21920 76TH AVE W.PDF111111111111
6136
21920 76TH AVE W
ADDRESS:
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER:— 00 14(al 0 00 2� OaO 0
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): �-X§Y�256,2,
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS:61 DETERMINATION: El Conditional Waiver 0 Study Required aiver
J
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DA
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
PERMITS (OTHER):aMAoV_-fi//.&vk -aeR*,ol - beft�- &k:ae AIN, �ftll-l-vb gV161
.7
7 j5(f ta� j &7 jr,15.,
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:W&*-&'
f I
SEWER LID FEE $: LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: L44, - --M—S3— LOT: BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
GEOTECH REPORT DATED: 1JW1e,240aS- J&1, &Zr6AaAV1-&)
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
OTHER:
UTEMP\DSrsTomis\.Swoet File Checklist.doc
CttP Of (9b OlIbISTREET FILE
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
,F or
f:1trtttttAtt jet.
PER International Building Code Section 110
Occupancy established by this certificate: I Dwelling Units: N/A
No. Stories: 2
ction: VB I Basement: N/A
Maximum Occupant Load- - --5 (Per IBC 1004)
Ro . om capacity signs, wh6h--req'u# - ain posted at all times.
-- � �0 :,must rem
Owner of Building: ReMax Office Buildina, Address/Teh : - 3nt'Soace: 21020, 76 th Ave W. Suite #120
THE Vacant Suite # 120 HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED AS COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
2003 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPT . ED,BY THE CITY FOR THE' -GROUP AND DIVISION OF OCCUPANCY AND THE
USE FOR WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED.
Issued this — i 8th . F day of March, 2008
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
BY:
This certificate shall be posted in a conspicuous public area and shall not be removed. mutilated or obscured and shall be maintained in legible condition at all times. Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new
Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official.
Nuwssas asses sessessas a a ease eases 0 G&MM
(h (1) (b (b a) (h (b (b Irb (b (h (b (h (h (h (h a� (h d) ill� a) (h (t 11) (b (b (b (T) (t (1) (b (b
0. T T T T T T T T T T T q/ T T T T q/ q/ q/ q/ T T T T T T T T T T T T k$ Mot
Ct"tp of eb�-,llronbjPTRIET FILE
lit,
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
PER International Building Code Section 110
Occupancy established by this certificate: Dwelling Units: N/A No. Stories: 2
B
Type"'.COnstruction: VB Basement: N/A
Maximum Occupant Load. (Per IBC 1004)
Room capacity signs, whi.§n:'r-"qJr'e-'-d, ; �mqst remain posted at all times.
Owner of Building: ReMax Office Buildina Address:fTeriarit'Space: 219 . 2 1 076 th Ave W, Suite #130
THE Vacant Suite # 130 HAsBEEN INSPECTED AND�APPROVE D-AS ',,COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
2003 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTED:BY THE CITY FOR THE GROUP AND DIVISION OF OCCUPANCY AND THE
USE FOR WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED.
Issued this 18 th day of March, 2008
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
BY:
This certificate shall be posted in a conspicuous public area and shall not be removed, mutilated or obscured and shall be maintained in legible condition at all times. Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new
Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official.
a assess a ease a
(h Irb (1) (1h 11) (T) (b (h 4) (T) (h (b (h (h (b (b (1) d) (1b (h (h (1) (1) (b (b 4) (b (h (1) (h #&I
ettp of (Eb 011bl STREET FILE
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
F r
4:tTttfttAtt
PER International Building Code Section 110
Occupancy established by this certificate:
B
Dwelling Units: N/A
Type',"Construction: VB
No. Stories: 2
Basement: N/A
Maximum Occupant Load
' : — (Per IBC 1004)
Room capacity signs, when re"quir6d; must. remain posted at ali times.
Owner of Building: ReMax Office Building_.,._Address/Tena rit :, S pace: 219 2Q 76 1h Ave W, Suite #100 & 2nd Floor
n
THE Vacant Suite # 100 & 2 ' Floor HAS BEEN INSPECTED� AND APPROVED AS COMPLYING WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2003 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY FOR THE GROUP AND DIVISION
OF OCCUPANCY AND THE USE FOR WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED.
Issued this — 1 8th - day of March, 2008
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
BY:
This certificate shall be posted in a conspicuous public area and shall not be removed. mutilated or obscured and shall be maintained in legible condition at all times. Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new
Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official.
et"t? of 01b oub OT FILE
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS ST f kEE
IF F
f:tTttft t jof'(p fill
PER International Building Code Section 110
Occupancy established by this certificate:
B
Dwelling Units: N/A
type Construction: VB
No. Stories: 2
Basement: N/A
Maximum Occupant Load� '-. - � 9 _ (Per IBC 1004)
Room capacity signs, n-�64&ir& mustremain posted at all times.
0' m
Ith
Owner of Building: ReMax Office Building--Addressffe'hant Space: 21920 76 Ave W. Suite #140
THE Vacant Suite # 140 HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND-APPROV.ED.AS . COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
2003 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY FOR THE GROUP AND DIVISION OF OCCUPANCY AND THE
USE FOR WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED.
Issued this — i 8th day of March, 2008
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
BY:
This certificate shall be posted in a conspicuous public area and shall not be removed, mutilated or obscured and shall be maintained in legible condition at all times. Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new
Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official.
%
(b (T) (b (b d) (b (b d) (1) ti) a) (h (h (b (h d) (h (b d) d� (h (b (1) (b d) (h d) (b (h d)
PLANNING DATA
11 STREET
-- Sign5 --
Nam' do "NA -c-
Date: 3,3D,
SiteAddress:
Plan Check #: BLD-2060-
Project Description: tAe.— axA�ery%.Jk
Reduced Site Plan Provided: (M / NO)
Zoning: RRA
1- L4
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Map Page:
I Corner Lot: NO)
Flag Lot: (YES b)
ADB File # (or date waived): A. lt4,,q
lejr,, onv
V S e- (P MN ry-4 re o,
Ty J
rO)AL Aie�a� jb� 6� J
Allowed in
Matrix
Allowed
TOTAL sign
area
Proposed
Type of Sign
zone?
conditions
area per
Unit
allowed for
sign area
met?
unit
this siqn
Example
Wall wAnternal
11107MIXIOn
Yes, WIth
condItIons
Yes
I sq- It.11ineal
tt. attached
41 ft. attached
wall
41 square feet
20 square feet
Wd//
Sign # I
y-
9-743
Sign #2
Sign #3
TOTAL
Sign Area for TenahtlSite
.Max Permitted: (0 0 W/ PKA.-^
Previous Total: D,
Proposed Total:
, �,—& V%
4b Sign
Sign Type:
Max Permitted:
Actual Height: —)I t+
Sign Type:
Max Permitted: V
Actual Height:
Sign Type.-
Max Permitted:
Actual Height:
Sign.Lightinq
Sign Type:
Proposed:
Allowed in Zone:
Sign Type:
Proposed:
Allowed in Zone:
0 0
PLANNING DATA 11 STREET:F�ILAE
-- Signs --
Sign Colors
Proposed:
Acceptable?
Requires ADB Approval?
Sign Location
If freestanding and 3-feet
or over (unless a fence) meets setbacks? .t(�
V.,
Si?tbacks
Street:
Side: A)IA_
Side:
Rear:
Aettlalsetbacks
Street:
Rear:
Landscaoing &r Freestanding Signs
Size:
01 A-.
Location:
I I
Critical Areas Det4rmination ff: CA� A ;L -0,5- 0 L98 3
El Study Required
Waiver
Other
r
Plan Review By:
STREft FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5T H AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS,WA 98020
PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221
Parce I No: 00461000202001
P&OPERTYONVNER APPLICANT CONTKAGIVIA
REMAX, CYBER PROPERTIES LLC AD SHAPIRO ARCHITECTS CORSTONE CONTRACTORS
21097 64TH AVE W STE 200 624 EDMONDS WAY 190 BICKFORDXVENUE, STE A
PO BOX 2280
MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 98043 EDMONDS, WA 98020 SNOHOMISH, WA 98290
425-92 1-2000 425-778-5400 360-862-8316
LICENSE #: CORSTCL984KZ EXP:5/912008
i L JOB DESCRIPTION
2 STORY OFFICE BUILDING — SHELLJCORE ONLY. TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO BE DONE AS SEPARATE PERMITS. IST
FLOOR: 3915 SF OF OFFICE, RESTROOMS, STAIRWAYS AND ELEVATOR, AND 1606 SF OF PARKINGAREA UNDER THE
CANTILEVERED 2ND FLOOR. 2ND FLOOR: 5521 SF OF OFFICE, RESTROOMS, STAIRWAYS AND ELEVATOR.
VALUATION: $932,753
PERMIT TYPE: Commercial
PERMIT GROUP: 45 - Office
GRADING� N CYDS: 3000
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB
RETAININGWALL ROCKERY: N
OCCUPANT GROUP: B/S2
OCCUPANT LOAD: 102
FENCE: N ( 0 X 0 FT.)
CODE: 2003
JOTHER: N ------- OTHER DESC:
IZONE: RM-2.4
INUMBER OF STORIES: 2
IVESTED DATE:
1
INUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 0
1
1,-X I STI NG A R EA
IBASEMENT. 0 1 ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0 7FASEMENT
11110 110 S ED A It L%
0 1 ST FLOOR: 3915 2ND FLOOR: 5521
13 RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0
13RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 1606
FRONTS ElFBACK SIDESErBACK REkRSEYBACK
REQUIRED: 15 PROPOSED: 15 IREQUIRED: 15 PROPOSED: 15 M�UIRE�D 10 PROPOSED: 10
HEIGHT ALLOWED:O PROPOSED:O IREQUIRED: 10 PROPOSED: 10 1
SETBACK NOTES: E& SSetbacksare 15'. N & W Setbacksare 10'. Lot Combination must be approved prior to finaloccupancy.
I AGREETOCOMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION ANDIN DOINGTHE WORK AUTHORIZED
THEREBY,NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYEDIN VIOLATION OFTHE LABORCODEOFTHE STATE OFWAS14INGTON RELATINGTO
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCEAND RCW 18:2T
THISAPPL.WATION ISNOT A PERMIT UNTIL SIGNED BYTHE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR HLS(HER DEPUTY AND ALL FEESARE PAID.
Print Narne Date
ATYENTION
NP 9/ IR(k 0
sed By
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUM RE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND A PPROVAL ORA CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/ IBCI 10/ IRCI to.
ARCHIVE APPLICANT ASSESSOR XO
STATUS: ISSUED
BLD20060552
The storm& water systems on 220th shall be potho led prior to installation of any portion of the on -site stormsy stem to verify
clearances.
The storm& sewer systems on 76th Ave shall be potholed prior to installation of any portion of the on -site sewer system to
verify clearances. A Nvye connection shall be used to tie into the sewer main on 76th Ave.
Lot Combination PLN20060089 must be approved and recorded prior to final occupancy.
Seperate Permits & Deferred Subrnittals:
I . Plumbing
2. Mechanical/1-fVAC
3. Fire Connection
4. Fire Sprinkler
5. Fire Alarm
6. Sign
7. Side Sewer
8. Water Meter
9. Fight of Way
10. Structural Shop Drawings per S LI
11. State Elevator Pennit
12. State Electrical Pennit
13. Tenant Improvements
14, Maintenance Bonds
15. Canopies
16. Lot Line Adjustment Permit
Special Inspections:
1. Excavation, grading, site preparation
2. Soil bearing verification
3. Placement of fill and compaction
4. Foundation drainage installation
5. Concrete construction, including rebar placement
6. Structural steel erection, including welding and high -strength bolting
7. Anchor bolt and hold-down installation
8. Shear wall and diaphragm nailing
Subrnit all special inspection reports to the City Building Inspector on a weekly basis.
• Lot line stakes must be in place at the time of foundation/setback inspection. ,
• All new, e)dended, re -built or relocated electrical utility and/or service shall be placed underground.
• Maximum Height 25 feet. Measured from average elevation of undisturbed sod at comers of extended building rectangle.
Subject to field check by building department.
• Special inspections have been called for on this project and are noted on the approved construction plans and building permit.
It is the owner and/or contractors responsibility to assure that reports are provided to the City on a weekly basis. Be advised —
if special inspection reports are not forthcoming, the Building Official may issue a "Stop Work" and no City inspections will be
provided until such time as the reporting agency has complied and reports are reviewed and approved by the City.
• Obtain Electrical Pen -nit from State Department of Labor & Industries. 425-290-1309
• Final approval on a project or final occupancy approval must be granted by the Building Official prior to use or occupancy of
the building or structure. Check thejob card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final
occupancyinspections.
• Any request for the modification, variance or other administrative deviation (hereinafter "variance") must be specifically called
out and identified. Approval of any plat or plan containing provisions which do not comply with City code and for which a
variance has not been specifically identified, request and considered by the appropriate City official in accordance with the
appropriate provision of City code or State law does not approve any items not to code specification.
• Fences, gates, and arbors shall be located on private property. Property owner responsible for determining property lines.
Fence shall not enclose or prevent access to any City maintained utilities.
• Sound[Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise limits
of ECC Chapter 5.30 only during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00arn and 6:00pm on Saturdays, excluding
Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all other times the noise originating from construction sites/activites must comply with the
noise Units of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120,
Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns, and successors in interests, agrees to indemnify defend and hold
hanydess the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
whatever nature, aris ing directly or indirectly from the issuance fo this permit. Issuance of this perrnit shall not be deemed to
modify, waive or reduce any requirements of any City ordinance not firnit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
provision.
Premise Isolation Required with reduced pressure Backflow assembly in hot box at meter.
Final Locations of illuminated exit s igns & emergency lighting subject to field inspection by the Fire Marshal.
Refer to City of Edmonds Water service line handout for requirements.
48 hours notice is required when requesting your FINAL Engineering Inspection. 425-771-0220, ext. 1326.
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY 11-iE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE
PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT TIME LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6)
BUILDING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1333 1 ENGEVIMRING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 1 FIRE (425) 771-0215
I PUBLIC WORKS (425) 771-0235 1 PR&TREATMENT (425) 672-5755 1 RECYCENG (425) 2754801
E-Pre-Con
E,Erosion Control/Mobilization
E,Traffic Control
E-Storm Tight line
E-Storm Detention System
F,Footing Drain Connection
E-Curb/Gutter Form
E-Sewer Tap on City Main
E-Pre-WatCT Main Connect,Trench
E-Pre-Water Main Con, Valve Cluster
F,Water Main Connection
E-Water Service to Meter,2" or less
E-Water Service Line
E-Double Check Detector Assem Vault
E-Remote Reader Installation
E-RPBA with HotBox
E-Curb/Gutter Forrn (comm/multi)
ESidewalk Forrn (comm/mUlti)
E-Pavement Subgrade
&Pavement Compaction Test Report
E,Pavement Striping
E-Fence Location/Height
F,Trash Fnclosure
&Cross Connection Final
E-Engineering Final
B-Setbacks
B-Footings
B-Foundation Wall
B-Isolated Footings/Piers
13-Retaining Wall
B-Slab Insulation
B-First Floor Framing
13-FAerior Sheathing
B-Shear Nailing
B-Height Verification
0
0
B-Framing
B-Wall Insulation/Caulk
B-Floor Insulation/Caulk
B-Ceiling Insulation/Caulk
B-SheetrockNail
B-Building Final
F-Extinguishers
F-Fire Dept Inspection
F-Addressing Visibility
F-Fire Final
P-Planning Final
SPECIAL INSPECI-IONS REQUIRED SEE APPROVED PLANS
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/ topography/ 4ydrology/vegetation)
l.. Site Address/ Location:
9
3.
4.
Property Tax Account N
Approkimate Site Size (z
Is this site currently developed? k yes;
If yes; how is site developed?
no.
CA File No: 05-6 1
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
I x Flat- less th an 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slope's on' site generally less. than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30%. (a vertical- rise of 10-feet
over. a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
.Other (plea'se' describe
6. Site contains areas of year-round. standing water: Approx. 'Depth:
J4,
7. Sitecontain� areas of seasonal standing w'ater:, Appkox*. Depth:
What seasor�(s) qf� t�E� year?
8. Site is in the flo-6'dway floodplain ofa`w 'a' te I r. course.
9. Site c9ntams a creek or an area where water flows. across the. grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
- Flows are seasonal? (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs mixed
urban landsca ed (lawn, shrubs etc)
p
11. Obvious wetland is present on site:
For City Staff Use Only
1. Plan Ch6ck Numb� r, -if � a p cible?
�p
2. Site is Zon4�d? P, M - L 4
'7
3. SCS mapped soff "(s)? A 16-A
4. Critical Areas inventory-or,,C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site?
5. Site within designated earth. -subsidence landslide hazard area? Nf5
DETERMINATION,
STUDY REQUIRED
Reviewed
;711 ?-/
WAIVER
#P20
ity ofidmonds
"'Development Services Department
I vil lanning Division
hone: 425.771.0220
4C. 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal ofthe application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
Date Received: 0 1 �� I U:J
City Receipt #:_ 76-15 17
Critical Areas File #:
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00
Date Mailed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist,. sign and date it, -and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent 'steps 'necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, 'in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, inderrinify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information furnished by the applic , i er/i agen% or employees.
j
By my signature, I certify that the informati nd e bits. herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to fi on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPLicANT/AGENT DATE
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that. 1 have author\ized le above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officifls and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attp'�Vto tt#sVplication.
SIGNATURE Of OWNER DATE
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/Applicant.- Applicant Representative:
C, 11-"
A,,0_1Lff&_Z60_ 1444#/9��n S,
Name. Name
21 tV1;tzVT'wAy
Street Address. Streei Addres's
92!�_ �Vfi-
city I 9tat Zip City State Zip
Telephpne:4(ZJ— �L-3 ?J4 Telephone: T3 -
Email address (optional):Rfffi�me/HOLarEmail Address (optional): or.,
#P20
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soffs/topography/.hydrology/vegetation)
L. Site Address/ Location: ?690 5- f —�i sr 5w aftotwf
2. Property TAxAccount Number:
Qffi&Q 2n 200 2-
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet)- �11L
4. I's this site currently developed? yes; no.1
If yes; how is site developed?
CA File No: 0 (0
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15 % (a vertical rise of 10-feet over. a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over. a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet)
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please di2scribe):
6.. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are. year-round ?
Flows are seasonal? (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) OK
11. Obvious wetland is present on site:
- ----- — For City Staff Use Only QMI
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. Site is Zoned? P-M
3. SCS mapped soff type(s)? c3 -A. Ur -kf7l
4. Critical Areas inventory orIC.A. map indicates Critical Area. on site? No
5. Site within designated earth. subsidence landshde hazard area?.
DETERMINATION
. STUDY REQUIRED
Reviewed by -
WAIVER
0 #P20
ED ity of Edmonds
velopment Services Department
lanning Division
hone: 425.771.0220
4C. 425.771.0221
Ile Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application � for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the . Checklist should be easily
available firom observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys),
Date Received: Nros
City Receipt #: I c��>
Critical Areas File #:
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00
Date Mailed to Applicant -
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist,. sign and date it, -and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a�
precursory site visit, and make a detertnination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application. .
Please submit a vicifty map, along with the signed copy
of this form to, assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of -property described on this form. - In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
information - (e.g. site plan, topography. -map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
. I
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, 'in consideration on the, processing of the. application agrees
to release, inderrmify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all "ges, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information fumished by the applic i edits agents or employees..
By. my signature, I cer* that the informati' nd e bits herewidi,submitted are. true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to fi
on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPMANTIAGENT DATE
Property Ownerls Authorization \J I
By my signature, I ccrti� -that I have authorized tAe above App'licant/Age nt to apply for the subject land use application,.
and grant my permission for the public officlids and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property forthe
purposes of inspection and posting a to ation.
SIGNATURE OF . OWNER 71 plic DATE
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/AppUcant: Applicant Representative:
I -
cr L, I, C, , I jot
Name Name
V
ZaO2 - o-&A-pr- W, 6 24 er in, \Vf'
Street Address Streett Address
6-Ta 00 002�0 -
city Stat zip City State zip
Telepho.:4r,7J- ,3 ?�14 Telephone:4��E, 793 - 5V_0V
Email address (optional):FLI M56pm e lif rMEmail Address (optional):.
#P20
Critical Areas Checklist CA File No:
Site Information (sofls/ topography/ hydrology/ vegetation) 19 it, - -76, -
1.. Site Address/Location: ?(190 5-* 1?1 20 %r 5W.. aftQ62� _.Wt 25=1
2. Property TaxAccount Number: 24 2CO 2�
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet):
4. Is this site currently developed? X yes; ' no.
W/
If yes; how is site developed?. L
f I
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat. less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes -on site generally less than 15 % (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over. a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: lt\10 Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: Approx- Depth -
What seasor�(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water'cours'e.
9. Site c9ritains a creek, or an area where water flows across the grounds surface?. Flows are year-round?
N2Q -Flows are seasonal? (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow -shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) OK
11. Obvious wetland is present on site:
- ------------------- For City Staff Use Only
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. Site is Z6ned7 Z
3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? !3- A I ALr krb,�� IA -A fGoy..
4. Critical Areas inventory orIC.A. map indicates Critical Area on site?
5. Site within designated earth..subsidence landslide hazard area?
DETERMINATION
STUDY REQUIRED WAIVER
Reviewed by.-- �2���� Date: 7-1-L 2,1-,_9-
* #P20
0
ity of Edmonds
(Plopment Services Department
aning Division
one: 425.771.0220
,k 425.771.0221
ne Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person. preparing a Development
Permit Application for the - City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
Ile purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete. the Checklist should. be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
Date Received: 10 0��?
City Receipt #:
Critical Areas File #:
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00
Date Mailed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her, authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form.. In
addition, the. applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. , site plan, Jopography 'map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns,.in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action -or infraction based in whole or part upon false,* misleading, inaccurate -or
incomplete information ftimished by the applic '; i er/its agents or employees.
rm
By. my signature, I certify that the informati d exh its herewith -submitted are, true and correct to the best of my
I
knowledge and that I am authorized to fi hi on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPMANVAGENT DATE
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature,* I certify that. I have authon\zJed le above Applicant/Agent to a
pply for the subject land use application,,
and grant my permission for the public offi I and the staff of the City of Edrrionds to enter the subject property I for the
purposes of inspection . and postinga to plicatio
SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/Appheant:
& Z, � C,
Name
Streei.Address
Applicant Representative:
A,_a
Name
6 24- �TAM\Vlf' WAY
city tat Zip City State zip
Telephoone:4'ZJ— �19 -1 W� Telephone I
Email -address (optional):F1,1ft!SVMie/if0, CMEmail Address (optional): eodskol,62,
-mow
Kv-
Aril 7, &
PLANNING DATA
New Commercial / Mulffamily Proiects
SITE ADDRESS: 2- 19 ?,o - -76, - ZONING: A-0-414-
;,rr,%Lr5 -7&oS - ZZ- io sL 2-19 1 76 - A- cd.
USE(S) PROPOSED: MW 2 - 516,, ot:Az, b�u.lt� ALLOWED?: wlCvP
(Y"
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND YJSE DETERMINATION ISSUED
79 To Allow What Uses?: o�Acz
CUP File: C L4 - o5
ADBFILE#: ADS-03-77
PARKING: .319ig-+ 9,43&0 Aij,,o F/;�,
U se- 47042 No. Spaces R I equired:
�7 X (floor area, # employees, etc.) = -,4--"9- 2 3, 1.
Use: - . No. Spaces Required:
. X (floor area, # employees, etc.) =
Use: 'No. Spaces Required:
X (floor area, # employees, etc.) =
Use: No. Spaces Required:
X (floor area, # employees, etc.) =
Total Required: 24 2-e- 6 P.,,-(. — Actual Provided: 3 1
SETBACKS:
Reguired Setbacks: 22x,,
/&"- Front: 150 Left"Side: 15' Right Side: Rear: 1.0'
Actual Setbacks: S3 526
Front: Left Side: 15, Right Side: --4?j- Rear: i344
Street map checked for additional setback required? t*.,, mq" (jio/No)
MAXIMUM FLeOR"ARiEA:
Maximum Allowed: 491% Actual: zio&V Z (P #7o
BUILDING HEIGHT: 414,0
Maximum Allowed: ;z 5' —Actual. Height: 30. (.4
Modulation Allowed?: Yq f.�, .4-, 1 z Ly. Modulation Height: 30' (A,
Datum Point: M,,A,4 E'AWC-v7V�72a- Datum Elevation:-rvnz 3P,-01
Elevator Penthouse > 3 feet over height limit? No If so,VAR#
0
LANDSCAPING:
Matches AD13 approved: Y4
Bid Provided? NAA - Bond Amount (100% bid):
J>� I-J-- 1444-) '. brP� u 8' 3 3 Z - 4 1 -2. 01 " p,,--A,4k j I (,,�
'CRITICAL AREAS#: 2zog_ k? - 0,11
SEPA DETERMINATIOW—PA) g, /I
emp
SHORELINE REQUIRED?: Aj
Continued ...
hfibrary\^PlandatNewComm.doc
0 0
(�/ 13 /0&
DATE: I / 7 /oT PLANCHK#: d5-423
I
NAME OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: P-1.0 i-L-C ( r, 9-e n,,,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Cansh-,--w AAj rl-A
ADBFILE#: oS'-,77 OR DATE WAIVED:
PLANS MATCH APPROVED PLAN: ADO, ow-c,.-f,
SUBDIVISION: 14a4Y,� A", 2-o.
LOT AGGREGATION REQUIRED?: Yz4
REDUCED SITE PLAN (8.5X1 1) PROVIDED FOR STREET FILE?
OTHER:
Plan Review By:
1Afibrary\^P1andatNewComm.doc
Golder Associates Inc.
Redmond, WA USA 98052-3333 %older
18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200
Telephone (425) 883-0777 ociates
Fox (425) 882z5498
www.golder.com
REPORT ON
76TH AVENUE W. AND 220TH STREET SW
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
Submitted to:
Tim Herdt
R&HInvestments, LLC
2190764 A Avenue West, Suite 200
Mount Lake Terrace, Washington
Submitted by
Golder Associates h7c.
18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200
Redmond, Washington 98052
0C.
David M.
Principal
Distribution: OTREET FILE
3 Copies — R&H Investments, LLC
2 Copies - Golder Associates Inc
June,2005 RECEIVED
SEP 12 2005
EXF-IRE-s
1741,
053-1512.000
-4
PERMIT COUNTER
060605mil.doc
June 6, 2005 053-1512.000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................ 2
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................. 3
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 4
4.1
Geologic Setting ...........................................................................................................
4
4.2
Soils ..............................................................................................................................
4
4.3
Groundwater .................................................................................................................
4
4.4
Infiltration Potential ......................................................................................................
5
5.0 ENGINEERING
RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................
:6
5.1
General ........................................................................................................... :
6
5.2
Seismic Criteria ............................................................................................................
6
5.2.1 Ground Motion Parameters ..............................................................................
6
5.2.2 Liquefaction Considerations ............................................................................
7
5.3
Foundations ..................................................................................................................
7
5.4
Lateral Load Resistance ................................................................................................
7
5.5
Foundation Drainage ....................................................................................................
8
5.6
Slab Subgrade ................................................................................................................
8
5.7
Backfilled Below -grade Walls ......................................................................................
9
5.8
Retaining Walls ..........................................................................................................
10
5.8.1 Drainage Provisions .......................................................................................
10
6.0 CONSTRUCTION
CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................
12
6. 1
General ........................................................................................................................
12
6.2
Subgrade and Footing Preparation ...............................................................................
12
6.3
Temporary Excavation Slopes ....................................................................................
13
6.4
Pen-nanent Slopes ........................................................................................................
13
6.5
Structural Fill Placement and Compaction .................................................................
13
6.6
Use of Excavated Soils ...............................................................................................
14
6.7
Imported Fill Materials ...............................................................................................
14
6.8
Erosion Control ...........................................................................................................
14
6.9
Geotechnical Construction Monitoring ......................................................................
15
7.0 CLOSING ......................................................................................................................... 16
8.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 17
060605mli.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I Site Location Map
1-�Igure 2 Site and Exploration Plan
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Test Pit Logs
053-1512.000
060605mll,dm
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005
1.0 INTRODUCTION
053-1512.000
Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is pleased to present this geotechnical report for the proposed
redevelopment of your site at the comer of 76tb Avenue W and 220th Street SW in Edmonds,
Washington (Figure 1). The purpose of this study was to explore the soil and groundwater conditions
at the property and perform a geotechnical evaluation of the site in support of proposed
redevelopment.
The scope of services for this preliminary geotechnical investigation was performed in accordance
with our Proposal No. P05-1170, dated March 29, 2005. Authorization to proceed with the
geotechnical investigation was received from you on April 14, 2005.
The scope of work included the following primary tasks: I
• Complete up to six geotechnical test pits on the site;
• Coordinate utility locate requests and test pit excavation;
• Evaluate the site soils for possibility of infiltration of storm water;
• Develop geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the office
building; and
• Prepare a report summarizing our field exploration results and recommendations.
The following sections provide our subsurface site characterization, our geotechnical design
recommendations, and geotechnical construction recommendations suitable for submittal to the City
of Edmonds.
06OW5mll.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005 -2- 053-1512.000
2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The site is located at the northwest comer of the intersection of 76th Avenue W and 220th Street SW
in eastern Edmonds. The site combines two properties at 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W. The
site is relatively flat and varies from about 2 to 5 feet above the adjacent street level.
A small vacant house, detached two -car garage and small shed occupy the southern parcel. A two to
four foot high rockery is located around the southeast comer of this lot along 30 feet on the south side
and 50 feet along the east side. An older two story house occupies the northern parcel. Both parcels
have shrubs, trees and lawns. A large cedar is located at the middle of the western edge of the site.
A.D. Shapiro Architects provided an architectural plan of the site, labeled A LL and dated May 15,
2005. We understand that the proposed development will consist of a two story office building
located at the southeast comer of the site. The proposed grading will include lowering the elevation
to street level, approximately 3 feet average. The western half of the second story will cantilever over
grade level parking supported with columns. The building will be founded on convention continuous
and isolated spread footings and slab -on -grade construction. At -grade parking will be on the west
and north sides of the site. A stonn water facility, either an infiltration trench or a detention vault,
will be located in the parking lot either east or north of the building.
06W5mll.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005 -3- 053-1512.000
3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
A one-half day field investigation was conducted on Thursday, May 12, 2005. The investigation
consisted of completing five geotechnical test pits, desigmated TP-I through TP-5, to depths of
between 6.0 and 12.0 feet below existing ground surface. The test pits were located in accessible
portions of the site. Four were located in the area of the building. One was located at the west side of
the north edge of the site. Approximate locations of the test pits are shown in Figure 2.
Test pits were excavated by Kevin Vletzke Excavating of Lake Stevens, Washington using a Case
580 Super L backhoe. After the test pits were completed they were backfilled using the excavated
soil and tamped into place using the track-hoe.bucket. Some settlement of the backfilled soil can be
expected over time. The general test pit locations were determined prior to the geotechnical
investigation based on existing buildings, topography, proposed building locations and potential
geotechnical issues. Actual locations were chosen in the field by Golder during the field
investigation. The test locations were plotted on the site plan by measuring distances from existing
site features. Utility locating services for the site were coordinated I by Golder pnior to the field
investigation.
Logging and sampling of soils were performed in accordance with Golder Associates Technical
Procedure TP-1.2-6, "Field Identification of Sol']", based on the Unified Sol] Classification System
(13SCS). The soil conditions were examined and logged by the Golder Geologist. Pertinent
information was recorded on field test pit logs, ]Including soi] classification, depths and locations,
stratigraphy, soil moisture conditions, and other information observed. Samples of each soil unit
encountered were collected from each test pit. The soils were classified in accordance with the
Golder technical procedure and are presented in the test pit logs in Appendix A. All samples were
placed in labeled one -gallon plastic zip -lock bags and taken to our laboratory for further examination
and classification.
06%05mil.doc
Golder Associates
0
June 6, 2005
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDI'nONS
4.1 Geologic Setting
0
053-1512.000
Edmonds is located in the central Puget Lowlands and native soils are predominately glacial in origin
although more recent nonglacial alluvial, marsh, and lake deposits are present. Areas of modified
land including cut and artificial fill are present in developed areas. The Edmonds area is generally
underlain by a glacial sequence of soils including till, advance outwash and transitional beds (Minard,
1983). According to the geologic map by Minard (1983), the near surface geology in the vicinity of
the parcel consists of till overlying advance outwash of the Vashon glaciation.
4.2 Soils
The subsurface conditions encountered during our site investigation indicate topsoil and a limited area
of uncontrolled fill overlying native soils of glacial onigin. The soil units encountered in the test pits
were consistent across the site. Compact weathered till and dense to very dense lodgment till were
encountered below the topsoil in the five test pits. The generalized descriptions of the soil units
encountered are provided below:
Fill: The so]] was loose; brown, silty, fine to medium sand, trace to little fine to coarse gravel,
moist, with roots, organics and concrete debris. Fill was encountered in test pit TP-1 at the
southwest portion of the site and was mixed with topsoil, and concrete debris. The thickness of
fill was approximately 2 feet. Fill was not observed in other test pits. This material is unsuitable
for construction.
Weatbered Till: This unit was encountered in the five test pits and was consistent in distribution
and thickness. This unit ranged from below the top soil to approximately 3.5 feet below the
ground surface. Weathered till was transitional with the underlying till and was compact, light
yellowish brown to light olive gray with orange mottling, non -stratified, silty, fine to medium
sand, little rounded gravel with scattered cobbles, moist. This matenial can be used for site
construction if the moisture content is conditioned to near optimum.
Till: This unit was the lowest so)] unit encountered and underlies the site. The till was
transitional with the weathered till and was encountered between about 3.5 feet below the ground
surface and the bottom of the deepest test pit at approximately 11.5 feet deep. The till was dense
to very dense, with the density generally increasing with depth. The till was light olive, non -
stratified, silty fine to medium sand, little rounded gravel, trace scattered cobbles and was moist.
The till is the primary bearing so]] on the site.
The subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits during this study are presented on the test pit
logs in Appendix A. The so]] contacts indicated on the logs represent the approximate boundaries
between soil types. The contacts are noted from observations made in test pits. and represent
transitions from one soil type to another and should not be regarded as exact contacts. Subsurface
conditions may vary between and beyond the test pit locations.
4.3 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test pits. The regional groundwater table is expected
to well below the depth of excavations on the site.
060605mli.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 -5- 053-1512.000
4.4 Infiltration Potential
In order to evaluate the potential for infiltration of storin water runoff, test pits TP-1 and TP-4 were
excavated to approximately I I feet to evaluate the soil conditions. This depth would be the
approximate depth of an infiltration or detention facility.
One foot of water was poured in the bottom of test pit TP-I and the infiltration (change in water level)
was measured over approximately one hour at about ten minute intervals. Initially the infiltration was
encouraging. However, after the soil reached saturation, the rate of infiltration decreased
significantly. Over the last half-hour, the decrease In water level was less than '/4 inch. 'rhus, it does
not appear that infiltration is feasible at the project site.
060605mil.doe
Golder Associates
0
June 6, 2005 -6- 053-1512.000
5.0 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
This section of the report provides our interpretation of the geotechnical data obtained during the
im,cstigation. The recommendations provided are intended for the guidance of the design engineers
and are intended for this project only. Contractors bidding on or undertaking the works must make
their own interpretation of the subsurface information provided it affects their proposed construction
methods, costs, equipment selection, scheduling, safety and the like.
The professional services retained for this project include only the geotecbmcal aspects of the
SUbSUrface conditions at the site. The presence or implication(s) of possible surface and/or subsurface
contamination resulting.from previous site activities or uses of the site and/or resulting from the
introduction onto the site of materials from off site sources are outside the terms of reference for this
report and have not been investigated or addressed.
5.1 General
The site is suitable for the proposed development from a geotechnical perspective based on our
understanding of the project and provided the engineering recommendations In this report are
followed. There was no geoteehmcal condition observed at the site that affect the building as
currently conceived, except the soils ' appear not to be suitable for infiltration of storm water runoff.
Based on the observations from the test pits, grading of about 3 to 5 feet below the existing grade for
the building and excavation of approximately 12 feet below grade for a storm water detention facility
is feasible and is not expected to encounter groundwater.
5.2 Seismic Criteria
Washington State adopted the International Building Code (IBC, 2003) on July 1, 2004 for design of
structures. Section 1615 of the IBC is related to earthquake loads and site ground motion. Sites are
classified based on the average soil profile properties In the upper 100 feet. For design purposes, the
average soil profile properties for the site should be considered for 100 feet below the base of
subsurface structures, i.e. estimated to be 3 feet below the existing ground surface. There is no
geological evidence indicating a decrease In soil density below the extent of the test pits excavated for
this study. It is our opinion that the site should be classified as Class C based on IBC 2003 Table
1615. 1.1 due to the presence of very dense glacial deposits expected within the upper 100 feet.
5.2.1 Ground Motion Parameters
Ground motion parameters used for design per the IBC 2003 include the site coefficient and mapped
spectral accelerations. These items can be found in section 1615.1 of the IBC and on the U.S.G.S
website for Earthquake Hazards Program (USGS, 1996). Tle mapped spectral accelerations in the
IBC 2003 correspond to Class B conditions. As such the spectral response accelerations should be'
adjusted for the site specific Class C soil conditions.
The following design parameters are based on the peak ground acceleration (PGA), the 0.2 second
spectral acceleration (Ss), and the 1.0 second spectral acceleration (SI) for the project site latitude of
47.80014N, longitude 122.33597W. These parameters were taken from the U.S.G.S website for the
Earthquake Hazards Program Probabilistic Hazard Lookup by latitude and longitude, 1996 (USGS,
1996). The following parameters, expressed in g (acceleration), can be used for seismic design:
06OW5mll.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005
0 PGA = .55
9 0.2 sec SA S, = 1.25
0 1.0 sec SA S, = 0.43
5.2.2 Liquefaction Considerations
-7-
053-1512.000
The soils considered most susceptible to liquefaction generally consist of very loose to compact
saturated granular deposits. In general, the site is underlain by unsaturated, dense to very dense soils.
We conclude that the potential for liquefaction at this site is negligible.
5.3 Foundations
Conventional, shallow isolated or continuous spread footings may be used, provided they are founded
on a subgrade of undisturbed native compact to dense till, or on a uniformly thick layer of compacted
structural fill placed over the native bearing soils. A bearing capacity of 4,000 psf can be used for
foundations bearing directly on the dense to very dense till. Footings should not be placed on loose
uncompacted or existing uncontrolled fills or on topsoil/,Organic soils. Conventional shallow isolated
or continuous spread footing foundations should be designed based on the following parameters:
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE (FS = 3.0)
Compact to dense Native (<4' below ground surface) /Structural fill ............. 3,000 psf
Dense to very dense Native (generally >4'below ground surface) .................. 4,000 psf
The allowable bean'ng pressures presented above may be increased by 1/3 for short-
term wind and seismic loading.
MINIMUM EMBEDMENT FOR FROST PROTECTION:
Pen*meter footings ........................................................................................... 18 inches
Interior footings (below exterior grades) ......................................................... 12 inches
MINIMUM WIDTH:
Perimeterfootings ............................................................................................ 18 inches
Interior isolated footings .................................................................................. 24 inches
SETTLEMENT:
TotalSettlement ..................................................................................... less than I inch
Differential Settlement ..................................................................... less than 0.5 inches
5.4 Lateral Load Resistance
The foundation will have to resist lateral loads from earth pressures, wind, and seismic loads. For
design purposes, these loads can be resisted by:
BASE FRICTION: An allowable value of 0.35 can be assumed for base friction between
the sofl and spread footings. A factor of safety of 1.5 is included in the allowable value
(ultimate = 0.45)
OW605mll.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005
I M.
053-1512.000
• PASSIVE RESISTANCE ON BELOW GRADE WALLS FOUNDED AGAINST SOIL:
The maximum available passive pressure on below grade concrete walls (detention
vaults) can be significant. However, considerable deformation is required to develop the
full passive pressures and for deep basement walls the resulting defon-nation is usually
unacceptable. Thus for design purposes, we recommend that the allowable passive
pressure be based on a fluid with a density of 350 pcf or an allowable average lateral
pressure of 1.0 ksf, whichever is smaller. The 1.0-ksf maximum average value Is
intended to limit the lateral movement to less than about 1/2 Inch. These values can be
increased by 1/3 for seismic loads.
• 13ASSIVE RESISTANCE ON SIDES OF SHALLOW FOOTINGS: For design purposes,
we recommend that the allowable passive pressure be based on a fluid with a density of
350 pcf on the sides of buried footings.
5.5 Foundation Drainage
A perimeter footing drain I's recommended for all external footings. The drainage should consist of a
perforated drainpipe placed at the bottom of the footing, enveloped in drain rock and covered with
filter fabric. Footing drains should consist of a 4-inch-diameter rigid -walled perforated PVC pipe or
equivalent. The pipe should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of clean free -draining sand and gravel,
having the gradation specified in the following table. The drain should be tightlined to the storm
system or other suitable discharge point.
DRAIN ROCK GRADATION
Sieve Size or diameter (in)
% Passing
1 '/2"
100% Passing
3/8"
10%-40%
No. 4
0%-5%
No. 200
0%-2%
Roof drains should be collected and conveyed in a tightlined system separate from the footing drain
system. The ground surface adjacent to the buildings should be graded to drain away from the
building. Cleanouts should be provided on all drain systems.
5.6 Slab Subgrade
Conventional slab -on -grade floors can be supported on a subgrade of the native bearing soils as noted
in the Foundation Recommendations, or on structural fill placed and compacted as noted in the
Eartbworks section of this report. Slab -on -grade floors should not be founded on organic soils, loose
soils or uncompacted or uncontrolled fills. Slabs should be underlain by a capillary break material,
consisting of at least four inches of clean, free draining sand and gravel or crushed rock containing less
than 3 percent fines passing the #200 'sieve (based on the Minus No. 4 sieve fraction) meeting the
following specification:
06D&05m) Ldm
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 -9-
TABLE 6-1
CAPILLARY BREAK GRADATION
Sieve Size or diameter (in)
% Passing
F,
100% Passing
No. 4
0%-20%
No. 200
0-3%
053-1512.000
A vapor bamier consisting of reinforced heavy plastic sheeting (6 mil or thicker) should be included
between the slab and the capillary break. If desired, an additional a two-inch thick layer of sand may
be placed on the vapor barrier to aid in concrete curing. The vapor barrier is recommended for all
occupied space, storage area, and any areas to receive floor covering, carpeting, or finishes on the
slab. Above -grade framed floors (crawl space) should also include a vapor bamier placed over any
areas of bare soils and adequate crawl space ventilation and drainage should be provided.
5.7 Backfilled Below -grade Walls
Backfilled below -grade walls can be designed for an at -rest earth pressure equivalent to a fluid
density of 50 pcf-, assuming there is no build up of hydrostatic pressure. The cniteria presented in the
foundations section can be used for foundation design.
For backfilled walls that are fixed at the top, an equivalent fluid weight of 50 pcf can be used to represent
the at rest earth pressure. For backfilled walls free to rotate at the top (cantilever) the active earth
pressure can be represented by an equivalent fluid weight equal to 35 pcf. All backfilled walls must be
provided with drainage to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure.
Where traffic loads will occur adjacent to the wall, a uniforin lateral surcharge load of 100 psf should be
added. Additional lateral surcharges should be added to the design pressures to account for vertical
surcharges, such as existing foundation and floor loads, adjacent to the excavation.
Adequate drainage should be provided for below grade walls to minimize lateral earth pressures and
to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. The wall backfill should be used in conjunction with
footing drains and/or other drainage provisions discussed below to provide full wall drainage. The
backfill should be compacted firmly in maximum one -foot thick lifts near the optimum moisture
content. The optimum moisture content is the water content at which the soil can achieve the highest
density, as deten-nined by ASTM D-1557, Proctor maximurn dry density laboratory test. The
contractor should avoid over -compaction adjacent to the wall in order to prevent an increase in the
earth pressure.
Alternatives to the use of free draining fill behind walls would include geocomposite drain strips
placed continuously behind the wall or washed drain rock within 2 feet of the wall for the full height
of the wall. As a minimum, both these alternatives would be used in conjunction with wall footing
drainage discussed above for below -grade walls above the water table.
060605m)l.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005 _10- 053-1512.000
5.8 Retaining Walls
Retaining walls may be used to accommodate grade changes, and general site grading around
buildings. A variety of wall types are feasible, including conventional cast concrete walls,
mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls, and rockeries. Once the grades are known, and a specific
wall type has been decided, detailed design recommendations can be developed. Cast-M-place or
gravity walls can be designed with an active earth pressure or equivalent fluid weight equal to 35 pcf
assuming a level backslope. In regards to foundations, the recommendations in Foundation
Recommendations section apply to retaining walls as well as building foundations.
I
For preliminary design purposes, we recommend that unreinforced cut rockeries be no higher than
8 feet. All rockeries should be designed and built to meet the standards set by the Association of
Rockery Contractors which includes a set wall batter, minimum rock sizes and quality, and a drainage
laver behind the rockery. In addition, the rockeries should meet the City of Edmonds standards.
Rockeries up to 4 feet high can be used to face fill slopes. Higher rockeries in ' fill can be used if the
fill is reinforced or over -built and cut back. Block walls under 4 feet in height, can generally be
constructed without internal soil reinforcing, while higher fill walls will require so]] reinforcing.
Earth Pressures for Retaining Structures:
Restrained Walls 50 pcf
Cantilevered Walls 35 pcf
Passive 250 pcf
These values assume a fully drained wall condition and flat backslope.
All retaining walls should be constructed with a permanent, full -face drain system. The wall footing
drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter, perforated drainpipe bedded in a clean gravel backfill. The
footing drain should convey the water under gravity flow, to the storm water collection system.
5.8.1 Drainne Provisions
The detail of the wall/floor drain connection will depend on the type of shoring, below -grade wall
type, and perimeter footing. During development of the final plans and specifications, we
recommended that Golder be provided the opportunity to review or assist in development of the
wall/drain tie in detail.
Provided the finish floor is at least 5 feet above the groundwater table, the drainage system should
consist of.
FOOTING DRAINS: A footing drain consisting of 4-inch-diameter, heavy -walled,
perforated PVC pipe or equivalent should be placed along the perimeter of all structures.
The pipe should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of drainage gravel material. The pipe
and drainage gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent migration of the
subgrade soils into the drainage system. Cle* an outs should be provided for maintenance.
WALL DRAINS: Drainage behind backfilled walls can consist of checker board or a full
face geocomposite drainage mat or a minimum of a two -foot -wide zone of clean sand and
gravel fill with less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve.
060605mil.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 _11- 053-1512.000
DISCHARGE: The drainage system should be tight -lined to drain by gravity if feasible,
or run to a sump for pumping. For a wall drainage system at least 5 feet above The
groundwater table, a nominal flow of 20 gallons per minute is recommended. If the
below -grade floor is within 5 feet of the groundwater table or below the water table an
under -drain will be required under the slab.
If a leak -free wall is desired, a water proof barrier, such as plastic or bentonite panels, should be
placed between the wall and the geocomposite or sand and gravel zone.
060605rrO.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 -12- 053-1512.000
6.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 General
General geotechnical related site construction will consist of site clearing, excavations, grading,
subgrade preparation, casting of detention vault walls, footings and slabs, placernent and compaction
of fills, and Installation of the drainage systems. This section discusses selected elements of these
construction issues.
Grading and excavation below about 3 feet can expect to encounter dense to very dense soils.
Excavations below about 5 feet can generally expect very dense soil conditions.
'Me on -site till and weathered till soils are moisture sensitive and can become soft and unworkable
when wet. It is strongly recommended that the major grading and foundation work be performed in
the driest summer months to minimize drainage and subgrade degradation problems and to optimize
the use of on -site soil for fill.
Although feasible, wet weather construction will add considerable cost and extend . the construction
schedule. It may require off -site granular borrow for fills and/or admixtures to aid in the use of wet
soils for structural fill, off -site disposal of wet excavated soils, and extensive use of off -site quarry
spalls to maintain access roads.
6.2 Subgrade and Footing Preparation
Site preparation should include removal of all uncontrolled fill, concrete debris, vegetation, organic
and wet soils and any other deletenious materials from building and paving areas or those locations
where structural fill is to be placed. Such matenials should be wasted from the site.
We estimate the uncontrolled fill depths could generally range up to 1.5 feet, and average about .5
foot although areas of deeper uncontrolled fill may be present locally on the site. The uncontrolled
fills, if present within areas to be developed, should likewise be removed by excavation and
backfilled with structural fill as outlined in the following section. If clearing and stripping efforts are
not accomplished duning or after peniods of dry weather, much greater depths of soil removal can be
expected in any wet or saturated areas across the site.
Subgrades to receive structural fill, building foundations, or pavement, should be cleared to expose
undisturbed native beaning soils. Prior to placing fill and preparing building and pavement subgrades,
we recommend proof rolling all exposed areas to determine if any soft and yielding areas are present.
If any soft areas are observed, these areas should be either removed and replaced with structural fill or
dried back and recompacted.. All pavement and building subgrades should be compacted to at least
95% of modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557).
The foundation subgrades will likely consist of dense to very dense till and possibly compacted
structural fill depending on the depth and elevation of the footing. The subgrade soils could become
loosened and disturbed under the influence of surface water, groundwater, and construction
equipment. The contractor will have to implement suitable procedures to protect the subgrade such as
excavating without tracking on the native soils, use of a crushed rock or gravel -working mat, so]]
admixing, geotextiles and other suitable procedures duning wet weather.
Native competent subgrade that becomes loosened by the contractors operation, and wet and
unsuitable soils should be over -excavated and replaced with a suitable fill matcnial, or admix the soil
060605mll.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 -13- 053-1512.000
with a moisture reducing agent or cement treated base (CTB), at the contractor's expense. The
footing excavations should be free of' any loose, soft disturbed material, mud or water prior to
placement of reinforcing steel and concrete.
6.3 Temporary Excavation Slopes
Safe temporary excavations are the responsibility of the contractor and depend on the actual site
conditions at the time of construction. Temporary cuts are the responsibility of the contractor and
should comply with applicable OSHA and WISHA standards. We recommend that temporary cut
slopes be excavated no steeper than Ili: IV (45 degrees). Cut slopes exposed for any length of time,
j-.)art1CUlarly duning wet weather, should be covered with heavy plastic. sheeting to maintain stability
and minimize erosion.
6.4 Permanent Slopes
Permanent cut 'slopes should be 2H:IV or flatter. For landscaping and erosion protection, flatter
slopes on the order of 2.511: IV to 3H: IV may be more appropriate for plant growth.
6.5 Structural Fill Placement and Compaction
Based on the soils encountered in our test pits, the non-orgamc native weathered till and till soils may
be suitable for use as structural fill provided they are placed at or below their optimum moisture
content. In areas where the site soils are over the optimum moisture content, the contractor will most
likely have to moisture condition (dry back) the soils prior to use as fill. Alternatively, soil admixtures
such as kiln dust, fly ash, or cement could be used to allow for compaction of soils that are wet of
optimum. The use of soil admixtures would require prior approval from the City of Edmonds. If utility
installation and site grading is perfonned during the wet season, imported granular fill materials would
be required for utility trench backfill, road subgrade, and any other structural fill.
On site till soils are not suitable for structural fill behind retaining walls. Structural fill behind retaining
wall should be well -graded sand and gravel with less than 10 percent fines (% by weight passing the
No. 200 sieve).
The on -site native weathered till and unweathered till may be suitable for use as structural fill
material, provided the fill material is free of organic and inorganic debn*s, is at or just below the
optimum moisture content, and is capable of being compacted to the required specifications listed
below. If the on -site soils do not meet the above criteria, or cannot be reworked to be suitable, we
recommend using imported granular fill consisting of well graded material free of organic matenial,
with less than 5 percent fines (that portion of the soil that passes the #200 sieve). Other fill materials
may be used with approval of the engineer. Alternatively, wet onsite soil free of organics could be
admixed that would allow for the soil to be compacted to a firin and unyielding condition.
Maximum Lift Thickness:
0 On -site native glacial soils 12 inches loose
0 Imported Granular fill 12 inches loose
060605n�Ldoc
Golder Associates
0 0
June 6, 2005 -14- 053-1512.000
Minimum Compaction Requirements:
Beneath. Building Foundations and Floors - The fill should be compacted to at least 95%
of the ASTM D1557 maximum dry density value for the material. The structural fill
beneath footings should at a minimum extend laterally at a lH:IV slope projected down
and away from the bottom footing edge.
• Beneath Roadways and Pavements - The fill should generally be compacted to at least
90% of the ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density value for the material, except within
three feet of subgrade elevation, where the fill should be compacted to at least 95% of the
ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density value for the material.
• Utili!y Trench Backfill - The fill should generally be compacted to at least 90% of the
ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density value for the material, except in paved and
structural areas where the material should be compacted to at least 95% of the ASTM 1)
1557 maximum dry density value for the material.
0 Non-structural/Landscaped Areas - Firrnly compacted.
The structural fill should be compacted with equipment suitable to achieve proper compaction.
Effective compaction of the native site soils may be achieved with a large steel drum vibrator roller,
hoe-pac compactor. A large steel drum, vibratory roller or hoe-pac compactor will be more suitable
to compact granular fills. Thin lifts or work in confined areas can also be compacted with a hand
operated jumping Jack compactor. If density tests taken in the fill indicate that compaction is not
being achieved, the fill should be scarlified, moisture -conditioned, and recompacted. If the required
densities cannot be met then the material can be excavated and replaced or a soil admixture used to
dry the soil.
6.6 Use of Excavated Soils
In general, uncontrolled fill containing debri's and organic material should not be used for structural
fill. i The till soils are considered suitable for reuse as structural fill provided that compaction
requirements can be achieved. Excavated soils used as structural fill should be placed and compacted
near the optimum moisture content and in accordance with the compaction requirements presented in
Section 7.5 above. If density tests indicate that compaction is not being achieved due to moisture
content, the fill should be scarified, and moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content,
recompacted, and re -tested, or removed and replaced.
Excess till and weathered till soils, free of deleterious material, is suitable for export as structural fill
provided that compaction requirements can be achieved and the conditions discussed above are
achieved.
6.7 Imported Fill Materials
If off -site structural fill is used during wet weather, it should be well -graded sand and gravel with less
than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Fills used for drainage should consist of washed gravels
with less than 3 percent passing the No. 200 sieve or equivalent.
6.8 Erosion Control
Erosion control for the site will include the Best Management Practices (BMP's) incorporated in the
civil design drawings and may incorporate the following recommendations:
060605TWI.doc
Golder Associates
0
June 6, 2005
-15-
053-1512.000
• Limit exposed cut slopes;
• Use silt fences, straw, and temporary sedimentation ponds to collect and hold eroded
material on the site;
• Seeding or planting vegetation on exposed areas where work is completed and no
buildings are proposed; and
• Retaining existing vegetation to the greatest possible extent.
6.9 Geotechnical Construction Monitoring
We recommend that a qualified geotechnical-engineening firm is on -site during critical aspects of the
project. i This would include installation of any footings, walls, slabs, pavement and subgrade
preparation, and placement of structural fills and trench backfill.
06OW5mll.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005
7.0 CLOSING
W
053-1512.000
This report has been prepared exclusively for the use of Max Metro Properties, Inc. and their
consultants for specific application for the 76th Avenue W and 220th Street SW project in Edmonds,
Washington. We encourage review of this report by bidders and/or contractors as it relates to factual
data only (logs of borings, conclusions, etc.). The conclusions and recommendations presented in this
report are based on the explorations and observations completed for this study and conversations
regarding the proposed site develop and are not intended, nor should they be construed to represent, a
warranty regarding the proposed development, but are forwarded to Assist in the planning and design
process.
Judgment has been applied in interpreting and presenting the results. Variations in subsurface
conditions outside the test pit locations are common in glacial soil environments such as those
encountered in Edmonds and the site area. Actual conditions encountered during construction may be
different from those observed during excavation of the test pits. When the site project plans are
finalized, we recommend that we be given the opportunity to review the plans and specifications to
verify that they are in accordance with the conditions described in this report.
The exploration was performed in general accordance with locally accepted geotechnical engineering
practice, subject to the time limits and financial and physical constraints applicable to the services for
this project, to provide infori-nation for the areas explored. There are possible variations in the
subsurface conditions between the test locations, and variations over time.
It has been a pleasure working with you on the 76th Avenue W and 220th Street SW site. We look
forward to working with you as the project develops into the design phase. Please call us at (425)
883-0777 with questions or comments.
060605mil.doc
Golder Associates
June 6, 2005
8.0 REFERENCES
-17-
053-1512.000
ICC (2003). International Building Code. International Code Council, Country Club Hills, Illinois.
Minard, J.P. (1983). Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles,
Washington, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1541, U.S. Geological Survey,
Department of the Interior, Reston, Virginia.
US Geological Survey and National Ocean Service (1981). 7.5xI5 Minute Quadrangle, Edmonds
East, Washington, 1:24,000 scales, US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
US Geological Survey (1996). Lat/Lon Lookup Output, Latitude 47.80014N, Longitude
122.33597W: Earthquake Hazards Program, http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/eq/html/lookup-
interp.htm]
060605mll.doc
Golder Associates
0 0
FIGURES
Golder Associates
I
17=
P.*4
di Sc n
ak
LR
�49 �O 2b V
;.j
-j"W, I !: 1! . *,. !� I! P'--
Se*�ttle'
f
J Z—
Z. 77- 1-1� 4 7.
<
A 1)
Site
:6 "1
-11N.
3 0. -?s
4
36 M:
350 T
Z�perap�,e `7
j
Z
F--
J
7
I LILWi z
TV
.3
1z
Lake
fi I e ei
P", Ba I
inger
b.
41/
! 7
. ffl\jql
0 2000
SCALE IN FEET N
FIGURE
Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map, SITE VICINITY MAP
Edmonds East, WA (1981), Edmonds West, WA (1978) R&H INVESTIVIENTS/76th AVE W. GEOTECH/WA
)531512000fool.rhil 7 m.d. 7777, , M
Golder Associatei
I
N
20
WOOD FENCE
88%L5�33" E
127.25
00
4) V
ct)
cl)
vi
TP4
WL-
S.F.R. VVAI E R
METER
R-
:R
-n c-)
M GAS
Z
0 METER
m 0 GAS---
rn
z
m
x—
TP-2
z co
0)
bo
La
z/
C:5 (D
S. F. JR Ln N) 104""EDA'p, TP-3
0
GARAGE
m
<
S.F.R.
384
—TP�-3
TP-1
ASPHIA-'
386 TP-5
392
Ir
3134 .26
118
B
us
SIGN
CD
61 --- GAS GA
C)
220th. ST. S.W.
157.26
ss ss ss
-0-
0 30 60 -0-
PAQr hAAD DDn%llM 0%,MLLZ IN FEE i
"i D 1 k-'r-iMmu"r- 1 ri at
ASSOCIATED, INC., 05/27/05
LEGEND
TP-1 TEST PIT NUMBERS AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
3531512()MFOI dwn I I —w Le 001 1 Modified: 06!- 41 4
(D
29
r
U)
FIGURE 2
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
R&H INVESTMENTS/76TH AVE W. GEOTECHIWA
I : 1 : 13.10 Ginith-ur Acc"vivkf,3,c
APPENDIX A
TEST PIT LOGS
Golder Associates
Unified Soil Classification System
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Names
Generoli2ed
Group Descriptions
�OARSE-GRAJNED SOILS
"a,, than 502
Wo;ned on
No. 200 5ie-
GRAVELS
More than 50% of
coarse fraction
weto;ned on
CLEAN GRAVELS
Less than 5% lines
GW
Well-groded Grovels
CP
Poorly-groded grovels
No. 4 Sieve
GRAVILS WITH FINES
More than 12% fines
GM
Glo-I end —S.It
Mixture.
GC
C'o"' and Cloy
W.I.,—
SANDS
50% a, more .1
CLEAN SANDS
Less than 5% fines
SW
Well-q,od�d Sand.
SP
P-011Y-910ded Sands
coarse fraction
Posses No. 4 Sieve
SANDS WIIH FINES
S!"I
—
Sand and Silt Mixtures
More than 12% fines
SC
Sand and Cloy Mixtures
rINE-GRAINED SOILS
502 a, mo,e Passes
the No. 2DO s . eve
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid limit
less than 50
INORGANIC
CL
—
Lo—pl—licity Cloy$
ML
Non-plost;c and Low-
Plasticity Sifts
Non-plostic and Low -
ORGANIC
OL
Plasticity Organic Clays
Non-plo5tic and Low-
Plastkity Organic Sifts
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid limit
INORGANIC
CH
High-ploslicity Cloy,
greater than 50
MH
H;gh-plasticity Silts
H;gh-plosticity
ORGANIC
Fz�
OH
Organic Clays
High-plosticity
Organic Sifts
HIGHtY ORGANIC SOILS
Primarily organic matter. dori, in color, and
organic odor
P1
Peat
Relative Density or Consistency
Utilizing Standard Penetration Test Values
Cohes;onless Soils (a)
Cohesive Soils (b)
(c)
:Density
(c)
N. blo.s/ft.
Reloti-e
Density
Consistency
N. blos/It.(c)
Undroined (d)
Shear Strength
(psf)
Very loose
0 to 4
0 15
Very soft
0 to 2
<250
Loo-
4 to 10
15 35
Soft
2 to 4
250-SDD
C—poct
10 to 30
35 65
F',—
4 to 8
500- 1000
Dense
30 to 50
65 85
stiff
0 to 15
1000-2000
Very Dense
over 50
>85
Very Stiff
15 to 30
20DO-40DO
—a Lon—ing or grovel. sand. and 5ift, either separately or in combination. possessing no characteristics
Of PlOsticily. ond exhibiting drained behavior.
Soils pos3es3ing the characteristics of Plasticity. and exhibiting undroined behovicir.
(c) Refer to text of ASTM D 1586-84 far a definition of N; in normally consolidated cohes;onle3s soils
Relative Density terms ore based on N values corrected for ove�rbu,rden pressures.
1) Undroined shear strength - 1/2 unconfiried compression strength.
Descriptive Terminology Denoting
Component Proportions
Descriptive 7erms
Range of Proportion
Trace
0-5%
Little
Some to Adjecli� (0)
5-122
12-3D%
And
30-50%
(a) Use Gravelly. Sandy or Silty as appropriate.
Component Definitions by Gradation
Component
Si7e Range
Boulders
Abov, 12 in.
Cobbles
3 in, to 12 in.
Grovel
3 in. to No. 4 (4.76--)
Coarse grovel
3 in. to 3/4 in.
Fine g—e:
3/4 in. to No. 4 (4,76mrn)
Sand
No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 200 (0.074--)
Coarse sand
No. 4 (4.76mm) to No. 10 (2.Omm)
Medium sand
No. 10 (2.0mm) to No. 40 (0.42mm)
r.ne and
No. 40 (0.42mm) to No. 200 (0.074MM)
Silt and Cloy
Smaller than No. 200 (0.074MM)
Figure
SOIL CLASSIFICATION/ LEGEND
Samples
SS
SPT Sampler (2.T OD)
HO
Heavy Duty Split Spoon
SH
Shelby lube
P
Pitcher Sampler
8
Bulk
C
Cored
Unless otherwise noted. drive som.p-�
adv?hced with 140 lb. hornmer with
30 in. drop.
Laboratory Tests
Test
Designation
Moisture
(1)
Density
D
Grain Size
G
Hydrometer
H
Attelbe,g Limits
(1)
Consolidation
C
Unconfined
U
UU 16ox
Vu
Cu Iriox
CU
CD .7riax
CD
Perrhi,obility
P
(1) Moisture and Alterberg Limits
plotted on log.
Silt and Cloy Descriptions
Description
Typical Unified
Designation
sin
ML (non-plostic)
Clayey Silt
CL-ML (low plasticity)
Silty Cloy
CL
Cloy
CH
Plastic Silt
MH
Organic Soils I
OL. OH. Fit
0 Golder Associates
4
der LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1
ciates
Temp 56 'F Weather Cloudy Engineer M. Lumpkin Operator —Kevin Vietzke
Equipment 580 Super L Contractor Vietzke Excavating Date 05/12/05
Elevation 386.0 ft Datum Street Elevation Job 053-1512.000
Location SW Corner S/O House
N Fl I 1--F I I I I 1 11 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 S
0
61
A-'
L-11
:11
Bottom of Test Pit at 11.5 ft
A 0.0 - 1.0 ft: Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, trace little
gravel, concrete debris. (TOPSOIUFILL)(SM)
B 1.0 - 4.0 ft: Loose to compact, light olive gray and tan,
nonstratified, SILT, little fine sand, trace to little
gravel, moist. (WEATHERED TILL)(ML/SM)
C 4.0 - 9.0 ft: Dense to very dense, light gray, nonstratified,
silty SAND, trace to little gravel, trace cobbles,
damp. (TILL)(SM)
D 9.0 - 11.5 ft: Becomes sandy, little gravel. (SIVI/SP)
(L
W
LL
0
SAMPLES
NO.
DEPTH
(ft)
MOISTURE
1
0.0
2
1.0
3
6.0
4
10.0
TIME
DEPTH OF
HOLE
(ft)
DEPTH TO
W/L
(ft)
DEPTH TO
SEEPAGE
08:20
Start
SPECIAL NOTES:
No caving
No groundwater
Approximately 1 of water was poured
into the excavation to evaluate
infiltration potential.
After saturation, infiltration was minimal.
9 0
(A�Vder LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2
iates
Temp 56 'F Weather Cloudy Engineer M.. Lumpkin Operator_Kevin Vietzke
Equipment 580 Super L Contractor Vietzke Excavating Date 05/12/05
Elevation 384.0 ft Datum Street Elevation Job 053-1512.000
Location Center of Site, N/0 Garage
W
5 1 1 0 1 1 5 E
20
0
5
A 0.0 - 0.5 ft: Loose, dark brown, SAN-D.
(TOPSOIL)(SP/SM)
B 0.5 - 4.0 ft: Compact, brownish gray and orange mottled,
nonstratified, sandy SILT, trace to little gravel,
moist to wet. (WEATHERED TILL)(MUSM)
C 4.0 - 7.0 ft: Dense, gray, nonstratified, silty SAND, little
gravel. (TILL)(SM)
SAMPLES
NO.
DEPTH
MOISTURE
1
0.5
2
3.0
3
5.0
TIME
DEPTH OF
HOLE
(Ift)
DEPTH TO
W/L
(ft)
DEPTH TO
SEEPAGE
09:20
Start
SPECIAL NOTES:
No caving
No groundwater
der LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3
(96dates
Temp 56 'F Weather Cloudy Engineer M. Lumpkin Operator_Kevin Vietzke
Equipment 580 Super L Contractor Vietzke Excavating Date 05/12/05
Elevation 384.0 ft Datum Street Elevation Job 053-1512.000
Location East Central, N/O House
W I V --F—F � I I I 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 T-T—T—] E
0 5 20
A
III
B
Bottom of Test Pit at 6.0 ft
0
A: 0.0 - 0.5 ft: TOPSOIL
B 0.5 - 3.0 ft: Compact, light olive gray and orange mottled,
sandy SILT, trace to little gravel, moist to wet.
(WEATHERED TILL)(MUSM)
C 3.0 - 6.0 ft: Dense, olive gray, nonstratified, silty SAND,
trace little gravel, scattered cobbles, moist.
(TILL)(SM)
SAMPLES
NO.
DEPTH
I (ft)
MOISTURE
. (%)
1
2.0
2
5.0
TIME
DEPTH OF
HOLE
DEPTH TO
W/L
DEPTH TO
SEEPAGE
09:50
Start
10:06
Backfill
SPECIAL NOTES:
No caving
No groundwater
A
-Golder LOG OF TEST PIT TP-4
(26dates
Temp 62 *F Weather Cloudy Engineer M. Lumpkin Operator Kevin Vietzke
Equipment 580 Super L Contractor Vietzke Excavating Date 05/12/05
Elevation 385.0 ft Datum Street Elevation Job 053-1512.000
Location NW Corner, North Parcel
S - � I I I I � I I I I ) 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 N
5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTIONS AND EXCAVATION NOTES
A 0.0-1.0ft: TOPSOIL, sod, sandy silt.
B 1.0 - 4.0 ft: Weathered, compact to dense, light olive
gray and orange mottled, sandy SILT, trace to
little gravel, moist. (WEATHERED
TILL)(MLISM)
C 4.0 - 11.5 ft: Compact to very dense, light olive gray, silty
SAND, trace to little gravel, moist. (TILL)(SM)
Y",
Uj
0
SAMPLES
NO.
DEPTH
(ft)
MOISTURE
(%)
1
1.0
2
5.0
3
7.0
EM
(z-'Golder LOG OF TEST PIT TP-5
Associates
Temp 56 OF Weather Cloudy Engineer M. Lumpkin Operator- Kevin Vietzke
EquiDment 580 Super L Contractor Vietzke Excavating Date 05/12/05
Elevation 384.0 ft Datum Street Elevation Job 053-1512.000
Location SE Corner of Site
SW 1 1 1 1 1 1
.0 A
B
Bottom of Test Pit at 6.5 ft
0
5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTIONS AND EXCAVATION NOTES
A 0.0 - 0.5 ft: TOPSOIL, sod, sandy silt. (MUSM)
B 05 - 4.0 ft: Compact, light gray grading to light olive gray
and orange mottling at 25, fine sandy SIL 1,
trace little gravel, moist. (WEATHERED
TILL)(MLJSM)
C 4.0 - 6.5 ft: Dense to very dense, light gray, nonstratified,
silty SAND, trace to little gravel, scattered
cobbles, moist to wet. (TILL)(SM)
t
U)
Uj
0
NE
SAMPLES
NO.
DEPTH
I (ft)
MOISTURE
(%)
-
1
1.0
2
4.0
TIME
DEPTH OF
HOLE
(ft)
DEPTH TO
W/L
(ft)
DEPTH TO
SEEPAGE
(ft)
10:50
Start
SPECIAL NOTES:
No caving
No groundwater
f
Golder Associates Inc.
18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200
Redmond, WA USA 98052-3333
Telephone (425) 883-0777
Fox (425) 882-5498
www.golder.com
January 5, 2006
R&H Investments, LLC
21907 64th Avenue West, Suite 200
Mount Lake Terrace, Washington 98043
Attention: Mr. Tim Herdt
RE: GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW LETTER
REMAX METRO PROPERTIES - 21920 76TH AVE WEST
EDMONDS, WASIIINGTON
Dear Mr. Herdt:
Ak&sociaks
OurRef: 053-1512.000
Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) presents this letter acknowledging that 'we have reviewed the civil
and structural plans for the above referenced proposed development. Based on this review, we have
found that the plans and specifications deviate from recommendations of the geotechnical report in
the following instances:
Foundation Plan Note 3, shown on Sheet S2. 1, calls out 4-inches of 5/8-inch minus crushed
gravel. This may not meet requirements for capillary break material presented in the
geotechnical report, which requires clean, &ee draining sand and gravel or crushed rock with
less than 3 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, and less than 20 percent passing the No. 4
sieve.
Provided that the recommendations are satisfied, the construction and development 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.
If you have any q
Z i,
uestions, please do not hesitate to contact US. I _� _U
V "A
Sincerely,
J,
GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.
VA
! J2.
r1v
Katy Chandler Richard tuark,
Engineer "I"ESUB Senior Consultant
KSC/RDL/se JAN 19 2006
SUILDINa IDEPAMMENT
C11W 01: EDWNDS STREET FILE
010506kci.dm
OFFICES ACROSS AFRICA, ASIA, AUSTRAUA, EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA AND SOUTH AMERICA
STREET FILE
City of Edmonds
Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet
Name of Proposed Project: Edward Jones Tenant Improvement
Owner/Applicant Applicant Contact Person:
Linn -Douglas Construction, LLC Kirk Figenshow, Member
Name PO Box 8019
Street/Mailing Address
Covington WA 98042
City
Telephone: 206 349 4230
State Zip
Name
PO Box 8019
� �t nel i Pn*(24' E I V E D
FEB 0 9 2016
11OPMENT SERVICES CTR.
._ GI1Y OF EDMONDS
Street/Mailing Address
Covington WA 98042
City State Zip
206 349 4230
Telephone:
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis (if applicable):
Firm Name Contact Name
Telephone: E-mail:
THRESHOLD LEVELS OF ANALYSIS
Project Traffi c Levels
Sections to Complete
—
1. Less than 25 peak -hour trips generated
1 and 7 only (Worksheet/Checklist)
11. More than 25 peak -hour trips generated
All sections
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Location - Street address: 21910 76th Ave W, Suite 102, Edmonds, WA 98020
(Attach a vicinity map and site plan.)
b. Specify existing land use:
c. Specify proposed type and size of development: P F Fzz�_' F,:-
(# of residential units andlor squarefootage of building)
Revised on 6124110
E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet
Page 1 04
d. Date construction will begin and be completed: _10 A42401
e. Define proposed access locations: & L
f Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations: &( c
2. TRIP GENERATION
Source shall be the Eighth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
manual. For independent fee calculations, the current edition of the ITE manual may be used.
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
PM Peak -hour trips (AM, noon or school peak may also apply as directed by the City Engineer)
a. Existing Site Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
b. Proposed Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
c. Net New Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
d. State assumptions and methodology for internal, link -diverted or passby trips:
Revised on 6124110 E82 - TrqJJic Impact Analysis Worksheet Page 2 of5
7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic
impact fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached)
and as identified in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations
in ECDC 18.82.130.
CHANGE IN USE
Fee for prior use shall be based on fee established at the time the prior use was permitted. If the
previous use was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (effective date: 09/12/04),
the 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be used.
ITE Land Use Category Per Unit
I Fee Rate
New Use $ X
Prior Use Dk
,7*nqc- � $ X
Units in
square feet,
# of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
Fee
NewUseFee: $ JLeq PriorUseFee: $ 3LtS 1$ - 1-746 X"2- 1
11 NEW DEVELOPMENT
ITE Land Use Category Per Unit
I Fee Rate
New Use
0 OTHER
Units in
square feet, Fee
# of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
X $
MITIGATION FEE RECOMMENDA ION:
S
INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATION: $200.OQLt consultant fee)
$
TOTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
$
2- Iq /I (,:: �.
�-f Edmonds, Engineering Division Approval Date
No impact fees will be due, nor will a credit be given, for an impact fee calculation resulting in a net negative,_
3
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet Page 5
PLANNING DATA
- - Sign5 -
Name:
Date:
Site Address: 2 1 cl 2_0
4vx C,
C> k
Plan Check ff-
Project Description:
Reduced Site Plan Provided: (�ES-*� NO)
Zoning:
Comprehens ive Plan Designation: 31�j �Js C'. v---, vv%,e- r
Map Page:
Corner Lot: NO)
Flag Lot: (YES
ADB File # (or date waived):
rOTAL Are''a per 7-ype of
Type of Sign
Allowed in
Matrix
conditions
Allowed
area per
Unit
TOTAL sign
area
P roposed
zone'?
met?
unit
allowed for
.
sign area
this siqn
Exa-ple
Wall. wlintemat
Aluminaton
Yes� with
candit7ons
yes
I ft//'?7e3/
tt. att,7ched
41 It. attached
WIN/
41 s;qudre feet
20 square 1��et
Sign #1
L4/;
96-
wkkk CA
--------
& e6e,�
(2
-31
Sign ff 2
Sign #3
TOTAL Sign Area fof- Tel7an�lSite
Max Permitted:
Previous Total:
Proposed Total: (�'9, ( e,
Sign Heigl7t
Sign Type: Q,'-�C,((
Max Permitted: t LA
Actual Height:
Sign Type:
Max Permitted:
Actual Height:
Sign Type:
Max Permitted:
Actual Height:
Sign Type:
Proposed:
Allowed in Zone:
Sign Type:
Proposed:
Allowed in Zone:
PLANNING DATA FILE
-- Signs --
S14n. Colors
Proposed:
Acceptable?
Requires ADB Approval?
55ga Locat(ag
If freestanding and 3-feet or over (unless afence) rTieetssetbacks?
5 'et
Street:
Sid
Side:
Rear7
ActualSeLbacks
Street:
Side:
Side:
L,7ndSCaping fer-F
Size:
Locatiom
Critical Areas Determination
Study Required
waiver
Other
L S
t6
Plan Review By:
INN &
G
ILy EAR N
A FA
LON)
ol
cz-
EDMONDS�ORTHOD alcs
'if
ID
FRONT ELEVATION
City of Edmonds Building Division
APPR'O
PLAN
Ii%;aRROVMDAX— Y. 117,1 &
10LDG. OFFICIAL. A 4-ndod
wmmm�'
376 99
144 91) C.O.
IEdwardjones 1� INVESTMENTS I
5/F 5ANP 13LA5TEL) HPLI FANEL
_QTy. 1
-51NGLE 51DED.
-51ZE 15 1b"H x 144"W x 1.5" HPLI.
-5ACKGROUND FTIVI PM5 5535 EJ GREEN,
-EDWARD JONES LOGO 15 PAINTED WHITE,
-1" 5ORDER PAINTED WHITE.
-INSTALL AS SHOWN,
I ir" 00, 1 IN, I I ` 1' 1 ' .10
Name
Financid Advisor
000-000-0000
www.*edwardjones.com
16" copy wicith
DOOR GRAPHICS
(FROVIDED 13Y FA5T5]GNS)
AFFLIED TO FIR5T SURFACE
_QTY 1 -
-PKEMIUM WHITE
VINYL GKAPHIC
V-1
_QTY 1
-5000NI 500K TYPE5TYLE
-TEXT HEIGHT 15/16"
-COPY PREMIUM WHITE VINYL
Please sign & return drawing/s to FAWT11IGNS *DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE BUT IS PROPORTIONATE*
I Im ffic':4 -'k Signature below indicates approval of BOTH design & placement of signis I
1 0 ' I FIELD VERIFY ALL MEA5UREMENT!5 DEFORE 13EGINNING ANY WORK.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIwIMINg x DATE I
%_ — — — Ar — -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — J IN5TALLER TO VERIFY MOUNTING 5URFACE PRIOR TO IN5TALLATION.
FASrSIGNS.
NATIONAL ACCOUNTS
ACCOUNT:
EDWARDJONES
FILE:
05829-2-ARTI
REPRESENTATIVE:
AD7RESS:
21910 7roth Ave W
5te 102
Edmorido, WA
OWINAL DRAWFING DATE: 12/07/15
DRAVANG NUMBER:
SCALE:
1 of 3
NT5
REV. #1 BY:
REV. DATE
13[3
I 112&11(o
REVISION NOTES:
Changecl to blaoted.
REV. #2 BY:
REV. DAT,E
REVISION NOTES:
REII, #1 BY:
REV, DATE
REVISION NOTES:
NOTES:
REVISION-1
01/28/16
MUM. 13.13uooe
THIS DRAWING IS THE
PROPERTY OF FASTSIGNS
INTERNATIONAL, INC.
THE BORROWER AGREES, IT
SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED,
COPIED OR DISPOSED OF,
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, NOR
USED FOR ANY PURPOSE
WITHOUT PERMISSION.
FEB 10 2016
6"T'REET FILE
BUILDING DEPAR—IjMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
0
51DE ELEVATION
d)
0
144 99 C1.0.
136 �9
Edwardjones �� INVESTMENTS I
5/F 5AND 13LA5TEL) HPLI PANEL
,-QTY. 1,
-51NGLE 51PED.
-51ZE 15 lb"H x 144"W x 1.5" HDIJ.
-5ACKGROUND FTM FIV15 5535 EJ GKEEN,
-EPWARP JONE5 LOGO 15 FAINTED WHITE,
-1" 13ORDEK FAINTEI) WHITE.
-IN5TALL A5 5HOWN
Wall signs attached to solid masonry,
concrete, or stone shall be attached by
means of metal anchors, bolts, or
expansion screws of a minimum of
3/8-inch diameter and be embedded a
minimum of 5 inches.
IBC H111.2
Please sign & return drawingis to FASTSIGNS *DRA, WING IS NOT TO SCALE BUT IS PROPORTIONATE*
Signature below indicates approval of BOTH design & placement of sign/s
I FIELD VERIFY ALL MEA5UREMENT5 13EFORE 13EGINNING ANY WORK.
Log x PATE I I
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — J IN&TALLER TO VERIFY MOUNTING5URFACE PRIOR TO IN5TALLATION.
I
FASTSIGNS.
NATIONAL ACCOUNTS
ACCOUNT:
EDWARD JONES
FILE:
05829-2-ART2
REPRESENTATIVE:
ADDRESS:
21910 7roth Ave W
5te 102
Edmotido, WA
ORIGINAL DIZAMIING DATE: 12/07/15
DRAVANG NUMBER:
SCALE:
2 of 3
NTS
REV. #1 BY.-
REV. DATE
1313
112811ro
REVISION NOTES:
Chaneed to blaoted oiori.
REV. #2 BY.
REV. DATE
REVISION NOTES:
REV. #3 BY:
REV. DATE
REVISION NOTES:
!NOTES:
7 1
REVISION-1
01/28/16
DPAWNBY. 13. 15uooc
REMDBY: 13. E5UCIE5e
THIS DRAWING IS THE
PROPERTY OF-FASTSIGNS
INTERNATIONAL, INC.
THE BORROWER AGREES, IT
SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED,
COPIED OR DISPOSED OF,
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, NOR
USED FOR ANY PURPOSE
WITHOUT PERMISSION.
RIESUE3
PEB 10 2016
BUILDINQ DEPARUMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
L:\LIBRARY\PLANNING\ParkingAnalysis\Cyber Properties Building (21920 76th Ave) Parking Analysis.xls
Parking Analysis
Building Name: Cyber Properties Building @ 21920 76th Ave West
Number(s): BLD-2011-0718
Review By: Mike Clugston, Associate Planner (9/9/11)
9/9/2011
Business
Unit
Use
Square Feet
Parking Ratio:
1 per
Spaces
Required
CPA
1 st floor
office w/customers
546
400
1.37
Office (Suite 104)
1 st floor
office w/customers
1003
400
2.51
—Escrow
Chiropratic/Massage
1 st floor
medical office
1229
200
6.15
Sonus Hearing Care
1 st floor
medical office
248
200
1.24
The Health & Wellness Clinic (Chiropratic/Massage)
2nd floor
medical office
1459
200
.7.30
The Health & Wellness Clinic (Chiropratic/Massage)
2nd floor
office w/o customers
92
800
0.12
Vacant
2nd floor
787
Edmonds Orthodonics
2nd floor
medical office
1890
200
9.45
Edmonds Orthodonics
2nd floor
office w/o customers
418
800
0.52
Parking Provided., 31 Stalls Total Parking Required. 28.64
L:\LIBRARY\PLANNING\ParkingAnalysis\Cyber Prooerties Building (21920 76th-Ave) Parking Analysis.xls
5/25/2011
Parking Analysis
Building Name: Cyber Properties Building @ 21920 76th Ave West
Number(s): BLD-2011-0382
Review By: Mike Clugston, Associate Planner (5/25/11)
Business
-"UtVU
Use,
'Square Feet
fog Ratib.
Per�
Spaces,
ed,
CPA
1 st floor
office w/customers;
546
400
1.37
Office
1 st floor
office w/customers
992
400
2.48
Chiropratic/Massage
1 st floor
medical office
1229
200
6.15
Sonus Hearing Care
1 st floor
medical office
248
200
1.24
The Health & Wellness Clinic (Chiropratic/Massage)
2nd floor
medical office
1459
200
7.30
The Health & Wellness Clinic (Chiropratic/Massage)
2nd floor
office w/o customers
92
800
0.12
Vacant
2nd floor
787
Edmonds Orthodonics
2nd floor
medical office
1890
200
9.45
Edmonds Orthodonics
2nd floor
office w/o customers
418
800
0.52
-,11,Stafls M1,61
P�kkind.P,6vided. totd/ Paikih4 Req&j
N---'
- - t
= I �M-
rNill
111111121",
log
13�
Mom.
"/\'l N4, 0
to
46f SqFt
Medical Use Area f 00 Sq.Ft. +46f Sq.Ft.
f 08 SqFt Total 569 Sq.Ft.
\. I
(S*I,V,n Center
19720 44th Ave. Suite H, Lynnwood, WA 98036
Phone: 425-672-3706 Fax: 425-672-3708
Signs@SeattleSigns.com
This layout is property of Speedy Sign Center Reproduction of thls material is forbidden. If produced by anyone other than Speedy Sign Center without consent client will be required to pay
. for any design time accrued. Important: Please double check the layout above for accuracy including spelling as your sign(s) will be produced to match.
21920 76th W, Edmonds, WA 98026 - Google Maps
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
To see all the details that are visible on the
screen, use the "Print" link next to the map.
0
z
Ui M
z
0
>
Ui U9
C= 0 U-
F- CD C)
U L)
C)
I of 1
1-4
10/6/2011 10:40 AM
ADPR ED F,-,( 'PL 11 LlIG
'Dp"o
CITY OF EDMONDS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
WORK
ADDR�SS
OWNER
APPROVED DATE:—L-2—L-11
ol
BLDG. OFFICIAL
PERMIT NUMBER
;FL,�nDzt:.�4�
STREu FILE
OV E . D CITY OF EDMONDS
1215 th Avenue North * Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 o Fax: 425.771.0221 o Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
-,STAFF DEasION -
BLD-2011-0847 Project Proposal:
Speedy Sign Center has submitted a sign permit for The Health & Wellness Center which consists of a
non -illuminated wall sign at 21920 76 th Avenue West. The comprehensive plan designation for the site
is Mixed Use Commercial and it is located within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center overlay. The
site is zoned RM-2.4 — Multifamily Residential. Busine�ss uses in the RM zones are subject to BN signage
requirements.
Property Owner
Cyber Properties LLC
2109764 th Ave W, Suite 200
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
Design Review Process:
Applicant
Speedy Sign Center
1972044 th Ave. W, Suite H
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Design review for signs is considered a Type I decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.01.003.
The design standards in the sign code (Chapter 20.60 ECDC) and those general urban design standards in
the Comprehensive Plan apply.
Analysis:
Design Standards. The proposed signage satisfies the intent,of the following goals and policies from
the Comprehensive Plan and the design standards in ECDC 20.60:
a. Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center are located
on pages 61 — 67 and are intended to encourage the development of high quality, well -designed
projects that reflect the values of the citizens of �dmoncls. The associated general urban design
objectives are located on pages 92 — 98.
b. "Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered." (page, 96) ,
c. ".'Minimize distraction from the overuse of advertisement elements." (page 96)
"Where multiple businesses operate from a central location, tenants should be encouraged to
coordinate signing to avoid the proliferation of signs, each competing with the others." (page
96)
2. Sign type. The proposed sign consists of individual plastic letters mounted directly to the face of the
building.
3. Size. Business sites within the RM zone (BN signage) are permitted 1 square foot of sign area per
lineal foot of wall containing the main public entrance. The subject building has approximately 96
feet.of lineal wall where the main public entrance is located.. Therefore, 96 feet of signage is
allowed for the entire site, tobe divided between all tenants in this building. Two existing tenants
S1 ; RET FILEPage I of2
are 56 square feet leaving 40 square feet for the proposed sign. The proposed sign is 17.4 square
feet which leaves 22.6 square feet of signage available for the remaining tenants at this time.
Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.A, the maximum area of wall signs within the BN zone is I square foot
per lineal foot of attached wall. The wall where the proposed sign is located is approximately 47
feet long. The proposed sign a. rea is 17.4 square feet and thus complies with the code.
4. Number. For commercial uses within a residential zone, pursuant ECDC 20.60.025 signs are subject
to the maximum area and height limitations established for signs in the BN.zone. While number of
signs is not mentioned, it is appropriate to use the number of signs in the BN zone as well. The
maximum number of signs within the BN zone is three per site or three per physically enclosed
business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants. Only one sign is being proposed
by the tenant.
5. Height. Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.B, the maximum height of wall signs is 14 feet or the height of
the face of the building on which the sign is located. The application proposes to place the sign on
the face of the building at a height of approximate.ly 22 feet which is consistent with ECDC.
20.60.030.B.
6. Color. The sign letters are white on an existing.beige fagade.
Decision:
Based on the facts and conclusions of this report, staff finds that the design review for this project (File
No. BLD-2011-0847) is APPROVED.
I have reviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development Code.
rL)
Mike Clugston, Planning Division
Date
Appeals: Design review decisions by staff under the provisions of ECDC 20.12.030 are only appealable to
the extent that the applicable building permit or development approval is an appealable decision under
the provisions of the ECDC. Design review by staff is not in itself an appealable decision.
Page 2 of2
WALL
CONSTRUCTION & MOUNTING DETAIL
Minimum 6 top and bottom 3/8"all thread
thru bolted with 2"x 2" L-1ron back if metal studs
or
Minimum 6 top and bottom 3/8" rated
expansion bolts onto concrete
or
Minimum 6 top and bottom 3/8" lag
bolt thru L-1ron to wood structural member
or *
Minimum 6 top and bottom 3/8"x 6"toggle bolts
cy
rn X
00
V
0 0
rn
OM
XX
C'C"l
VIM ZZ.,;
G*
Ar STREET FILE
#10 self tapping
screws
Fluorescent lamp
attached to face of
panel
NON LIT ALUMI-
NUM CHANNEL
LETTERS,
0
1- e
!i M
25'- 0'
24'- 2'
Fluorescent Lamp, 25'Long
Attached to Face of Panel
EXTERNALLY ILLUM. CHANNEL LETTER SIGN QTY: 1 SQFT: 16 SCALE: 1/2"= 1'
SPECIFICATIONS:
FABRICATE AND INSTALL ONE SINGLE FACED EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN
CHANNEL LETTERS
Custom fabricated aluminum channel letters as described
Faces: white 3/16" acrylic (#2447),
Returns: 3" Bright brushed clear anodized aluminum
-Trim Cap: 1 "Brushed Silver (Gemini)
- Mounted flush to background panel
BACKGROUND PANEL
1/8"aluminum panel, painted closest match to fascia color (VERIFY)
Attached to fascia with 2" angle iron frame support, painted Gray (Match Facia)
EXTERNAL LIGHTING
- 25'long flourescent lamp, mounted to background panel,
painted RAL color (by vendor) closest match to fascia color (VERIFY)
COLORS
BRUS DALUMINLIM BRUSHED SILVER
CLEAR ANODIZED GEMINI
(RETURNS) (TRIM CAP)
F-1
WHITE
3/16"ACRYLIC #2447
(FACES)
G.-
BERRY
N E 0 N
SIGN SYSTEMS
F ZZ
FASCIA COLOR (CLOSEST MATCH)
MATTHEWS
PAINT
VERIFY
FASCIA COLOR (CLOSEST MATCH)
RAL PAINT (BY VENDOR)
(LAMPS)
VERIFY
Departm- ent
Rooflinl'LAN
-luorescent Lamp
kttached to Face of Panel
Fascia Surface'
1"TrimCap '
Channel Letters
1/8" Aluminum Back Panel
2" Angle Iron
3' 2'
SIDE VIEW SCALE: 3/4'= 1'
(Gj
V);l r7
A oVED BY PLANNIN
-11 ly
RECEIVED
MAR 2 6 2010
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTFL
CITY OF EDMONDS '
LL!
F_:
C32006 tdifi6fk !R-C WWAC Afftefidffi@04
442006 Wlfloii TIRC w/ftiqAt
. _.p.qodments
E32006 Edition UPC w[WAC Amendments
and Appendices A, B, Q 1
[32006 Edition IMC w[WAC Amendments
E32006 Edition 1FGC w/WAC Amendments
[32006 Edition 1FC w/WAC Amendments
C32006 Edition VIAQ WAC 5 1- 13
02006 Edition WSEC WAC 5 1 -11
EDMONDS
BUILDING
VV0RK..,'jLQ
6
ADDRESS _'Z4 ?;
me�11.6_1
PERMIr NUMBER
I Z 6/,o -ozz, / I
+/- 47'- 0" (Tenant
.A
STREET FILE
ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8'= V
Job Name: Edmonds Orthodontics Scale: Noted Designer: C. Snider 0 Berry Neon Sign Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved
kAPPROVED AS IS APPROVED W/ CHANGES AS MARKED
Site Address: 21920 7th Ave. W., Edmonds, WA98026 Date: 02-17- 1-0, rev. 2-25,3-15,3-25
Unauthorized use, reproduction, and or display shall render the infringer
Sales Representa tive: Grady Kizziar Design#: Edmonds Orthodontics la E:40031
liable for up to $150,000 in Statutory Damages, plus attorneys fees and costs,
CLIENTAPPROVAL:
7400 Hardeson Road, Everett, WA 98203 m (425) 776-8835 m (800) 488-2430 m Fax:(425) 774-8221 in E-Mail: jnfo@berryneonsignsxi�_7�j
'
for ea'ch infringement, under the U.S. CopyrightAct [17 U.S.C. 412 It 504]
SIGNATURE
DATE APPROVED:
NOTE: If this file has been emailed or faxed it may be out of scale. NOTE: This Color Drawine is a simulation of the DrODosed colors and
should be verified with actual materials.
ACV
OR rll4
K
VW, Dia 717AR
tt
4
Nt
. . . . . . . . . . .
qj t i
m w, y
Gm 77N
C- A
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VaAi
ng V.-
J': M
"Of
r:Wi A
A7j
QZ.)Uji
f-'!? iv
M Ps
V
T`A i�$
xv
ft�2
Q t
'g,
MIA:
-j7 11 6 'G,
'tt,.
4:44
. . ..... . ......
ww
Pm
g;'gg
M,
Aft
g7
mi
. ..... ... .... %V
Affin
57—
101-01,
LINEAR LIGHTING
SYSTEM
ObtairiFilectrlcal Permit from
State Industries
CHANNEL LETTERS
ca, -e
2
BACKGROUND
PANEL
"SONUS"= 10" LETTERS; "HEARING CARE PROFESSIONALS"= 5 1/4" OVER 3 3/4" COPY
S/F WALL SIGN
.125 ALUMINUM PANEL W/ N N CHANNEL "SONUS" LETTERS & NON -LIT VINYL "HEARING CARE PROFESSIONALS" COPY
PAINTED TO MATCH FASCL RIFY) BACKGROUND AREA FOR "SONUS" LETTERS PANTED PMS 534 DARK BLUE
DISEW_TQ�BE-M0UIqTnRM1/ 2" ANGLE BRACKETS 0, f 0
____—WERNAL ILLUMINATION W/ FLUORESCENT "LINEAR LIGHTING" SYSTEM 0, 0A i Y� 2-1
CHANNEL LETTERS:
3" ALUMINUM SIDEWALLS - PRE -PAINTED WHITE
I" TRIM CAP - JEWELITE WHITE
3/16" PLEXIGLAS FACES - WHITE ("@" TO BE #220/225-10 WHITE VINYL)
"HEARING CARE PROFESSIONALS" COPYTO BE #220-69 DURANODIC VINYL
B E R R Y
N E 0 N
SIGN SYSTEMS
Job Name: SONUS i_ ScalfL,_ _j 11= V- 0" (OR AS NOTED) Designer-: AXJRTY JOHNSON
SiteAddress: 21920 76th AVE W, EDMONDS WA Date: 4/19/2011 Rev. 4 25/ 2011 5 /19 / 2011
Sales Rep: GRADY KIZZAIR Design No. 041911SONUS File Name: SONUSEDM.SCV
NOTE: If this file has been emailed or faxed it may be out of scale. NOTE: This Color Drawing is a simulation of the proposed colors and should be verified with actual materials.
Office/ Deliveries: 7400 Hardeson Road, Everett, WA 98203 M (425) 776-883 5 M
3" �1 2"
1/8"
EAST PHOTO ELEVATION SCALE: ± 1 /8" = 1 '- 0"
FILE
FASCIA
MOUNTING BRACKETS
RF.SUB
MAY 24 2011
BUILDING DEPAP-17MENT
CITy OF EDMONDS
Q Berry Neon Sign Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved E] APPROVED AS IS [] APPROVEDW/ , CHANGES AS MARKED
Unauthorized use, reproduction, and or display shalt render the infringer CLIENT APPROVAL: LfTb"
liable for up to $150,000 in Statutory Damages, plus attorneys fees and costs, IGNATURE
for each infringement, under the U.S. Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 412 Et 5041 DATE APPROVED:
(800) 488-2430 M Fax: (425) 774-8221 m E-Mail: info@Berryneonsigns.com
A -M
Mop,
Mao
41
A
7
'J�
ell
( �rr
X I
AL _r
U�b
hl.
yr-
IA NOR
OW
A.,
Al W�V
CZ
J.g
Lzf=
tD
I
3TY OF EDMONDS
WING DEPARTMEN1
ADDRESS
OWNER -
PERMIT NUMBER
- BZ-V 2-011 -0
A a5 VW -FCO(_/
APPROVED BY PLANNING
V-Wil&/ 0 1.
.gft kEF
5 g
RESUB
MAY 2 4 2011
SU"-DING DEPAWNENT
CIV op E70MONDS
Me,
MIN
....... . . . . . .
�Z,
T
]so
1- 9.54 in -
--%9 As In 33.94 113
L- Mm H ED)
94A Sq Inch 2744 Sq Inch W Sq Inch 292.72 Sq lmh
A 52 in
a (C MD CO)r 1184.26 Square Inches
L�� w 8.224 Square Feet
85.9 S� to& ]CL74 Sq Inds
SIDE PROFILE DRAWING I
2" Long X Wit" Studs Threaded—,
Building Siding
Into Backe Of Letters 117'.
Will Drill Into The Building Siding
injection Molded
At Stud Locations And Attach
Plastic Letters
Using Bonding Filter Material
Thicknes,
W' -314"
101, - ill
ft& Flll� RECE01FED
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
0TY OF EDMONDS
21920 76th Ave W, Edmonds, WA Satellite Map and View
http: //www. mapquest.com/print?a=app. core. fed6 I cO 19c6ee5 6e999dOc4b
Notes
To investors who want
to retire comfortably.
If you have a S500,000 portfolio,
download the guide written by Forbes
COlUmnist and money manager Ken
Fisher's firm. ft's called "The 15-Minute
Retirement Plan." Even if you have
something else in place right now, it still
makes sense to request your guide'
Click Here to Download Your Guide!
. ...... ... ... . .
02011 MapQuest, Inc. Use of directions and maps is subject to the MapQuestTerms of Use. We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their
content, road conditions or route usability. You assume all risk of use. v'
Get Directions even quicker! fcatures.mapquest.com/tootbar/
I of 1 10/20/2011 10:17 AM
CITY OF
BUILDING
woRK--SI-q-r—)
ADDRESS
OWNER )
APPROVED DATE:
BLDG. OFFICIAL
APPROVED BY PLANNING
EDMONDS
DEPARTMENT
PERMIT NUMBER
zi-D 7,61 t -08 7
S, F(Eg F ILE
RECEIVED
OCT 2 0 2011
SUILWiNG DEPAPPIr-Or
CATY OF EDMONDS
,Burlee, Denise
From: McConnell, Jeanie
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 3:01 PM
To: Burke, Denise
Subject: ESU's - Re -Max 220th/76th
21920 76th Ave W
ReMax General Office
5.81 ESU's
,-1.7eanie 3fcConneff
JEngineering Technician
-425-771-0220, eyt. 1338
IFAX- 425-771-0221
kivn q I
4ey, vo�)
mcconnell(eyd eamonas.wa. us
Cop
JU
I�j
NP
N
1
5-rgz�E;r FLL8
() V F 1: D/1.1
�2
City of Edmonds
Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet
Name of Proposed Project:
Owner/Applicant
71-1-Y,l -7-
Name
710 A.25-
Street/Mailing Address
zxg%o o,--x
city State Zip
Telephone6
Applicant Contact Person:
�vov �-_-Z
Name
��, g1Z, � � /!�W-
Street/Mailing Address
L &6<r7_ /_V/�L_
city / State Zip
Tetephone&�O ;�,-2
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis (if applicable):
Firm Name Contact Nam'e
Telephone: E-mail:
THRESHOLD LEVELS OF ANALYSIS
Project Traffic Levels
Sections to Complete
1. Less than 25 peak -hour trips generated
I and 7 only (Workslieet/Cheeklist)
If. More than 25 peak -hour trips generated
All sections
1. PROJE CT DESCRIPTION
a. Location - Street address:
(Attach a vicinity,niq]) and site plan.)
b. Specify existing land use:
c. Specify proposed type and size of development: 14MI-I&I'm - MY39-M, _-a
of resitlential units an(Ilor squareflotage of building)
Re vised on 6124110 E82 - Trqffic Impact Analysis [Vorksheet Page I of 5
d.
C.
f.
2. TRIP GENERATION
Source shall be the.Eighth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
inanUal. For independent fee calculations, the current edition of the ITE manual may be used.
ADT = Average Daily Traffic I
PM Peak -hour trips (AM, noon or school peak may also apply as directed by the bty Engineer)
a. Existing Site Trip Generation Table:
Land Use Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
b. Proposed Project Trip Generation. Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
c. Net New Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
d. State assumptions and methodology for internal, li nk-diverted or passby trips:
Re vised oi 16124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheel Page 2 of 5
f I
3. TRIP DISTRIEBUTION
Prepare and attach a graphic showing project trip distribution percentages and assignments. For
developments that generate over 75 peak-liour trips, tile City Engineer reserves the right to require
trip distribution to be determined through use of the City traffic modei. 1
4. SITE ACCESS ROADWAY/DRIVE WAYS AND SAFETY
a. Have sight distance requirements at egress location been met per AASHTO requirements?
b. Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis:
Intei-sections to. be evaluated shall be determined by the Cily ofEdwoncls Ti-affic Engineei-
Existing Conditions
LOS
Delays
Year of Opening
LOS
Delays
Five Years Beyond Change of
LOS
I I
Delays
Land Use
c. Describe cliannelization. warrants:
(Attach striping plait.)
d. Vehicle Storage/Queuing Analysis (calculate 50% and95 % queuing lengths):
50%
95%
Existing Conditions
Year of Opening
Five Years Beyond Change of
Land Use
e. If appropriate, state traffic control warrants (e.g. stop sign warrants, signal warrants):
f. Summarize local accident history 2 (only required for access to principal and minor arterials):
1 Available upon request at City of Edmonds Development Services Department
2 Available upon request at City of Edmonds Police Department
Re vised on 6124110 E-82 - Traffk Inipact Analysis Worksheet Page 3 of 5
5. TRAFFIC VOLUME, S
Provide the following and other plaimed development traffic within the city.
a. Describe existing ADT and peak -hour counts (less than two years old), including turning
movements, on street adjacent to and directly impacted by the project.
b. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, the year the
proJect is fully open (with and without project traffic).
c. Describe the estimated ADT and 0eak-hour counts, including turning movements, five years
after the project has been fully open (with and without project traffic).
d. State annual background traffic growth factor and source:
6. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS
a. Summarize Level of Service Analysis below and attach supporting LOS analysis documentation.
Provide the following documentation for each arterial street or arterial intersection impacted by
ten or more peak -hour trips. Other City -planned developments must also be factored into the
LOS calculations.
LOS
LOS
Existing Conditions
Existing
Delays
Year of Opening
With Project
Without Project
Five Years Beyond Change of
Land Use
With Project
I I
Without Project
I
b. Note any assurnptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications:
1 A list of planned developinents are available at the City upon request for public records
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Tr�ffic Impact Analysis ff,'orksheet Page 4 of 5
7. MITIGATION RE, COMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic
impact fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached)
and as identified in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations
in ECDC 18.82.130.
.E1 CHANGE E'4 USE
Fee for prior use shall be based on fee established at the time the prior use was permitted. If the
previous use was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (effective date: 09/12/04),
the 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be used.
Units in
ITE Land Use Category Per Unit square feet,
Fee Rate # of dwelling,
I I I vfD. etc.
New Use I Oi�lco., -716 11 1 x
OPC9— 10''I $ 1 X
Prior Use Fee: $
New Use Fee:
11 NEW DEVELOPMENT
ITE Land Use Category' I Pei- Unit,
I . I Fee Rate
I New Use 1 1 $ 1
)4QT
�, R
Units in
square feet,
of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
X
f�o
INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATION: $200.00 (+ consultant fee) $
TOTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE $ rh
City of Edmonds,
Approval
No impact fees will be due, nor will a credit be given, for an impact fee calculation resulting in a net negative.
Revisedon 6124110 E82 - Trakic Inip'acl Analysis Worksheet Page 5 of 5
0
i.
CITY OF EDMONDS
jki, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
WORK SHEET RECEIVED
OCT 27 2009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
Name of Proposed Project: mba ds Or*t) dol � cs CITY OF EDMONDS
Owner/Apolicant:
km Kan
Name
/5�)/to 3-4. I)A
StreevMailing Address
Nek 9x/)-
city State zip
Telephon e: A0G--r-5-zf— &8'.5-2—
Applicant Contact Person:
kels (<(IV\,
Name
15Z& 9-4 pje 51--
Street/Mailing Address
mdt 6-0&t� twk
city State zip
Telephone: — C- &5 2-
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis:
�5o L C. MA yi< --sa C,0 6 5 4 1,E Ptro L- �2 0 Iff - -5-4 F,1
Firm Name Contact Name Telephone
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Street address (if known): A ve. 6d1ndP1d5 UM qf Z) 2- 6
b. Location: _JXrA-ed w +ka- fJogtkijest (—Qk-17C4,- Of
5 t - - Ed Mndj, (,/,+ - ---- - -
(Attach a vicinity map and.siteplan.)
c. Specify existing land use: /0 1 931 5F &75-5 6e4,1e,-,yA -0
e ex.& , I d
d. Specify proposed type and size of development: Z-eculn. 1 0 1-d &A 6 1,-a 17'" 1 f T JF-
When.will the project begin construction and when will it.be completed? 3td7�j AJ6VM rel
f, Define proposed access locations: lAere
06 y-f K ?4 51 (Wtle r a� :f 6, LLD de rd
(OUW OVN. f4. 5�U-VA S.Idt g -f L� e
the
g. . Define proposed sight distance at site egress locatidnsT_
1) 1' oUot�- -5-t - -5-0 -
Is
a M63
Page 1
2. TRIP GENERATION
a. Existing Site Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour Trips
IN OUT
b. Proposed Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour Trips
IN OUT
c. Net New Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour Trips
IN OUT
d. State assumptions and methodology for internal, link -diverted or passby trips:
Page 2
3. - TRIP DISTRIEBUTION
Prepare and attach a graphic showing project trip distribution percentages and assignments.
I
4, SITE ACCESS ROADWAY/DRIVEWAYS AND SAFETY
a. Have sight distance requirements at egress location been met per AASHTO requirements?
b. Intersection Level of Service Analysis:,
• Existing Conditions
LOS Delays
• Year of Opening
LOS Delays
• Five Years Beyond Change of Land Use
LOS I Delays
(Intersections to be evaluated shall be determined by the City ofEdmonds Traffic Engineer.)
c. Describe channelization. warrants:
d. Vehicle Storage/Queuing Analysis (calculate 50% and 95 % queuing lengths):
50%
• Existing Conditions
• Year of Opening
Five Years Beyond
Change of Land Use
e. If appropriate, state stop sign and signal warrants:
f. Summarize local accident history: I
(Attach stripingplan.)
95%
Page 3
5. TRAFFIC VOLUMES I
a. Describe existing ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, on street adjacent to and
directly impacted by the project.
b. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, the year the project is
fully open (with and without project traffic).
c. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, five years after the
project has been fully open (with and )kithout project traffic).
d. State annual background traffic growth factor and source:
6. LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Summarize Level of Service Analysis below and attach supporting LOS'analysis documentation. Provide
the following documentation for each arterial street or arterial intersection impacted by ten or more peak -
hour trips. Other City -planned developments must also be factored into the LOS calculations.
Existing LOS:
Existing Condition:
Year of Oyenin2 LOS:
With Project:
Without Project:
Page 4
Five Years After Openin2 LOS:
With Project:
Without Project:
Note any assumptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications:
7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic impact
fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached) and as identified
in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECDC 18.82.130.
11 aNIA e-CL-0- t-- I A A'It, C -�tz (n
al ke,� Tka -W6 )c
5F 3q T� -
44,
ITE Ff� E
I-e,55 /41 pt 5F CY.1i 1 1/5-F) r 0-q0 30 -
Di4e(we betuven ftpj,,ra� us-�L Ckvxd �Ae40-(-,GC*e H
SAENGMarreffiCity ProjectATIA GuidelineffrafIrnpAnalyWork 9-04.doc Page 5
Wimail - 2009.03 1- Emailing: E82-Traffic Impact Analysis Requireme... http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik--c3a5cd I cec&view=pt&search=
G_
2009-031- Emailing:
Kris Kim <kriskimdds@gmaii.com>
E82-Traffic—impact—Analysis—Requirement - Dr Kris Kim
DDS
1 message
Mark J. Jacobs, PE, PTOE <Ja keTraffic@comcast. net> Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:39 PM
To: Kris Kim <kriskimdds@gmail.com>
Cc: Tim Herdt <flyinl80@hotmail.com>
Kris
As we discussed the City of Edmonds Traffic Impact Fee is based on dated traffic data, the 6 th Edition of the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. This manual has been updated twice. Thus the
data used in the City's Traffic Impact Fee schedule is not reflective of current data. The following is taken from
the Table 4 of the Edmond Road Impact Fee Rate Study.
TABLE 4
IMPACT FEE FATES
(T
(4)
. Trip
ITE ITE Land Use
Trip
New
Lenf
jth
Wt New Ttips por
Impact Fee Per Unit. @ $
,Code Cateeory
Rate2
Trips4
Factce
Unit of Mc-asure
763.66 per Trip
110 Light Injustrial
0-98
100%
1.59
1.56 1,000 sq ft
119 per square foort
520 Nursing home
0.2,0
100%
0.87
0,17 bed
13 2.88 per bed
710 General Office
1.4
100%
1.5 9
237 1.0 00 Sq It
1.81 ijer scmarc ro ot
720 Medical office
3.66
10046
I.So
j.49 1,000 sq It
__ 4.19 per squara foot
020 Shopping Center
3,74
81%1
0,40
Lz 1 1,000 s(I f t
0.93 per Square foot
832 Restaurant: sit-
10-86
56%
1,06
6.45 1 000 sq
7 ft
4.92 per square foot
The new ITE data (see attached) shows the trip rate for Medical office ITE Code 720 at 3.46 versus the 3.66
used in the City's Table 4 Impact Fee Rates. The trip generation rate for General Office ITE 710 did not
change.
Simply pro -rating the trip generation rates yields a corrected impact fee rate for MOB of $3.96 (3.46/3.66 x
$4.19) per square foot.
I understand that you plan on converting —2,200 sf of general office space to medical use thus the calculated
impact fee using ITE data would be $4,730 ((3.96 — 1.81) x 2,200). This calculation does not take into account
the fact people schedule medical office visits on their way home from work or other activity (these trips are
pass -by and are not new to the system). Based on prior project experience a 10% pass -by trips for MOB has
I of 4 10/25/2009 10:46 PIVI
A
Medical -Dental Office Building
(720)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 43
Average 1000 Sq. Feet G FA: 32
Directional Distribution: 2701,0' entering, 73% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
I Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
3.46 0.97 8,86
Data Plot and Equation
Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1240 Institute ot Transr.K)rta!;on Engineers
General Office Building
(710)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
On a: Weekday,
P.M. Peak Hour
Number of Studies.- 235
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA*. 216
Directional DistribUtion: 17% entering, 83% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Range oi Rates Standard Deviation
L 1.49) 0.49 - 6.39 1.37
Data Plot and Equation
X
3,000
LU
2.000 ....... ... . . . . . . . .
1,000 . . . . . . .
1
v
X
0-V
10'
0
0 - - -
0 1000
X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Actu.31 Data Points Fitted Curve Average Rate,
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 1.12(X) +78.81 R2 = 0.82
Generation, 8th Edition 1205 Institute ot'l-rans.portation Erqirwers
CITY OF EDMONDS -
1215 1h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 980.20
Phone: 425.771.0220 - Fax: 425.771.0221 - Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - PLANNING DIVISION
,/)C. ljk4"
March 15, 2012
Jackie Amble
Snohomish County Assessor
jackie.amble@co.snohomish.wa.us
Subject: Tax Parcel Numbers 00461000202002, 00461000202001, and-00461000202004
Dear Ms. Amble:
The three parcels identified above are located in the northwest comer of the intersection of 220th
Street SW and 76 1h Avenue West. These three parcels were developed with in office building
and associated parking spaces under City of Edmonds building permit BLD20060552 as a single
property (Attachment 1). A lot line adjustment eliminating the interior parcel lines was approved
by the City of Edmonds under file number LL-06-89 (Attachment 2), but never recorded with
Snohomish County.
The City of Edmonds has noticed that these three parcels are addressed incorrectly. Tax parcels
00461000202002 and 00461000202001 have a situs address of 7605 220,h Street SW while
parcel 00461000202004 has a situs address of 21916 in the County's system. Given that these
three parcels were developed as a single property and the City has approved a lot line adjustment
eliminating the interior parcel lines, these three parcels should be combined into a single parcel
and addressed as 21920 76 th Avenue West.
Correct addresses are important for emergency responses and the City appreciates your attention
to this matter. The City will be following up with local agencies to inform them'of the address
correction. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, lienPci.edmonds.wa.Us,
425-771-0220 ext. 1223.
Sinc rely,
emen Lien
Associate Planner
Encl: Attachment 1: Site Plan for BLD20060552
Attachment 2: Staff Report approving LL-06-89
Cc: Cyber Properties LLC, Property Owner
'ITA Y SE
FNN a
C)
flu
CZ)
T � r-r
T,
'it
4
-. ina
ss�mm
C*q*fEd.3=b
It fit
it 1
uw" L
It
It
v::JL
i.-AMW.
220th STREET SW
'PLAN
SM- RESU
A 1.1
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING DIVISION
REVIEW OF PROPOSED LOT COMBfNATION
FILE # LL-2006-0089
CONTACT PERSON/AGENT Pat Reagan
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT Cyber Properties LLC
PROPERTY LOCATION 7605 — 220'h Street Southwest and 21916 — 76,h Avenue West
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot combination to combine three lots held under one ownership
A. INTRODUCTION:
The applicant is proposing to consolidate the boundary lines among three lots in order to form one lot
as shown on the lot combination map (Attachment 1). The Land Use Application is included as
Attachment 2. The subject area is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of 220d' Street
Southwest and 76h Avenue West. The site is zoned Multiple Family Residential (RM-2.4). See the
Zoning and Vicinity Map for reference (Attachment 3).
B. ANALYSIS OF DESIGN:
1. Number of Lots Involved: 3 adjacent lots
2. Lot Area:
a. Minimum lot area reguired for RM-2.4 zone: 2,400 square feet per dwelling unit
b. Minimum lot width required for RM-2.4 zone: None
C. Number of corner lots: Parcel A is currently considered a corner lot; therefore the lot
combination will result in a corner lot.
3. Tonographical Consideration: There appears to be no particular topographical consideration
driving this lot combination.
4. Flag Lot Determination: None of the lots are considered flag lots.
5. Zoning Ordinance: The proposal meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
a. Lot combinations shall be approved unless they will result in a non -conforming lot. This lot
combination results in a lot that meets the lot width and lot area requirements, and is
therefore a legal conforming lot.
b. Lot combinations shall be approved unless they will not be in compliance with the goals and
objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The director is directed to determine whether
or not the lots, as combined, negatively impact compliance with the city's urban density
requirements as established pursuant to the State Growth Management Act, Comprehensive
Plan and the Snohomish County planning policies. The proposed lot combination is in
compliance with the goals and objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan, and the lot
combination will not negatively impact compliance with the city's urban density
requirements.
6. Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is in compliance with the goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. Access: Access to Parcel C has been off of 76 1h Avenue West, and access to Parcels A and B
has been off of 2201h Street Southwest. This access will not change with the proposed lot
combination.
LL-06-89 Staff Report.doc
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
1. SEPA Determination: Not Required
2. Shoreline Master Program: Exempt From Shoreline Master Program permits.
3. Critical Area Determination: CRA-2005-008 1, CRA-2005-0082, CRA-2005-0083: Waivers
from the requirement to complete a critical areas study were issued for each of the parcels
involved in this lot combination.
D. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS AND DEDICATIONS:
The Engineering Division has reviewed this proposal and is not requiring any improvements or
dedications at this time.
E. DECISION: Approved with the following conditions:
I . Notify the City if the original lots are to be developed or sold separately in the future.
E. ATTACHMENTS:
I . Proposed Lot Combination Map
2. Land Use Application
3. Vicinity / Zoning Map
I have reviewed the application for lot combination pursuant to Chapters 20.75 and 20.95 of the Edmonds
Community Development Code.
This application for Lot Combination is complete.
Machuga,
THE RIGHT TO APPEAL
Date
This decision may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner. In this case, a written letter and other items
needed to appeal must be submitted to the Planning Division within ten (10) calendar days of the posting of
this notice (see posting date below). Please contact the Planning Division for information.
City of Edmonds, attn.: Planning Division
121 - Sth Avenue North
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Telephone: (425) 771-0220, Extension 1330
DATE POSTED:
PARTIES OF RECORD:
Planning Department Pat Reagan
Cyber Properties LLC
Engineering Department 21907-64 1h Avenue West, #200
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
LL-06-89 Staff Report.doc 2
tu,,n — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —
F- - - I. a-
laf
CF.IVLO
TCH BASIN
C) IM=380.98
CD
p PER C:) 2'INV=375.31
C) 'PEEk"IT C00191 Found Iron bar
C) 0,08 west of Set at SANITARY SEWER
ANHOLE
catc, posltlon� 4 fo at RIM=381.17
20 \ offset, 4.1
Found iron bar N QQ445133' 0 d fence
asp a LO
0,08 west of 127.25 00 2
caLc. position, drive N <:5
0
0
WL WL
n
waler
S.F.R, me er
-C
C1
'A
n
gas 0
M'< meter GAS :3
:3 n GAS n
n -1
:3 — — — — — — —
z SHED
P)
co
00
n
S, FJR. ((-A NO 4 ceclar 0
n
GARAGE M 00
p W
asphalt S.F.R. np
s gpark.
384
386 asphalt D Al
nn Y- MANHOLE
Co
3:3 s gnpt RIM=380.09
u7n '382 boq WATER=373.8
r fic
3S4 118.26
conc. Soperete 0
zl� r ve —WL
b s walk
I KD
zz�� I ee hone
CD D —GAS GAS a.
61 Q
CD
15726 30 29
�LAT
SS r-
SS SS
Con.grete CUrJQ
TARY SEWEq -()--OP—� CATCH 1B3 SIN ATCH BASIN SANITARY'SEWEI
OLE RIM=379, 9 RIM=379,61 OP ANHOLE
382.41 IP'TNV=3 5.c, Q'INV 377.5. PTM=1R11.29
Attachment I
Survevs * TODoaraphy * Sanitation
city of edmonds
land use application
'ONLY
• ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR OFFICIAL USE
• COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # 010 -OCqCl ZONE
0 HOME OCCUPATION DATE 0 (0 - 2-(" (10 REC'D BY (�l V1
0 FORMAL SUBDIVISION
El SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE -RECEIPT# 0007-17-
0 LOT LINE ADJUSTMLNT/ G'146�11\ At6V,, HEARING DATE
C1 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DFVELOPNIENT \*STAFF El PB 0 ADB LI CC
Q OFFICIAL STREET MAP AmrNDIVIENT Q HE
Q STRIIETVACATION
0 REZONE L-ot Gorelloo
Q SHORELINE PERMIT
0 VARIANCE / REASONABLE UsF, EXCEPTION c-I, LA 0�,V, 6L
�2f OTHER: PA Icy\ ZZIA �A sw .
PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION 'a � I 1 -1 (.4 CU_V_ u_�, CDAkWzb)U_Noi ozD
PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) ReMRk &_RALD�QC,
PROPERTY OWN FR C_.,1 \De�_ i1T-DOAV4�b6 L A PHONF#-42S- 9qk-SD_an
A 1 -412_C�C)
ADDRESS at Sol G,44 Coax �� . u k CL (� n q
E-MA I L ADDRESS (20 Lc)slt
TAX ACCOUNT #. —SEC. '34�� TwP. 1:1 RNG. q C
"A .1 '
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE LN k, , A 112, L4,1 _M"J. 1.1
C,4 rIc- —k r,:pz srE. C!:) zk't.% N A %,�q
S _? 'Ut, % k
) 1k, L\4,
APPLICANTQi�AlLex_ PHONE# I`�C:, f1r)Pk-�SOCC)
ADDRESS
U'LTV\6 4;M 1,� co. FAX # Z_cs�q;
E-MAIL ADDRESS
CONTACT PERSON/AGENT PHONE#4ZS `AQG-(_
ADDRESS_.R[,RCU (04A- axw_
E-MAIL ADDRESS FAX # _qzs:� tii-
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application
agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including
reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading,
inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, histher/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith.submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am autborizeditaA this application o e chalf of the owner as listed below,
SIGNATURF or APPLICANT/AGE �T�L7�� DATE.(�Z)_ 2x�) -
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use
application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staffofthe City ofEdmonds to enter the subject
property for the purposes ofinspection and posting attendant to (his application,
SIGNATURE OF OWNER'� DATE c,
This application form xk,as revised oil 1/27/60. To verify whether it is still current, call (425) 771-0220,
Attachment 2
LALIBRAMPLANNING\Forins & Handouts\Public Handouts\Land Usc Application doc
2RM"'
---------------
218TH-,
-j K i
4 -
IL
FR,
F
T SW
'Su4ject Prop" 6s:
7605 - 220th�/-S S W,
I
21916 --7-dt.h A-Ve. W
222ND ST SW
221 ST PL SW
�bLem
am
(=5
C)
f
220TH ST SW
9_3 `�GJ2,
Ov ED4f,>
0
A
Zoning Vicinity Map N j
CD RS-20 RS-6 RM-3 BP CG2 Rezones
k\\ RS-12 RSW-12 RM-2.4 BN CW MU A
PRD
RS-10 "Y' RS-MP RM-1.5 BC EH3 MPI P .. I)C.
RS-8 CG MP2 OS 0 175 350 File LL-2006-0089
Attachment 3
LNR
V- V
STREt 0 1 FILE
Edmonds Building Department
250 5' Avenue N.
Edmonds, Washington 98020
re: REfMax Metro Prop. at 21920 760 Avenue West
Dear Sirs,
MUM / SURVEY05 / RUNIX / DEVELORdEff (0115111TAIM V
June 14, 2007
File No. 5014-0-07
RECEIVED
JUN IS, 2007
BUILDING DEPARTME"T
ClyY OF EDMONDS
At the request of Sean Barquist of Corstone Contractors LLC . the project contractor, we
dispatched a survey crew. to the above referenced property on May 5, 2007 to ascertain
the elevation of the building currently under construction. We found the elevation of the
roof sheathing at that time to be 414.2 1. A letter was sent to the city Stating what we had
found. In a response letter dated June 4, 2007 the city concluded that the building was
above allowable height and the roof should be altered to meet building height
requirements. In the letter the city stated that the catch basin manhole used as building
height datum on the architectual site plan shall be used and referenced for all elevations
taken at the site and that the ridge height shall be from the finished roofing material and
not the roof sheathing. On June 14, 2007 we dispatched a crew to ascertain the revised
building height. Using the top of storm drain manhole datum of 380.1, as shown on the
architectual site plan, we found the elevation at the top of the roofing material to be 413.94.
Should you require any additional informabon, please call me at 425-775-1591.
Sincerely,
, Aleele ,
14
Lovell-Sauerlabd & Associates, Inc.
19A0033FdAVe.W-.SU1ttZ0O, Lynnwood, WA98036 4Z5-775-1591 425-672-7998fax IsaengineerIng.com
7/7 a6 eA ! WVCP. : I /n-F;L-unr !AS6/?1qq?V !ONIH99NION�IVSI :A9 lUaS
STREET FILE
Edmonds Building Department
2505 Ih Avenue N.
Edmonds, Washington 98020
re: RE/Max Metro Prop. at 21920 76' Avenue West
Dear Sirs,
S
ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS / PLANNERS / DEVELOPMENT (ONSULTANT �/
May 25, 2007
REM&V�007
JUN - 1 2007
BUILDING DEPT.
At the request of Sean Barquist of Corstone Contractors LLC , the project contractor, we
have dispatched a survey crew to the above referenced property to ascertain the elevation
of the Building currently under construction. We find the elevation of the roof sheathing to
be 414.21. This elevation is based upon the datum provided on the Architectual site plan
approved by the city.
Should you require any additional information, please call me at 425-775-1591.
I T 9,
Sincerely,
OV WASJ1',Jj1
A$
:10
J*effreyv reiber P.L.S.
President
'kV4L L
rmpipes A9 / IS-1 07
1�zl
.2 2-00605YZ
Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc.
19400 33rd Ave. W., Suite 200, Lynnwood, WA 98036 425-775-1591 425-672-7998 fax lsaengineering.com
'F
CITY OF EDMO?#'
1, 1"P 121 5h Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 - Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNINd DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
-STAFFDEasioN-
BLD20100221 Project Proposal:
Berry Neon signs has submitted a sign application for Edmonds Orthodontics which includes a
wall mounted externally illuminated channel letter sign.
Property Owner Applicant
Cyber Properties LLC Berry Neon Sign Systems
2109764 1h Ave W, Suite 200 7400 Hardeson Road
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 Everett, WA 98203
Design Review Process:
The proposed project requires a Design Review. Projects that remain under the SEPA threshold
are reviewed by staff with the building permit and the design review is considered an
administrative Staff Decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.60 (Sign Code) and is a
Type I decision pursuant ECDC 20.01.003.A.
Analysis:
I . Location. The project site is located at 21920 76 th Avenue West on the northwest comer of
76 1h Avenue West and 2201h Street SW. The site is zoned RM-2.4 — Multifamily Residential.
The comprehensive plan designation for the site is Mixed Use Commercial and it is located
within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center overlay.
2. Sign type. The proposed sign is a wall mounted externally illuminated channel letter sign.
This sign type is permitted within the RM-2.4 zone.
3. Size. Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.025 commercial uses in the residential zones are subject to
the maximum area and height limitations established for signs in the BN zone. Sites within
the BN zone are permitted I square foot of sign area per lineal foot of wall containing the
main public entrance. The building where Edmonds Orthodontics is to be located has
approximately 96 feet of lineal wall where the main public entrance is located. Therefore, 96
feet of signage is allowed for the entire site, to be divided between all tenants in this building.
Edmond s Orthodontics is the first tenant to apply for a sign permit.
Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.A, the maximum area of wall signs within the BN zone is I
square foot per lineal foot of attached wall. The wall where the Edmonds Orthodontics sign
is located is approximately 47 feet long. The sign area of the proposed sign is 16 feet. This
is within the limits allowed for the site and the wall which the sign is attached.
The allowable sign area left for the site is 80 square feet.
4. Color. The letters of the sign are white, while the wall attachment and external light are
painted to match the color of the building. Sign color is acceptable for the site.
Page I of 2
5. Height. Pursuant to ECDC 20.60.030.B, the maximum height of wall signs is 14 feet or the
height of the face of the building on which the sign is located. The application proposes to
place the sign on the face of the building at a height of approximately 22 feet which is
consistent with ECDC 20.60.030.B.
6. Number. For commercial uses within a residential zone, pursuant ECDC 20.60.025 signs are
subject to the maximum area and height limitations established for signs in the BN zone.
While number of signs is not mentioned, it is appropriate to use the number of signs in the
BN zone as well. The maximum number of signs within the BN zone is three per site or one
per physically enclosed business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants,
whichever is greater. Edmonds Orthodontics is only requesting one sign, which is consistent
with the number of signs allowed in the BN zone.
Decision:
Based on the facts and conclusions of this report, staff finds that the design review for this
project (File No. BLD20100221) is APPROVED.
I have rpviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development
R
3,3 E) —,)L 01 0
Lien, Planning —Division Date
Appeals: Design review decisions by staff under the provisions of ECDC 20.12.030 are only
appealable to the extent that the applicable building permit or development approval is an
appealable decision under the provisions of the ECDC. Design review by staff is not in itself an
appealable decision.
Page 2 of 2
(lip Rt'
CEIVEO-
ff&,, a1V6'.V' AV,
CITY OF EDMONDS 2005
�Wt PLANNING DEPT.
TRAFFIC IMPACT, ANALYSIS
WORK SHEET RECEIVED
JUL - 8 2005
Name of Proposed Project: Remax General Office Buildin2 RIANNimr, nFPT
Owner/Applicant: Applicant Contact Person:
R & H Development LLC c/o Tim Herdt Lovell Sauerland. & Associates, Inc. — Rob Lon2
Name Name
2190764 A Ave W, Suite 200
Street/Mailing Address
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
city State Zip
Telephone: 425-337-5021
1940033 d Ave W. Suite 200
Street/Mailing Address
Lynnwood, WA 98036
city State Zip
Telephone: (425) 775-1591
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis:
LSA Engineering Robert Lon% PE 425-775-1591
Firm Name Contact Name Telephone
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Street address (if known): 7605 2201h St SW, Edmonds, WA 98026
b. Location: Located on the Northwest Corner of 76 th Ave W and 220th St SE. — Edmonds, WA.
See attached vicinity map and site plan
(Attach a vicinity map and siteplan.)
c. Specify existing land use:
3 parcels containing 2 Sinizie Family Homes
d. Specify proposed type and size of development:
10,839 SF Gross Floor Area General Office Buildin2
e. When will the project begin construction and when will it be completed? Spring 2006/Summer 2007
f Define proposed access locations: 2 existing access points w 11 moved , one access located at the
northeast corner of the Property accessing 76 th Ave. W. will be moved sli%!htly south and the
access located on the south side of the propert oth
the west Property line of the DrODert -y accessing 22 St SW will be moved closer to
_y . See the attached site plan
CU30curnents and SettingASTonySUml SettingATern;mrary Internet Fiies\OLKI N777.TmfImpAna1yWork.doc
g. Define pro*posed sight distance at site egress locations: Sight distance will be reviewed durin2 final
-engineering design to ensure the Cit
Y of Edmonds requirements are met.
7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic impact
fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 and as identified in ECDC
18.18.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECDC 18.82.130.
The mitigation for the proposed as calculated per the above requirements is as follows:
qi0k_154;
General Office Bldg (Code 710) 10,839 SF Gross Floor Area X $ 1.81/SF = $4
Less 2 Existing Single Family Homes (Code 210) 2 Homes X $ 840.72/Home $ (1,681. 1 4 4)
Net Mitigation Payable $17,937.15
Tk
CADocurnents and Settings\STonySkUcal Settingsqenporar� Internet Files\OLKI I\4777.TrnflrnpAnaIyWork.doc
212TH ST SW
CD
Ui
216 ST Sw <
(0
(D
SITE
220 TH ST SW
220TH ST SW
99 >
X
224 TH ST SW
0-
1-5
3: to 226TH PL SW
Ui
228TH ST SW
228TH ST SW
00
(D LO
10
230TH T SW
LAKE
BALLINGER
236TH STISW
Remax Office Building
(VICINITY MAP)
Lovell — Sauerland & Associates, Inc.
6-29-05 Engineers/�urveyors/Planners/Development Consultants
LSA No. 4777 19400 33rd Ame T., We 2DO Lpmood, TA 98W (45)M-15M (Q)M-?M FIX