on-site soils are extremely wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rains and the potential need to import granular fill. The on-site soils are generally silty and thus are highly moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the moisture"content of these soils exceeds the optimum moisture content. 50 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 9 Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and "pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than the optimum moisture content. Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve. The use of "some" on-site soils for fill material may be acceptable if the upper organic materials are segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering inspection. DRAINAGE CONTROLS: No drainage problems were evident with the existing restaurant building at 14201 Interurban Avenue S. No drainage problems were evident with the existing north parking lot (site of proposed mixed-use building). However, a current "drainage swale" exists immediately at the base -of -slope. See photo sheets. Evaluation of this "drainage swale" indicates a buried drainage storm line with an inlet grate. This engineer understands the following: the new mixed-use building will incorporate all buried storm lines (located in the current drainage swale alignment). This engineer approves of use of the existing drainage swale as an alignment zone for properly designed and inspected buried storm lines. CONCRETE: All foundation concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls, etc.) shall have a minimum cement content of 5-1/2 sacks per cubic yard of concrete mix. STEEP SLOPES: As stated in this report, the adjacent slopes exceed a declination of 40%, hence, the semantic`tabel of "steep". 51 Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 10 This engineer's previous geotechnical investigations, the top -of -slope geotechnical study done August 25, 2.014 by Geotech Consultants, and this engineer's current evaluation, all verify the stability of the slopes. The proposed new multi -use building will not impact the slopes. The existing slopes will not impact the proposed multi -use building. It is essential that no excavation occur at the toe -of -slope. INSPECTIONS: The recommendations of this report are only valid when key geotechnical aspects are inspected by this engineer during construction: • Soil cuts • Verification of footing bearing capacity subgrade • Any retaining wall, or rockery placement • Any fill placement • Subsurface drainage installation • Temporary and permanent erosion control measures SUMMARY: The proposed mixed-use building at 14201 Interurban Ave S., is geotechnically viable when constructed in accordance with the recommendations herein, compliance with City of Tukwila approved plans and requirements, and key geotechnical inspections during construction. STATEMENT OF MINIMAL RISK: The plans and specifications for the mixed-use building at 14201 Interurban Ave S., Tukwila, Washington have been reviewed by this engineer and conform to the recommendations of the analysis and report and, provided that those conditions and recommendations are satisfied during the construction and use, and inspected and verified by this engineer, the area disturbed by construction will be stabilized and remain stable and will not increase the potential for soil movement, and the risk of damage to the proposed development and from the development to adjacent properties from soil instability will be minimal. 52 14201 Interurban Ave S. # PRE17-0039 Proposed mixed use building West of exist. restaurant. Slope behind (south) of property is geotechnically stable. Viewing west. Interurban Ave. S. at right. Viewing east. New bldg. to be constructed in exist. parking lot area. Geotechnical investigation of rear slope verified stability. 53 1421 Interurban Ave S. Existing parking lot subgrade consists of compacted structural fill. Exist. drainage swale S. of parking lot. (at base of slope) New project to incorporate underground drain lines. 54 Extremely dense Glacial Till soils are evident. No evidence of any geotechnical distress . Slope is stable. Viewing west (behind existing rest.) Mario Galliano c/o Dave Thorstad, Architect Re: 14201 Interurban Ave S October 20, 2018 Page 11 CLOSURE: The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on the results of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored locations. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different than those described in this report, this engineer should be notified to observe the situation and review and verify or modify the recommendations. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to'call. q. (l M 1 I I- DMB:vlb Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer 55 56 From: "Jones, Randy" <rjones36@wm.com> To: David Thorstad <dltarchitect@comcast.net> Date: 09/27/2021 2:20 PM Subject: RE: Galliano project 14181 Interurban Ave. S. David, I thought I sent an approval last week, right after our conversation. Sorry if it didn't get to you. This attached document is the only thing I have available that has any kind of guidance on bin sizes. From what I understand, in approving all of the Seattle City plans, is that the City itself has container requirements. All of the plans I see from Seattle have the service levels already determined, and drawn into the plans. From the drawing you provided, I don't see any reason the design would not be feasible for trash collection. It is approved for WM services. Randy Jones Route Manager WM of Seattle rjones36@wm.com Tel 206 505 9038 Cell 206 305 6353 1 L19-0077 RECEIVED 10/25/2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTACHMENT D 57 81011st Ave. S Seattle, WA 98108 58 2 Yu n D m 4 Dm r iI Ji 59 Ci C S. 60 INDEX W s� V AN A MIXED USE BUILDING FOR ©�,4 ° �� " s' T r' �I �^ t SITE I r.rt s ; FOUNDATION - ` 2 ' 2 FOUNDATION PLAN -NORTH . ' fs6 0'QRS .5---..-----k_ 3 FOUNDATION PLAN - SOUTH T' K/o 4 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NORTH II � ALUMINUM PANEL 5 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH r.1/e- - � n- w 5.5 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL \ 'V • ,Nrs = 1x HANDICAPPED SYMBOL L �},f��gfvy�x�'OP - e 6 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - NORTH ] SECOND FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH 7.5 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL MARIO GALLIANO LLC 4 i . \ Luo Y B THIRD FLOOR PLAN -NORTH 206.683.5059 4J Vin, �f = I W 4W .h@ 5 \�a'4j'y� y. ex5x as *PIING.. 1864148 a 9 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH 9S THIRD FLOOR PLAN -OVERALL 10 SECTION -NORTHIICC 1 11 SECTION SOUTH 12 ELEVATIONS NORTH &WEST l?44 22 NE • F S. ���\�`\ \ '1'000 \ xT 9 P 4 ' M., coxcNn[roo�nu II ���k,, •8��. 1 € �,1 ®im-1. ...t -`10 ACCESSIBILITY IIS II 1111 •11 �- �I" _ 13 ELEVATIONS SOUTHB EAST 14 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NORTH - ELECTRICAL 15 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH - ELECTRICAL 16 SECOND FLOOR PLAN -NORTH -ELECTRICAL 17 SECOND FLOOR PLAN -SOUTH-ELECTRICAL 18 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - NORTH - ELECTRICAL O T klL Q OxoxorcPPPTU Pnxx he SIGN t9 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH - ELECTRICAL war P ti' •• - _ '' r 1 1 F: • NOTES FIRE DEPT CONN 4 -4 - INTERURBAN AVE. S. LOCATION: 14181 INTERURBAN AVE.SOUTH ZONE: RCH — — FINE HYDRANT FOC Loc6N00003 CAPf \ �a Q OCCUPANCY: B/U/R-2 ANoe....... - - `..--__ - \ ?�— __--_- CONSTRUCTION: VA SPRINKLERED PARCEL: 3365901470/1480/1505/1515 2a -0" 80.$'_-- - 2514' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: /p - NI LL ` • .` ` `• �- ` ` ` ` `-`-,(°'^-`r-="`�` — ,`, `, ` PARCEL BOF CITY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO `O4LLo' \ •LL�I • / - �n . 1 - - R L03-019, RECORDED 2003 UNDER RECORDING NO. i; _ -� '- Mil R ` ORDS, TOGETHER RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH i ILL' i r� - ,- 1 I�AE 8w • LL ` `: sx STVF ✓ x ro LL .\ Q rc PARCEL A OF CRY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L03-019, RECORDED JULY 01, 2003 UNDER RECORDING NO. .I 26.00 AVO ELEY 20030701900003, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH LOT 25, BLOCK 15, HILLMAN'S SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO y n . 9 f 0' .. / s 86'-0" \\60. , 0 0 4 S ACE ./- U FIRENE , g THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE SOUTHWESTERLY HALF; n ` 1 s,' - - 1 1a INTERU AN / TUKWIW, wn8a+ee \! F 39'-5" / ma �— ' - a H 3 AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN W. MARGINAL WAS, AS f CONVENED BY INSTRUMENTS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 995857, I - L 9 I \ I / 0 J/ / i FIREurvE _. -i l' T+`— I 3 a ' 990090 AND 988203 AND CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT / CAUSE NO. 109001; % AND TOGETHER WITH /// THAT PORTION OF LOT 26, BLOCK IS HILLMAN'S SEATTLE GARDEN ";J , ` r --+ I I ----_ L-} - JAti, / III, �I- _---� I ' - _Hnx9Rc- PROPOSEDxp, L TRASH rlReune EXIST NG HANDICAP \ sPncEs vnTH SIGNS A / -, --`-m— � r,/ / ops " .i;=, .. M` --= NCM_ ' � LL y TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF , ')/ //.I _ i -s ✓ l i *\ I- -- �; - y -r -� . PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: / BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF REITZ AVENUE, NOW /fp ✓,.'-- Y _ _ Tom- _ _ -+ --- L - '�\I I ill T / _ �' _ , l `rte" -` d` ` ` ` 8006-11-20 INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH, AND THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT 26; •-- THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT IN A SOUTHWESTERLY f/✓C%- - — _— — — --9 —1 4 — / , - — �a - - . 8110-20-20 DIRECTION 129.425 FEET; —� / \--T-*----'_ THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT IN A-- NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE- - `--- - n - - _ ��� �.-- -`-�-`T- ,. ,� — _815 ME2f-� — .__.LLT-" MND+=s f. — -* ` - - IftII , R201-21-21 I z'�`� SOUTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF MAIN STREET NOW 58 AVENUE SOUTH; - _ �e3 122.6' �: . . . . { 150.0' R303-24-21 A THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF MAIN STREET AND ALONG THE MARGIN OF REITZ AVENUE, NOW INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON FOR ROAD PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED UNDER PROPOSED FILL EXISTING —UG RETENTION PIPE AND rs-TANK MIXED USE BUILDING SWALE 1000, EXISTING LUMINAIRE R404-28-21 8510-12-21 12610-18-21 RECORDING Na 988203; WITH STRUCTURAL FILL AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY RECYCLE ExISTIrvc PARKING R711-09-21 SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 700399 FOR STATE ROAD NO. 181. PARKING REQUIRED RESTAURANT: 24 STANDARD RESTAURANT HANDICAP: 2 MIXED-USE INDOOR:13 SITE PLAN - EXISTING LUMINAIRE EXISTING RESTAURANT 1"=20'-0" x \ MIXED-USE OUTDOOR: 6 NORTH MIXED.05E HANDICAP: 2 TOTAL: 48�y- PROPOSED OCCUPANT LOAD L19-0077 MIXED-USE BUILDING: 48 A4 B:3 OCCUPANTS 9-2:45 OCCUPANTS11 ACCESSIBLE UNIT NUMBER 203- ALL OTHERS TYPE B . PROVIDE FOR GRAB BARS AT ALL AT ALL BATHROOMS ATTACHMENT E 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE RECEIVED /09/2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2 61 62 INDEX W s� ©�,4 ° �� " 3 T r' ��I ..^ SITE PLAN A MIXED USE BUILDING FOR a� s ; `Ir _�..d 2 FOUNDATION PLAN - NORTH ' fs6 t At, y� 3 FOUNDATION PLAN - SOUTH ' 4 I T' >z r K/1 0 4 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NORTH y ■ 1/8. ALUMINUM PANEL 5 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH - � w S5 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL E \ ,Nrs 'V • =ylx�°1OP 0 IunooPPms 6 L - )- 2. 6 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - NORTH 7 SECOND FLOOR PLAN -SOU R 7.5 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL MARIO GALLIANO LLC 4 i . \ Luo, Y 8 THIRD FLOOR PLAN -NORTH 206.683.5059 41 I €. 1 �f I = Nw"' 1 yIT I 4 \�a'4j'y.9. y. f RxSx as P x P10 Glad a 9 THIRD FLOOR PLAN -SOUTH 9S THIRD FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL 10 SECTION - NORTH 12 SECTION SOUTH 12 ELEVATIONS NORTH & WESTtr) ILICC iii 44 22 BwL., F � 9 P ,} 4 ""• CO.. rooPo M If I,� �•8�. II II _ III 13 ELEVATIONS SOUTH 8 EAST 14 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NORTH - ELECTRICAL L - jc ��j,+\,`� pa \ B i1� hewA .(meq `�-, 4 I g'-"�€wx o` i� x e✓.a ACCESSIBILITY .Y 15 FIRST FLOOR PLAN SOUTH ELECTRICAL 16 SECOND FLOOR PLAN NORTH ELECTRICAL 17 SECOND FLOOR OORPLALAN- SOUTH - ELECTRICAL 18 THIRD FLOORP AN - NORTH - ELECTRICAL -FIRE SPRINKLER FDC AND PIV SHALL BE INSTALLED AWAY FROM BUILDING. RELOCATE WITHIN AREA OF CLOUD. ` \� ^3 ,1 HANDICAPPED PARKING sc 19 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - SOUTH - ELECTRICAL SIGN 4, BOTH FDC AND PIV SHALL HAVE THEIR Ig ® ( ' 4w ---i' m _ , .9r1 .; - OWN 4'X4' CEMENT PAD AROUND EACH. 2018 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE "' �� ® 1 •- / BUILDING ADDRESS - A FIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE WITHIN 50' NOTES (14181) INSTALLED ABOVE TREE r- OF THE FDC. NO UNDERGROUND TANKS WITHIN FIRE LANES. • J LINE AND VISIBLE FROM FIRE DEPT CONN FDC FACING FIRE ACCESS ROAD/SOUTH. INTERURBANTO RE 60,00 A H IN I EUHBAN AVe. e. LOCATION: 14181 INTERURBAN AVE.SOUTH ZONE: RCH — —LOCI FIRE HYD NT ---��---- Q 0 OCCUPANCY: B/U/R-2 - � '- __ /�— CONSTRUCTION: VA SPRINKLERED 251.4' PARCEL:3365901470/1480/1505/1515 LEGAL DESCRIPTION:'• ` lll. . »`` ` `-•. »..- »C..�.`�..� I I PARCEL B OF CITY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L03-019, RECORDEDJULYO1, 2003 UNDER RECORDING NO. � T LL ` aWO C'= ■ `� / • �..•C� � ` �I `� ` • R ` 20030701900003, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON;'• • L t T ...�; yS 10 • '� TOGETHER WITH PARCEL A OF CITY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENO. ADJUSTMENT `I, • J I 2x.00 ��G117444 890 ��i 0 yAIC CLE P • • agOISP x:.20 ',' 1I Q L03-019, RECORDED JULY 01, 2003 UNDER RECORDING NO. LL I AVO ELEV L� 20030701900003, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH LOT 25, BLOCK 15, HILLMAN'S SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO vi SM m .2 10 0 _ _ _ _ / s 96'-0' \V 23-0" I, 6...6. o 4 S' ACES 900L00E (' 8 THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24, EXCEPTRECORDS THOEFSOUTHWESTERLYTAHALFGTON; n s, - /r 14INTERURBAN AAI � NN1 INTERUR000 — // r 39-5" / rlla fI - a H 3 g AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN W. MARGINAL WAS, AS f CONVENED BY INSTRUMENTS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 995857, I \ I \ \, �/ % --LANE FlR J _ E/ I r�I—�— /- if N , 990090 AND 988203 AND CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT / CAUSETOGETHER01; AND / TPORT ON WITH THAT PORION Of LOT 26, BLOCK I5, HILLMAN'S SEATTLE GARDEN / r - I 1 -+� I ---_____-� J L-} - 1'I I / 1 1' PROPOS -Hum-_ c 11L UM H PIREunE EXIST NG HANDICAP SPACES M TH SIGNS A �--/ r,/ %.. i>«Dus D 5 � - .i — T .— ,�—,�_ yN8 1LL �. TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF ., 1 *\ L l PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS 7 FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT HE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF REITZ AVENUE, NOW /f//_ ./4//...- T�---__------L-�/I — Mx I II Ous rF � P 1 A � uc \ r/ —' = --,,. ..1_1::.14 -J l _' .41 --- .0 •• ` LL ` ` ` ` ` • ` R006-11-20 INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH, AND THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT 26; Y THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT IN A SOUTHWESTERLY f/ ✓tC&? • _ — — -$ -9 _ ' 1 _ _�'"i •� � - y • • •. • • • • 81 10-20-20 DIRECTION 129.425 FEET; 1 —, — .— / t- THENCE AT 9 GFIT ANGLES NORTHWESERLYDRECTIONOTOAID HEOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID ITESECION WITH THEOTINA 1•.� •`•LL•LLx•••• SS 4 _ .- _ � _.$-_ • ,— -- - �-c+ •yam-� 4-t ,. — T• • MUMINAaf-�y "ppn - •� • • • • • » • •••• • • • ` R201-21-21 SOUTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF MAIN STREET NOW 58 TM AVENUE SOUTH; _ e3 122.6' .4 » » . `. , 150.0' 83 03-2421 THENCE ALONG SAID MARGIN OF MAIN STREET AND ALONG THE MARGIN OF REITZ AVENUE, NOW INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON FOR ROAD PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED UNDER PROPOSED FILL EXISTING —US RETENTION PIPE AND rs-TANK MIXED USE BUILDING SWALE 1000, EXISTING LUMINAIRE R404-28-21 8510-12-21 R610-19-21 RECORDING Na 088203; WITH STRUCTURAL FILL AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY RECYCLE ExISTIrvG PARKING SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 700399 FOR STATE ROAD NO. 181. PARKING REQUIRED RESTAURANT: 24 STANDARD RESTAURANT HANDICAP. 2 SITE PLAN EXISTING LUMINAIRE EXISTING RESTAURANT L19-0077 MIXED-USE INDOOR:13 1"=20'-0" MIXED-USE OUTDOOR,6 NORTH MIXED-USE HANDICAP: 2 RECEIVED 10/25/2020 TOTAL: 46 T PROPOSED OCCUPANT LOAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MIXED-USE BUILDING: 48 A4 B:3 OCCUPANTS 0-2:45 OCCUPANTS ACCESSIBLE UNIT NUMBER 203 - ALL OTHERS TYPED • PROVIDE 2X6 BACKING FOR GRAB BARS AT ALL BATHROOMS 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE ±.I - 63 64 c ea SHOULD T1:11--ErE W,r3 4� 48" MIN? 1s-0." 2P -o• 2r.U^ 16.-0" 304 Q 01 I I I I II I I � 03 ■ _! TENANT _ m -s �i TOILET L---- �I®-''� 1 �, co ��� HANDICAP TOILET- 18" SEAT HEIGHT- t (� t 1b -o^ s' -a' mII GRAB BARS -36" HIGH- /�/ L $ °°" `\ L j OI{ET i \\ . 42"LONG@SIDE- � o �. -------- -1 i , \ rj 1 i -- i , 36" LONG@BACK O cv k�-�, I - my BATH B` TH I 13 $7i`1 8 %, rift L 1- 2 �- ry ry r -� --- �� - - 9 - .............. Im ---- -r------ --- �._ I— �� HANDICAP VANITY - • 1 1 2------------3--- d-------- 5 Z Q �Q;] Z - 0 34"RIM HEIGHT -R b 'x i���r Q 29" CLEAR UNDE Ems."ATOR �--- ' q ------------------------->-- _ - - ---�--INSULATEDPIPES- - I 1 ti .Q K I' 1 - ENLARGED BATHROOM PLAN v2'=1.0 T i PRIVATE GARAGE i 0 1 21Y 2 8 3 30)4 ,; g B 7 8 9 10 11 12 ! 13 z�YDIAIPS.pa sA. P PRMKtER Si 13'-0" 14'-0' \ r rz 1111 $ n a a / f / „ T 5---�=-s-I b on ?-------------- ----------- ------------ --------------i-- -- a :asp v L !LT 5 ra Z., o 7. .._. .._--._..- R010-20-20 �\ I R201-21-21 �/ u RETENTION R302-11-21 0410-20-21 I PIPEANNTIONK BATH FIXTURE ELEVATIONS FIRST FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL 1r TMNaR L19-0077 RECEIVED 11/09/2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5...J 5 65 66 16•-0" zr-0' 6'-0' 10•-0^ I 10'-0' 6'-0' 1 T 1 C3++ \ \ 9B5 WE. - 44 r LAING Dw6f LIVING DINING� BEDROOM L. THC — I1 iI I► emu 11■ r 7. swan MIAMI MAIM MM. II IMAM !NON B.F.BFI BMSrDi Q �m est �— I 1 r� a. LI J. 8806006 m I KITCHEN µp I to 111 E.,01_11 111 111 I Q DINING MO BEDROOM DINING LIVING DINING BATH N 3 Y CO—Ill E �/ f �\ a - . - Imo' BEDROOM - - -- -- 11 BEDROOM I® ME 3 g I m 2 0, n - zse s.8. z se0 F. Deck asB SR. RO 10-20-20 SECOND FLOOR PLAN — OVERALL ,.6"-,'-0• __,..-'--____ NORTH L19-0077 RECEIVED 11/09/2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �%% J 67 68 0 0 0 El B6 D" ifi' D" 2T-0" K 8'-0114] 10'-0"10'-0" K ,r 6'-01/4" x ?) I 1-1-I 0 44 BEDROOM s . ss sr. BED ROOMm �r I O = I \ Q pIIII EDRO II LIVING DINING LIVING DINING BEDROOM 4. r- BATH EN-R ME — ELEVATOR —F— ❑ _ 61 ' EXIT am CORRIDOR ea sr. cocc. !p 36:6 _OS ,14I BKITCHEN TM o yI1 KITCHEN ---J f 44C C3 Ol BEDROOMLIVIt, 1 GI DINING BEDROOM BEDROOM J DINING [ IyvriNG 1 BEDROOM ¢ n Z F $ 0. - L N J \ - 0 LI 2 s . Sr �____ 7 (1 I I 1 1 R010-20-20 12-22-20 ®I O THIRD FLOOR O PLAN - OVERALL O ve•=r-o' O ®R1 0 _� NORTH L19-0077 RECEIVED 11/09/2021mt COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �j J. 6• 70 TYPICAL FLOOR - CEILING TYPICAL INTERIOR PARTITION TYPICAL EXTERIOR PARTITION GA FILE NO. FC 5121 PROPERIETARY 1 HOUR FIRE 50 T054STC SOUND GA FILE NO. WP 3243 GENERIC 1 HOUR FIRE 50 TO54STC SOUND GA FILE NO. WP 8105 GENERIC 1HOUR FIRE "' i GYPSUM WALLBOARD,GYPSUM SHEATHING,WOOD STUDS 'A WOOD TRUSSES STRUCTURAL PANELS EXTERIOR SIDE : One layer 48" wide 5/8' Type X gypsum sheathing applied parallel y .WOOD .04050M6FLOOR TOPPING CHANNELS, GALSS BATT OR LOOSE FILL �1 to 2x wood studs l6"O>C. with l-3/4' galvanized roofing nails 4' o.c. �"i ,RESILIENT INSULATION,CEILING DAMPER, GYPSUM WALLBOARD �� GYPSUM WALLBOARD,RESLIENT CHANNELS,MINERAL,OR GLASS 4 �,���y'',.,, „I NNW at vertical joints and T'O.C. intermediate studs and top and bottom Joints of sheathing may be left unimtetl. FIBER INSULATION,WOOD STUDS �.���-U.�1 plates. gypsum Exterior cladding to be attached through sheathing to studs. Base layer of 5118" properietry type x gypsum wallboard applied at right angles to ������ �� �� ��� INTERIOR SIDE: One la 5/8" X Il board,water-resistant THICKNESS: Vanes layer type gypsum wall gypsum on resilient furring channels 12" batt with 1" Type s dry wall screws 8' n allowed No limit wool insulation overall thickness of glass batt,loasefill brood • 000009bbard,orgypsum veneer base applied p04101orat right APProx.Weight:]psf ing a 23/32' 50 23/32 when applied directly over gypsum board. Wood busses s1 right wood structural lsubfloor, Ion edges T&, applied at riht angles to trusses Appro ceiling weight 3psf pane g e g g g 9 with construction adhesive and 6d ring shank nails 12" batt A 145/32" Fire Test : UL R 41196.04NK25585,type wood structural panel 2" gib a merit applied aver subfloor. 1-15-05,4]86440611.6.6-14 Sound tested with 3 1/2" glass batt Insulation , carpelpadding as well as vinyl flooring. UL Design 15]4 V Optional ceiling damper (refer to manufacturer UL Design M508UL far information on the type of damper). UL Design L528 PROPRIETARY GYPSUM BOARD Sound Test :RAL TL08-310,1031.08 RAL TLOB311,1031.08 Resilient channels 24' O.C. studs 16" with l-116"Tri llboard or gypsum veneer stud 5 tlrywall screws B" batt studs 3" mineral or glass fiber Opposite side; one layer 5/8" applied padlel or at right angles 0.0915" sh to eiag64"heatls,T Vertical joints staggered 24° attached at right angles to ONE SIDE 2 x wood baseaywall screws. One layer 5/8"typexgypsum base applied at right angles to channels with 1" with vertical joints located midway between insulation in stud space. Type x gypsum board or gypsum veneer base to studs with 6d cement coated nails, 1-]B" long o.c' on opposite sides.(LOAD-BEARING) THICKNESS: Approx. Weight' Fire Test : Sound Test: 53/8" ] sf P Based on UL R14196, 05N005377,2-15-05, Design U309 NRCC TL -93-703, IRC -IR -]61,3-98 angles to studs with 6d coated nails, 1-7/8" Iong,0.0515" shank, Fire Test: Based on UL R 4196, 1/4"heads,]" o.c. (LOAD BEARING) 05NK05371,2-15-05, UL Design U309 Sound Test: NRCC TL -93-103, IRC -IR -]61,3-98 E STAG '� V }1 .� L American gypsum company LLC...............FireBloc® Type C Gypsum Board IIC & Test : (RAL 40 sheet 039,1 (640868-039,10-31-08; (640&P) RALINO&040,10-31-08; I Ill y -- _- ,I I Q } P Parent_ 2 H 111 11 '..111111111 1_ �. Plate_II -VVVV\/\,\/�������� M • �! PE GY 5/8 •uJar..ao.a-r•r_� ROOF @ 2. ROOFINSULATION � 24' 0... F TRUSSES 7"^"•""a�M '. _ - - _ 1/2"PLSULATION 1/2" PLYWOOD IL, R- 1/2 i:• WOOD i��, .. BUILT-UP ROOFING i m -: -_ H BE�rs -alai 'X' ' 5/8" TYPE GYP.BD. 2x4 STUDS ®i6"O.C. / \ EL' .1 ERIC C1 R-11 INSULATION• 314s.G PL •: RESILIENT CHANNELS @ 'X'GYP.B.D. 4" • FL4l TERS CSS S`alnAIMss r_ m Q SEETYPE GA SEE GA FILE ND.WP 3243 518 112 u1iP '' P. N. 000 i� _ _ tThird Third �� j-- PALMA! L- 1111111,1111 IVVVV\VVVV SII '\/\/\1/\/\/\/ /\/` re 1 cq 5/8"TYPE '%'GVP.BD. RESILIENT CHANNELS O 12° C.C. _- - H 3 FLOOR TRUSSES ( 16" O.C. __ g R-11 INSULATION L, ^� m m 3 4 L' 9/4'T.&G. PLYWOOD 1/2" —ill _ N i -b�', SE GA FILE NO.FU5121 GA FILE I i ,q1 & 2xSs—LL 2x FLOR-3 •S-5 - SSE' ••smw. � FACE MOUNTED ALUM. _- -- I 'Y40 : -- POSTS & RAILS W/ TEMPERED GLASS Second RE @ \ ,■ R006-11-20 Second — !� 5/8"ik •a'�I-- I plummy _A/.6-11. Rt 10-20-20 /I[ \/ \/ V/ P/ \/ VP/ - \d -./nIV V W/ �w// V/ \/ l \/ V/ lrV - R212-22-20 518' TYPE 'X' GYP.BO. 5/8" TYPE'X GYP.BD. ir RESILIENT CHANNELS ®12"C.C. FLOOR TRUSSES Q 16` O.C. R -3O INSULATION 3/4"T.BG. PLYWOOD r p 2x6 STUDS@16'O.C. R-21 INSULATION 1/2" PLYWOOD iSNF ER J ' ap s uuM.iJSE Conatus = = -_ - E .J: 4'., ill' UNGA FILE YMENTNO.FU5 SEE GA FILE NO.FU5121 I o "" -_ —I—I-- � % 6" FOUNDATION WALL 8"x4'-0° FOOTING 2k4 BARS CONT. -TOP == Il ': R8'TYPE'%CHANNEL. 2x6 STUDS@ 16" 0.LS®26"O.C. 4"CONC.SLAB 2x6 STUDS (} 16" O.C. 6 MIL VAPOR BARRIER R-21 INSULATION ,1! S . 5"0 6101 6MI 4"P . SLAB W/ ULATION `POR BAR' GRAVEL ='R -• 012'O.C.B.W— #4 BARS CONT: BOTTOM #4 BARS 012°0.C. 2%6 P.T. PLATE 5/8"0 A.BOLTS@68"0.C. 4 PER GRAVEL 518 TYPE X GVP B D $ I First SEE GA FILE NOWP 3243 ( l IVy re onuo GRADE e w L 9- 077 @I.. �c b b RECEIVED "11/19021 SECTION - NORTH - FRONT I= : I 3/&'_1.-0. �� 2-0' k 2 °" aOMMUNITY 1 6.$. / DEVELOPMENT ELEVATOR SHAFT u'5 -,u 71 72 TYPICAL FLOOR - CEILING TYPICAL INTERIOR PARTITION TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL GA FILE NO. FC 5121 PROPERIEfARV' 1 HOUR FIRE 50 TO54STC SOUND GA FILE NO. WP 3243 GENERIC 1HOUR FIRE 50 TO GA FILE N0. WP 3243 SOUND GENERIC 1 HOUR FIRE st ¢— WOOD TRUSSES , WOOD STRUCTURAL TOPPING RESILIENT CHANNELS, PANELS ,GYPSUM FLOOR GALSS BATT OR LOOSE FILL GYPSUM WALLBOARD,GYPSUM SHEATHING,WOOD STUDS INSULATION,CEILING DAMPER, GYPSUM WALLBOARD __ ■ of Base int 12" typethgypsumType wallboard applied 8t right angles to / //F�\ % GYPSUM WALLBOARD,RESLIENT CHANNELS, MINERAL 0R GLASS ��������� FIBER INSULATION,WOOD STUDS II�„aok I'p ���1,1��/� EXTERIOR One layer 48" wide 5/B"Type Xgypsum sheathingappliedparallel to. wood studs 16'0xC. with 1-3/4" galvanized roofing nails 4"e.c. ��. furring channels n overall thickness ssba.wNm7"Tor erall thickness of glass batt,loose wall inewseon al N011mit till or mineral wool Insulation allowed O �/X\/YV'V�\/ __I,�,_ at vertical joints and?"O.C. intermediate studs and top and bottom Joints of sheathing may be left unrated. when applied directly over gypsum board. Wood trusses snow-Ming1r:ghl a 23/32" _ X1.1.,1,1/. plates . gypsum Exterior cladding to be attached through sheathing to studs. I1 wood structural I subfloor, longedges with construction adhesive and 6d ng wood structural panel underlayment applied Sound tested with 3 12" glass batt insulation Optional ceiling damperthe 3/ (refer to manufacturer for information on the type of damper). PROPRIETARY GYPSUM American gypsum company LLC...............FoeBloc®Type T&g, applied at right angles to trusses shank nailsp12" o,c. A 145/32" over subfloor. F/re T ceiling weight : 3ps1 cerpeLpatlding as well as vinyl flooring. Fire Test : UL R05,478 44NK25585, 1-15-05,4786440611,66-14 UL Design 1574 UL Design 8508 BOARD UL Design L528 Sound Test : RAL TL083l0,10-31.08 CGypsum Board RAL TL08311,10-31.08 IIC&Test : (40 sheet vinyl) RAL IN08-039,1031-08; (64C &P) RAL IN08-040,10.31-08; Resilient channels 24" O.C. attached at right angles to ONE SIDE 2 x wood er-resistant gypsum studs 16" ac with 1-1/4" Type S drywall screws. One layer 5/8" type x gypsum INTERIOR SIDE: One layer 5/8" type Xsum Ceum wall baseboaapplied wallboard or base applied at ri ht an to channels with i' anglbaxces /0 studsboardor gypsum veneer applied pedlel or at right gypsum veneer pp ie g angles angles to studs with 6d coated nails, 1-7/8" Iong,0.0915" shank, type S drywall screws 8" o.c. with vertical joints located midway between studs 3" mineral or glass fiber insulation in stud space. 1/4" heads,r o,c. (LOAD BEARING) Opposite side; one layer 5/8" Type x gypsum board or gypsum veneer base applied pedlel or at right angles to studs with 6d cement coated nails, 1-7/T long THICKNESS: 5318" THICKNESS ,0.0915" shank,15/64"heeds,7' 0.0. Appmx.Weight:7pst Approx.Weight Vertical joints staggered 24' on opposite sides.(LOAD - BEARING) Fire Test : Based on UL 614196, Fire Test 05NK05371,2-15-05, UL Design U309 Sound Test: NRCC TL -93-103, Sound IRC -IR -761,3-98 : 53/8" : 7psf : Based on UL R14196, 05NK05371,2-15-05, UL Design U309 Test: NRCC TL -93-103, IRC -IR -761,3-98 ORSTAt V 14 -C L Q TYPICAL DECK - CEILING FILE NO. FC 5120 GENERIC 1 F RER STC TO 54GA 50SOUND r WOOD JOISTS,GYPSUM WALLBOARD,RESILIENT CHANNELS, • GALSS FIBER INSULATION One layer 1/2" type X base ;� -1'1� IIIIIM 1 I_ Parapet J gypsum wallboard right angles to resilient channels 24"o.c. or gypsum veneer applied at with 1" type S drywall screws 8" o.c. �Y AFAVA�� F,V,��VLt1�� a at ends and 12 t intermidiate furring located midway b tw continuous channels channels Gypsum board end joints andattached b additional AQP► �! AW. RPM, /4 c 4 of channel 64 g with screws 8" o.c pieces Resilient channels applied at 5ght angles Q�A�'u �M�ryi�i�i.'aoea%��1�CQ���2����1��`,�1���ry���e��S�1��������i�A )I �����919���i. Plate " L. to 2012 wood jests l6 ao with gd coated nisi ]/8 long 0085 shank 1/4"heads,— 'X _ 0 } two per joist. Wood supporting 5/8 interior 3/8" 1.5 3-1/2" plywood with exterior glue subeoor and Approx,ceing weight: 21st insulation friction fit in Fire Test : FM FC -181, 8-31-72 FACE MOUNTED ALUM. 5/T TYPE GYP.BD. POSTS & RAILS W/ 2%6 STUDS Q 16' O.0 5/8"TYPE'X'GYPBD. ' ROOF TRUSSES @ 24" O.0 1/ 'X' pantie board, psi, glass cavities supported alternate) 12" y evey fiber belts, 0.7 pct joist by rc b rods and resilient channels. TEMPERED GLASS R-21 INSULATION R-38 INSULATION 55 5/8' TYPE GYP.BD. 1 2X4 STUDS @16'0.0 alai Sound tested with carpet and pad and Sound Test :G&HOG-3Mi, 10.13-71 with insulate/ stapled with joist. IIC&Test :GBH &P) G&H OC3MT, 10-13-71 I 1/2 PLYWOOD BE FELT BEVEL SIDING } 1/2 PLYWOOD BUILT-UP ROOFING 1/2" UNDERLAYMENT 3/4"T.&G. PLYWOOD FLOOR TRUSSES @ 16" 0.'4 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. 5/8" TYPE 'X' 16'0.. 2X4 STUDS @ 16' 0.C. R-11 INSULATION m R ` Q r S43 5fO0eln00 • IBamant .' R 11 INSULATION RESILIENT CHANNELS 1)OC. RESILIENT CHANNELS @ 24" O.C. 5/8" TYPE ' X' GYP.BD. Dain Owe =II FRbIststftaWribric 5/9" ' GYP.BD. SEE GA FILE NO. WP 3243 - m D�rim���g '' \\ ' j! I I I I \ GA SEE GA FILE NO.FC 5121 " Third \ Ex13 49yRUa AEA — I f \'' E1vi9MgHM 1 I ���������I luiulual ���������������V���I iNagl IIII auwuleluiu 1 . , /, I I��c�e��kitti���'�h�`t��23��� �i��e����������+i���s�e�a����.4��'����o�� % \ N �1 ei���i' ��.��v��i� �� �������te �I�tiN\« \ ld tif b 3 m�mr - 1 ' 5/8' TYPE X GYP BD 5/8 TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. g LL N x--'~--_-' --.-„ BESIL 1 ' `'@ .0 2X4 STUDS @16"O.0 111111 ixiarrS,@m ATION run vmm 1/4" -0 5/8" TYPE DC GYP.BD, Igr-ZrIT'(•— U.T.S.lL V4"T.&_ 4LvmnmDnC 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. m n y. �jcr..-. 1 i"mmNlxM nxrntN 2X1 STUDS OC. . 8006-11-20 � } LAST 4CRIC COATNG _ r TI N R11 INSULATION R1 10-20-20 INSTALLATION PER 16440,407 '1 8 4�P7 �' 5/8" TYPE GYP.BD. @ O tl� M JF TIR BEE GA FILE NO.WP3243 Second , ROOF R rico NO SCALE �u h AAAI iiO�i�i�i�i���i�i�d��iti�iA�iti�A► y �y�¢iri�P��e�Jik��k i . is eititlitaWAYINHVRAVINIATRi NM — 5/8" TYPE DC GYP.8D. 11 INSULATION N RESILIENT CHANNELS 12" aa ' RESILIENT CHANNELS 12" O C, �1n 2 2X1 E/LAj• . ., u IG E 1/4 11-0 I @ 2X12 JOISTS Q 16" O.C. R-303/4"INSULATION — Q FLOOR TRUSSES @ 16" O.C, APPLY 6" ADHESIVE FLASHING TAPE TO MOUNTING FLANGE& SHEATHING -SILL FIRST -JAMBS 8" FOUNDATION WALL MIMIMI PLYWOOD 1/2"UNDERLAYMENT_ / 1' 3/4'TINSULATI PLYWOOD 1/2"UNDERLAYMENT SECOND - HEAD LAST 8.x2.-0. FOOTING SEE GA FILE NO.FC 5120 ' SEE GA FILE NO.FC 5121 N I 2 94 BARS CONT. -TOP 3it4BARS BOTTOM 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. 2X4 STUDS 1fi" O.C. II II I �/� �•I 12 0 N4 BARS @ 1r O.C. 2X4 PT PLATE _ VAPOUR BARRIER 5/8"m A. BOLTS @ 48" 0,0, — @ 1/r PLYWOOD 159 FELT 1 —5'CONC. SLAB W/#46ARS @12"O.C.E.W 6 MIL VAPOR BARRIER 4" PER GRAVEL .t • 1'�v7—�Q77 LAPPED OVER TAPE BEVEL SIDING . I 'R e T� t F p. 2021 2 LLL 1 1 WINDOW FLASHING NO SCALE SECTION - SOUTH - REAR —UNITY EVELOPMENT 74 75 rgrarx— —fi t -N exicn,wnnF - - III ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ �■ ■ ■ r� D ,�xI� — aw ,wx AE _ I =; IID L. THORSTAI .c u - a lUI[ ]I®C' ii' ■■ p _ = Q plONE VENEER — STONE, WHISKER CREEK LACE n I I I I 0 I I I I axtl —IIII 906 51189^'5! DA F,40 Way. WA 98003 (253) 991-9880 NORTH ELEVATION - FRONT ,•_,•-0 • N wnRE _ \ I @ aE��x—• Extlxtlwx 800&11 20 Oe �xbsFa I� R110-2020 BENJAMIN M.P.,' �E DECK RAILING. �/ P 8212-22 20 LAN O.v vex 1 ewi WITrre / 1 tlNE wxlSx[T I� 80020.127 . ■ 1 7 L19-0077 __ r w'��"■sa�_ II■�Y� I ■ L esoxo REGEIVEO 10/25/2020 li- I—� I I e[rv�u•+wo Moo �x. cxeuc sx wx COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — NORTH CREEK BROWN "ARO GARAGE WEST ELEVATION - SECOND FRONT ,••_,•.tl. METAL""x"°°°" IN 12 BENJAMIN 6 7 a� RAx11��T 75 76 77 rgr ITIZEMOW N ma REGISTERED ) AREIIITECT Of WAVING, gITNATMILTYMirr _..I, CORBEL „ru ' •UIII. — IU 1 ITOTRW°H'Er iMli 1 1 1 =0 --. — — — BRIGHT WHITE II II II L.) V, TgAggTE'°" /ZC 44.1- 1-- -c- , SEME VENEER ST0NE WHISKEY CHEEK — -6- NIMI IN NMI - _ 2 Tall Pg. A I • I i I = Nil 1- —W i r g 1 SEVEL 5113ING rrItITRETIC'ERE7OWN )AVIL SOUTH ELEVATION - REAR .Q1 1 :,,, 1 M ME----- 1AllhIILill. •MIIE /— 17=rvoRni _ , _ GHEE% BROWN RO 0611 20 BENJAMIN I R1 10 20 20 MOORE cwurru VLACE R212 22 20 re"Oclir" R3 0627 21 ''' R410 20 21 A n"LTZ. BRIGKVVNITE --- MEIN - MEM == isiliii 1-Wir- o .- _ mr STONE VENEER ..,1, o STONE WHISKEY GREEN 'ITLIGLE'STAAE L19-0077 — arr.*....t....6,4rScs....- 4i RECEIVED 10/25/2020 BEVEL SONG 111r 1111 --Lir.g COMMUNITY ..... ..&.. 1111 1 DEVELOPMENT = --„ - , _. , . , :. : „ -,,,,-- -- -,•-iu:4:..- "Ita q 1.4 k, , ,,,,, LJ_ , NOR, CREEK BROWN EAST ELEVATION - SIDE MEIN GARAGE DOOR 1 3 TIIT61 77 78 L19-0077 RECEIVED 11/09/2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 79 80 L19-0077 RECEIVED 11/09/2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 81 82 curb cut TENANT TENANT PARCEL D GARAGE ATRTNUIrOr LOCATIONS 7... PARCEL C 1/8"= 1,01 123.55' (NEW) 18 24 feet NORTH WM •on EXISTING BUILDING #14201 PARCEL B CALLIAN() RESTAURANT MATCH LINE 99.94, 83 9616 Avenue S u. 4W -0A5 9128 .0930 GALLIANO LLC TUKWILA, WA 98168 o �ngetioe o ✓? �c4 CID. THOMAS LANG 98178 DRAWN BY. CHECKEll BY L 3.1 84 MATCH LINE TG IRRMA„DN TO REMAIN. HANDICAP RAMP 16 24 feet vs. = 1. -CC NORTH zomzwonv WITH 2 HIGH CHARACTERS: FINISHED GRADE. IKITIIIIITIIIII f= .II ,. VALVE AS w1 ..�` �\ °PLE. LENGRI AS REG. �i MONKum= : . MO STAINLESS STEEL CLAMPS. 1/2"PV STE.IPE. TEHL1E PVC SCH 50 PvC SCHEME 80 w;L:r SCHEDULE 80 OQUICK COUPLING VALVE IN BOX F.,R-F..DUtoea. O TRENCHING DETAIL mameLlec 328408.78.02 VALVE SCHEDULE IRRIGATION SCHEDULE MHER F,T1. PSI( POC PRECIP lo Spray Hunter POV-1010 1" Shrub Spray 8.8E 34.07 47.50 4 HunMr Hunter vinic 1" Turf Spray 31.. 8. Hunkr PCZ -101-26 1" Area for DriplIne 35.02 40.23 0.061* Ot zrun O 0Iu N GVA 0CM04250654l1 0 Os2HxaMALE 222210RS(„ Os MAINLINE PIPE PER PLAN ® 2..5E2 DRAN ROCK lO GEOTECHNICAL CLOTH ® grt V NEAT ODCVA IN VALVE BOX NTs 32840S 46-01 01 STANDARD VALVE 806 FINISH GRADE 03 REMODEMOTEL CONTPERPUN VALVE ROL WATERPROOF CONNECTORS (2) 45 18-24° COILED WIRE 0 SOH 80 T.O.E NIPPLE MMN UNE PIPE & FITTINGS 0® BRICK SUPPORTS (4) 09 3/4" MINUS WASHED GRAVEL 10 PVC SLIP UNIONS 11 GEOWRATECPUP HNSIDICALES CLOTH - 12 4' CLEARANCE BETWEEN VALVE AND GRAVEL 02 REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH UNIONS NTN 32840E.,3.M SYMBOL fli®® MANUFACTUREWMODEL/DESCRIPTION Hunter PROS-04-PRS30 10' tea Turf Spray, ay,30 regulated 40" Up. Co -molded wiper seal with UVam Material. Hunter PROS.00-PRS30 5' radius Slvt=, 30 pLizg=a6..O.Po,Up. Co -molded wiper Hunter PROS-06-PRS30 8' radius Shrub na30 pelt regulated 6.0.Po>Up. o-maeed*, Saalw H unter PROS.06-PRS30 10' miles Hunter PROS06-PRS30 12' radius Shrub Spray, 30 psi regulated 6.0" Popup. Co -molded Mper Hunter Adj m ®®O ® O OSaeal with u0Re psi regulate ualtebl0 Am p. Co -molded MP. SYMBOL MANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTION • Hunter PC2-101.25 Dim Control Valve Kt PGV globe valve wilb HY100 fitter 1s GPM150tem m sMinle0yeel 10005GPM ta OO Hunter 10, box, wIth PLD-BVHunter PLD -BV- V, bed insert. Install in t blank oanual r cobra w gtoextendval.e out of valve box. Hunter ECO -10 S6°-110: .510M1060P ngMeasure. Area to Receive Drip!. wwbl gw/ GPH emitters at 12. o.c. Check valve, deM wl0 gray s50400 Ddpine laterals spaced at apart wlm aminerS offset lw triangular pattem where possible. Install* HuMer PLD barbed or PLD -LOC Maga. Area to Receive DrIpline Hunter H0L-09-12-CV Check valve, dark Mown tuhlng w/ Mack x2124 emitters o.C.pattern. Install with HurMr PLO barbed or PLD -LOC Minos. SYMBOL MANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTION • Hunter Plastic EleMCRemote Control Valve, tor Rgleentl Wgbt Commercial a Female NPT Inlet/OMNI. Globe • Hunter Quick coupler • g Ree, yellow locking rubber cover, red Mem en, ebinless steel. v. 3/4" NPT In. 2 -piece body. MatemNorce 75g Brass Shut Off Ball Valve.... to C. Two Piece Body. Blow -ON Proof Stem, Chrome Plated Soli, Brass Ball, Threaded, with PTFE Seats. Same eke as mainline pipe. Double Check Bao.prevention. VT t0 z ▪ Hunter PC -400I wlm(Op PCM -300 moduCommercial Residential Controller, le wbon expanded aonwller. 120 VAC, Indoor model • Hunter MINI-CLIK Rain sensor, mount as noted on Hunter HER -075-25 Miter and Regulator Combo Kit. 3/4. MPT In,. x FPT outlet filter with 150 mesh stainless steel screen. Pressure regulated at 25 PSI. Use to connect drip line areast adjece spray zones. Application rates are Mmrlar. MI Water Meterl Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Class 200 SOR 21 IrtlgatIon MalnlIne PVC Schedule 40 Pipe SM.. Duct. Iron Pipe NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS DIAGRAMMATIC ONLY. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS IN FIELD. ADJUST EQUIPMENT LAYOUT TO SUR FIELD CONDITIONS AND SRE CONSTRAINTS. g NiniN°C"EaEDNTLLFLLINSALQEUNDEETONLY. SL ILANDAPDA oOWIIUY TLLIMITS U MNT ER PAVEMENTOUTSIDE PROJECT LIMRS. aASSUMPTIONS THE METER. VERIFY IN FIELD. NOTIFY H LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF AVAILABLE VOLUME IS LESS THAN THIS. AND IF THE PRESSURE BY MORE THAN IO PSI. g ST SPRINKLER ARC AND RADIUS AS NEEDED TO AVOID OVER SPRAT ONTO MARC }SU�R�FACES. WHILE MAINTAINING PLANT S LINE -1R INCLATERALS-1, SLEEVES -1B UNDER WAD<WA�'`y()s�`rrWryJJL COVERAGEDER 6. PROVIDE ,LATERAL. AND 6, VERTICAL SPACING BEVE 1515. T VEHICLE DRIVES. LMMEETTRAND IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LOCATIONS T.B.D. COORDINATE WITH OWNERS 1REPRESENTATIVE G4 MULR MTRAND AND IS OTHERTRADES. FOR USE. DESIGNATE TWO WIRES AS SPARES. Brooks K,M, LLC Lem., Architecture 961S 1.5t Avenue S ua igu4sa m°maPen o GALLIANO LLC TUKWILA, WA 98168 CID. THOMAS LANG 98178 4 SPAVIN BY. CHECKED BY L 3.2 86 CDTURF SPRAY FLEX ASSEMBLY PVC MAINLINE. TYPICAL OFFSET 2. FROM TP =12n1=111 Al zto, PER PLAN s. 1TPICAL LATERAL F DM PLPNTEO •I HEADER 6mDE CHARTHEAD.POLYETHYLENE OR PVC. UP LY SUE PER !Iuu END FEED EXAMPLE MIrriL,I,NE SPACING AS SPACING AS NOTED :InIZLAS16)5A.Or7LATEE' ORa S POSSIBLE. FLUSHING VALVE Ai EACH EXHA ST END. CENTER FEED EXAMPLE OTYPICAL HUNTER HDL DRIP LINE REQUIREMENTS SET CONTROLLER 60.EtBOVE EASBOLT CONTROLLER TAL >BACKUP E'E'ArscFGEG SPEa 1/E' DIAMETER RIGID RCE.PER INEL CONDUIT FOR 110 VAC STALL ELECASL FINISHED FLOOR, LONG SWEEP ELL. CCM VALVE 0 STANDARD Sox 0 KNISH GRADE 0 WATERPROOF CONNECTORS (_) T.0 E. NP�EIRe ©SCH ]O MAN LINE PwE FITTINGS 0 BRICK SUPPORTS 14) 0 26mm MINUS WASHED GRAVEL 0 PVC SLIP UNIONS OINTERIOR WALL MOUNT CONTROLLER FX IR.FX.CDNT,. O WIRED RAIN SENSOR TO WALL -MOUNT CONTROLNTS LER O CONTROL VALVE WITH FILTERNTS PLD MAXIMUM LENGTH OF SINGLE LATERAL (FEET) PLD GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR WATERING TIME DRIPPER SPACING 24. IR )G f LOW EC PH) 0.26 0.26 o. 127 109 86 65 120 91 152 25 427 325 256 194 604 459 361 274 458 345 35 539 409 322 244 763 579 456 346 580 440 45 618 469 369 280 877 664 397 666 506 PLD FLOW PER100 FEET 0 26 GPH DRIPPER 0.4 GPH DRIPPER 0.6 GPH DRIPPER 0.9 GPH DRIPPER OPH GPH GPM GPH M GPH GPM 2640 0.44 40.00 0 67 61.00 1 02 92.0 1 53 17.58 0.29 26.67 0 44 41.00 0.66 61.00 1 02 N/A N/A N/A N/A 31.00 0 51 46 00 0 77 SUPPLY AND EXHAUST HEADER SIZING CHART (UNLESS NOTED ON PLANS) STEP 3: LOCATE THE GPM THAT APPLIES FOR EACH UNIT OF 100 FEET LENGTH ON THE CHART rTECHLINE FLOW PERIN FEET, MULTIPLY THIS EIPM NUMBER TIMES 1HE UNITS 0,100 STEP a.8 ZRETLTATDEH Wn aLTO"= R.10. TO 20 GPM 11AV HEADER 20 TO 30 GPM IVY HEADER. TURF SHRUB GROUND COVER CLAY LOAM SANDY GUY LOAM SANDY DIPPER FLOW (GPU) 0 26 0.26 DRIPPER INTERVAL LATERAL (ROW) SPACING IS APPLICATION RATE (ry/HR) TIME TO APPLY 1/4 79-100 35-43 16-21 79-107 52-71 21-26 323413.76.0.1 LATERAL FROM TYPICAL SUPPLY Y uw HEADER J ISLAND LAYOUT IRREGULAR AREAS: TRIANGULAR SUP Y FADE XII VS OF 1HESE LATERAL AND LATERAL AGAINST COMPARE TO THE CH RT FOR cHART FOR MAX LATERAL LATE A IRREGULAR BRANCHING OUT JOINING LATERALS ODD CURVES LATERALS M.. LENGTH OF HUN. TYPICAL START CONNECTION ON SUPPLY HEADER SEE PARKING ISLAND TYPICAL LAYOUT TOP OF SLOPE. PVC SUPPLY HEADER CHANGEIINSTALLF UTGREGVALVES EVERY 5, IN ELEV. ONTOURS OF THE SLOPE ,r1.11110.14.701.'- MANUAL LINE FLUSHING VALVEGHAUST HEADER Tzr SPACING SLOPE FEED LAYOUT BOTTOM 1 /3 OF SLOPE: CONVENTIONAL SPAC1NGP 2514. 10. DIAMETER VALVE BOX COIL TO SO.OF DRIP TUBING IN THE BOX. .DRIIPTUBING 4. THICK LAYER OF WASHED GRAVEL THE BOX SHALL REST UPON THE ROCK BED. DO NOT EXTEND GRAVEL INT STANDARD VALVE BOX FINISH GRADE � PVC LATEFUL TO DRIP AREA fitgol • WASHED GRAVEL SUMP LEGEND: 0 ECU INDICATOR- ECOID ®Z LATERAL PIPE PER PLAN O FPI CONNECTION FROM LATERAL CJ4 BARB ELBOW O FLEX TUBING FINISHED GRADE IN TURF OT ADJACENT MULCH © FINISHED GRADE IN PLANTER BED 0 MARLEX STREET ELBOW 328413 56-01 ODRIP FLUSH VALVE -SUBSURFACE 3�,1 <aD1 O HUNTER HFR-OXX-XX FILTER REGULATOR NTS 326<,o.N6-D, O HUNTER ECO -INDICATOR NTS 32.11.01 87 LLC LiIKIKape 9515. Avenue S u i < sa mSmaPen GALLIANO LLC TUKWILA, WA 98168 OEEmi Ly 3 s a o . W/ DSD o � au•noa ,CID, THOMAS (ANG 98178 4 4 DRAWN BY. CHECKED BY L 3.3 88 SW—SE 14, T23N., R4E., W.M. SUMS FOR GALLIANO DEVELOPMENT 14201 INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH TUKWILA KING C9dil4Y, WASHINGTON SHEET 1 OF 2 SURVEYOR'S NOTES: 11' RHFNUNA21R0UHWOTESISRE AACL OML SE IEH INTEGRAL ELECTRONIC DISTANCE MEASURING METER (GEODIMETER 600) AND REAL TIME KINEMATIt MITI / STATIC IMI POSITRENTRAVER5RSMMEEETETHE 9TMATRCS°OENWACAR 332-130-090. 2) THE INTENT OF THIS SURVEY WAS TO LOCATE THE EXISTING BUILDING. 3) THIS SURVEY REPRESENTS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT CONDITIONS AS THEY EXISTED DECEMBER 23. 2019., THE DATE OF THIS FIELD SURVEY. DURINGED THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY NO EARTHWORK WAS BEING CONOUCE. FULE AM BEENAPLACEDR0NETI€ TITLEI REPORT OOMRE1P50E0366100NNTS TITLE I ° HIV INSURANCE C COMMITMENT 0 MIITMENiF ORDER AI F DATED ART 3.2020. NO DDITIONALRESEARCH HAS ATTEMPTED. w EASEMENTS OR RESERVATIONS WHICH MAY EFFECT THtS SITE. 4) 6) TNR PURPOSE OF 6HIS SURVEY IS TO PROVIDE EXISTING CONDITIONS F NGINEERING DESIGN. 7) BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON I5 FROM A PRIOR BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE PARCEL. LEGEND: -G- = GAS PAINT 0 = SANITARY SEWER CLEAN DUT(SSCOI WATER METER,WM) alATER VALVEIWVI = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOXIICB) -W- = WATER PAINT - = GUY WIRE ANCHOR(GWAI -P- = POWER PAINT X LIGHT BTANDARD(LBI SAN Sala GALLIANO CUCINA EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 4 E., W.M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON BASIS OF BEARING: C NORTH. BASED U N ITIONING SY M (GPS) LAMBERT GRID SEI NGTON STATE 61.' COUNTS COORDINATES. A APPLIED AT ANGLE OF . 'USED. ' COUNTERCLOCKWISE LEFTOEAST B UNS OF INEEERURBANHAVENUETS NNLASED. IN THE LEFT EAST BOUND LANE THE ORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1963/1991 (NAD 83/91) GRID CNORDINIRES WERE INVERSEYOFEBOTMBTHE2SEA/LEVE81LORRELTION FACTOR OF P 0H FACTOR OF 1.0000046]5 0000 NTGSCALE LIEDTOTHEGRIDCOORDINATES FOR SHOWN GROUND DISTANCES. VERTICAL DATUM: NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1986 MAYO BB) Gb oT PARCEL D TAX PARCEL 3365901,535 PAR EL C TAX PARCEL 3365901505 DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A PARCEL A OF CITY OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.2003019 900003. JULY 1. 2003. COUNTY, RECORDING N0. 20030)01900003. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL R: AUGCOROINBL00 THE PCITLMNIS 000000FETTLE ECGROEORTMNVORLUMES: 11 OF PLATS. PAGE 24. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. EXCEPT THE SOUTHWESTERLY HALF. WAY EA5EPT CONVEYEDPORTION INSTRUMENTS LYING ECOROEDTUROER MARGINAL RECORDING NO 99585), 990°90 AND 988203 ANO CONOEMNEO IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR CDURT CAUSE N0. 109001. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF LOT 26. BLOCK 15. HILLMAN, SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE E POINT OF INTERSECTION OF REIT2 AVENUE, NOW INTERURBAN VENUE SOUTH. NO THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF THENCELOT ALONG THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION 129.425 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTHEAST LINE OF SAID LOT IN NOR H ESTERLY DIRECTION TO HE INTERSECTAON WITH E SOUTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF MAIN STREET NOW 56TH VENUE SOUTH: THENCE ON6 SAID MARGIN OF MAIN STREET ANO ALONG THE MARGRN OF RFITZ AVENUE, NOW INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH. TO HE INT 0 BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED T9 KING COUNTY. NASHINGTON FOR ROAD PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED UNDER /CORDING N0. 968203: AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMNED TN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 00399 FOR STATE ROAD N0. 181. PARCEL PARCEL B TAX PARCEL 3365901480 14201 INTEPM9 N AVENUE SOUTH / / N \ \ N \ N\ \ N N N N CENTREINTE CwllsM lae.I.t 11203 29N Sir. &el, 805 - SLw,er, AA 03333 252-903-5924 mein 252-983-3850 tax 0 WOODS re¢xm N LARSON MAY 14. 2020 EXHIBIT 3934 Le SCALE: 1" = 10' L19-0077 RECEIVED - PLANNING 12)18)2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 90 GALLIANO CUCINA EXHIBIT A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 4 E., W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA, 10 20 SCALE: 1" = 10' 25 PARCEL B TAX PARCEL 3365901480 ALLIAND G 14201 INTERURBAN AVEMIE SOUTH o261p'2aao.:3. en LEGEND: - G- = GAS PAINT e SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT TSEFF WATER METER (WMI • WATER VALVEIWVI 0 = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOK(ICE) - W- WATER PAINT • = GUY WIRE ANCHOR(GWAI - P- POWER PAINT X = LIGHT STANOARDILS) ITE BENCHMARK: ELEVATION 25.5E FEET PARCEL A TAX PARCEL 3365901470 BENCHMARKS: RUC MBAR WITH CAP STOWED ..TER 44\O/ BASE. ING COUNTY CONTROL POINT YSMOOTH FOUND TACK IN LEAD IN 1 , IRON PIPE, INCASED LOCARED AT LEVATIONSE350 252FFEgH AVENUE SOUTH AND SOUTH 272ND STREET. GETLUSA NAIL IN ASPHALT. SOUTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ELEVATION: 25.56 FEET / HOUSE RECEIVED - PLANNING 12/18/2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTREINTE CwrsM tae./.L 11209 ram Street .4 805 - SLw,er, AA 00390 250-901-5924 mein 259-987-7859 tax oPem n 0 WOODS tmxm N LARSON MAY 14. 2020 TOPO 40 m 3934 • SW—SE 14, T23N., R4E., W.M. 13011T0 FOR GALLIANG DEVELOPMENT 14201 INTERURBAN AVENUE SOUTH 49KNI1441 KING C9IIY, WASHINGTON SHEET 2 OF 2 92 33 30 3.3 59 5.4 40 40 50 27 30 3.8 39 1 ala 3.4 0 1.3 3a 2s 3, 99 2.3 J as .5 0. .t 5. 2 2 . s *0 3s 81 33 83 i 4 3.0 b.s 5..0 2C8.0 3z 3.3 i51A Mylt �z 'tis 3s bJ e '3.t ,.4�z.i en�3.o 3z as 34 z e 50 ss 3.2 5.8 is 1.1 51 5.8 5.2 s 50 5s 3'0 b0 3., 3.0 37 3.4 2.0 as a.s z.9 5s 5m 3.0 i.s }.a 5.; 4e 50 a.0 50 15 3.s 55 32 s 1z 3 5.3 51 30 3 30 s 12 3.9 3., �i.5 ‘----5.0-5.s _b.__3.s 3.0 59 5.0 801 5.3 b.s - 3 4 3e b.e 14z 42 sz as .28 3a 3.5 3n 59 3.4 33 3.0 ''s 30 3 30 <z 5.115..3:: 3s .2.3 �3.i 3.8 '4 3.s 59 3.6 8 ...13 5.6 34 3s 3.2 3.3 1.0 fIKelOLOWER 25 4.8 58 29 *j1*-Je 3.5 SUMMARY TABLES: Luminaire Schedule Symbol City Label LLF Description Lurm Watts 1 S1 0.900 RAR2-320L-140-4K7-4W-SINGLE @ 20' MTG. HT. 133.2 2 SIA 0.900 RAR2-320L-140-3K7-3-SINGLE @ 20' MTG. HT. 133.2 ® 1 S2 0.900 RAR2-320L-110-4K7-50W-090' @ 20' MTG. HT. 100.3 Calculation Summary Label CalcPts_1 PARKING LOWER CekType Untie Avg Max Illuminance Fc 2.85 5.5 Illuminance Fc 3.02 5.5 0 5.70Avon 11.00 0.5 5.70 11.00 1.2 2.52 4.58 PARAMETERS: 20' Poles >4000K > Wattage mix 100/133 .35 Surface Reflectance »> Calcs on 10' Centers @ Grade Level DISCLAIMER: THE ENGINEER AND/OR ARCHITECT MUST DETERMINE APPLICABILITY OF THE LAYOUT TO EXISTING / FUTURE FIELD CONDITIONS. THIS LIGHTING LAYOUT REPRESENTS ILLUMINATION LEVELS CALCULATED FROM LABORATORY DATA TAKEN UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ILLUMINATING ENGINEERING SOCIETY (IESNA) APPROVED METHODS. ADDITIONALLY, THE PREPARER USED INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE CUSTOMER. IF/WHEN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION WAS NOT PROVIDED, PREPARER USED EDUCATED ASSUMPTIONS. ACTUAL PERFORMANCE OF ANY MANUFACTURER'S LUMINAIRE(S) MAY VARY DUE TO VARIATION IN ELECTRICAL VOLTAGE, TOLERANCE IN LAMPS, AND OTHER FIELD CONDITIONS NOT ACOCUNTED FOR IN THIS PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS. THESE LIGHTING CALCULATIONS ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF LIGHTING SYSTEM SUITABILITY AND SAFETY. THE ENGINEER AND/OR ARCHITECT IS RESPONSIBLE TO REVIEW FOR ENERGY CODE AND RELEVANT LIGHTING QUALITY COMPLIANCE. 93 94