22020 HIGHWAY 99.PDF1111111111 lill
11587
22020 HIGHWAY 99
"Pit
1 -5,
JOKO vi Z- At Ipp-
. 7t%l�
-Z) /0�� w
/W rIlVe-7.
/,,� c / V/ /� . 1�-fl+" ,�t// �Welee- Ajld
----------- -
me h-
'00/ W,
COS�-
OtAe WY7'
1,011 A,-e4g d ve
city of edmonds
development information
FENCE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
FENCE DEFI-NITION:
HEDGE DEFINITION:
A fence is a combination of materials, wood, metal,
plastic etc., which creates a barricade and/or
obstructs the clear view from any angle.
A hedge is a fence or boundary formed by a dense row of
shrubs or low trees.
BUILDING PERMIT A building permit is required for fences which are
REQUIRED: greater than two feet in height, measured from the
finished grade. No building permit is required for
hedges.
NOTICE
TOPERMITTEEAND/OR07NER-
PARTIAL APPROVAL--' �-,
VIOLATION
CORRECTIONS REQUIRED
PERMIT
NUMBER
IJOB ADDRESS Z ze�, I Z,?,> I
NO PERMIT — STOP WORK — REMOVE CONSTRUCTION OR OBTAIN
PERMIT AND MAKE WORK COMPLY WITH BUILDING LAWS.
CONSTRUCTION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH "PROVED PLANS
F] AND PERMIT — STOP WORK. MAKE EXISTING WORK COMPLY WITH
APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT OR REMOVE IT.
STOP WORK — UNTIL AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE BY INSPECTOR.
CORRECTIONS LISTED BELOW MUST BE MADE BEFORE WORK CAN
BE APPROVED.
E]WORK DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED.
CONTACT INSPECTOR AND
ARRANGE FOR APPOINTMENT. RECALL FOR INSPECTION.
6 7J4 v4 z,
/affy C--r-s
Z' TA9-;r-!5-- &w7�� - czr-,Tw ex- eac W - 40C41I&J--
/47X)Cj,;0—,— tAlW6-X-S
T-- 5 7'c>,zm
5-. P67i - ��w 0
16'. 510 DX,09VAI oo� 6-Ado ir7 6-moD-Em Axap
-7- 94156 lJzb 7P P',Il tJ, 0- 510zg'
THE ACTIONS OR CORRECTIONS INDICATED ABOVE ARE REQUIR9-6*frHUr-
DAYS OR PENALTIES IMPOSED BY LAW MAY BE APPLIED. a,/
FOR INSPECTIONS CALL: 771-3202. 1q, c el
P"V,g s, ce. 6wn-a�- 0�r- -7, PaLk,-1 ear BUI DING DIV
a -,00, g 4z
INSPECTOR 6f PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF —DA—TE!4 FIRE DEPT.
EDMONDS
4 6
ADDRESS: Axpal�p
gz�;� FA
F ,gppm���
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS DETERMINATION: F
]Conditional Waiver []StudyRequired &V-aiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
PARKINU AUREEMENTS DAYED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
k
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: cz�
SEWER LID FEE u LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
SOILS REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
A/
�v
LATEMP\DSrs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc
TRA FFIC IMPA C T A NA L YSIS
for
A New Car Dealership
Prepared for:
Nelson Motors, Inc.
April 10, 1991
Prepared by:
The TRANSPO Group, Inc.
14715 Bel -Red Road, Suite 100
Bellevue, WA 98007
(206) 641-3881
FAX: (206) 747-3688
A f-- C E I VK r)
A" A T 1991
ENGINEERING
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
fo r
A New Car Dealership
Prepared for:
Nelson Motors, Inc.
April 10, 1991
Prepared by:
The TRANSPO Group, Inc.
14715 Bel -Red Road, Suite 100
Bellevue, WA 98007
(206) 641-3881
FAX: (206) 747-3688
TABLE OF CONTENTS
mm
INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1
Project Location .......................................... 1
Project Description ........................................ 3
EmSTING CONDITIONS ........................................ 5
Street System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Traffic Volumes and Level of Service ............................. 6
TrafficAccidents ......................................... 9
Pedestrian and Bicycle Aettvity ................................ 10
TransitService .......................................... 10
FORECASTED CONDITIONS WrMOUT PROJECT ........................ 11
Planned Street System Improvements. 11
1992 PM Peak Hour Non -Project Traffic Voftr;�e�.*.* *13
1992 Baseline Level of Service ................................ 14
PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................... 17
TripGeneration ......................................... 17
Trip Distribution and Assignment .............................. 18
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ..................................... 22
1992 Level of Service with Project ..............................
22
S4pnal System Considerations ................................
26
Project Access ..........................................
26
Safety Impacts ..........................................
28
Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity ................................
28
TYansit Impacts .........................................
29
Parking..............................................
29
NMGATWG MEASURES ....................................... 30
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Project Vicinity Map ......................................... 2
2. Site Plan ................................................ 4
3. Existing Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service (PM Peak Hour) ............... 7
4. 1992 Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service
Without Project (PM Peak Hour) ................................ 15
5. Trip Distribution .......................................... 20
6. 1992 Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service
With Project (PM Peak Hour) .................................. 21
LIST OF TABLES
1. Existing PM Peak Hour Level of Service ............................. 8
2. City of Edmonds Transportation Improvement Program ................... 12
3. Level -of -Service Summary - 1992 Without Project ...................... 16
4. Level -of -Service Summary - 1992 With Project ........................ 22
5. Summary of Mitigation ...................................... 31
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the traffic analysis which was conducted to assess the
impacts of Nelson Motors proposed new car dealership. The analysis was designed to
address the net traffic impacts associated with replacing the existing mobile home park
with a new car dealership. Where the analysis Identifies adverse traffic Impacts due to the
project, mitigating measures are suggested which would reduce or eliminate the effects of
these impacts.
The project site is located near the site of a proposed Top Foods warehouse -style
grocery store for which The TRANSPO Group recently completed an extensive traffic analy-
sis. The scope of the Top Foods analysis was determined in cooperation with City of
Edmonds staff and transportation staff representing neighboring agencies. The scope for
this Nelson Motors analysis was determined in cooperation with City of Edmonds staff
based on the findings of the Top Foods analysis.
The proximity of Nelson Motors new car dealership project site to the Top Foods site
has allowed the Nelson Motors traffic analysis to build on the findings of the Top Foods
analysis. Portions of the Top Foods report are directly applicable to the Nelson Motors
analysis and have, therefore. been reprinted herein, though often in less detail. Examples
of areas which the two projects have in common include: existing conditions, proposed
transportation Improvement projects. background traffic growth, baseline traffic volumes,
and. to some extent, recommended mitigation measures.
Project Location
Nelson Motors new car dealership site is located In the City of Edmonds In South Snohomish
County. Figure 1 illustrates the site location. The site Is located in the southwest comer
of the intersection of two major commuting hnks—SR 99 and 220th Street SW. A number of
other jurisdictions have boundaries near this intersection. The City of Mountlake Terrace lies
to the east, Lynnwood lies to the northeast (but has operational responsibility for SR 99 traffic
signals). and Snohomish County lies immediately across SR 99 to the east and southwest of the
220th Street SW/76th Avenue W intersection.
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 1
CAD
C�
W
�j
CA)
4Ln
D?
-0
91)
U3
CD
cz
0
V) 9
az
m
0
go
CA
'110
C:l
z
0
-4.3
Project Description
The proposal calls for construction of an approximately 39.200-gross square foot
new car dealership which includes showroom, offices, and parts/service department with
20 service bays. F1gure 2 illustrates the proposed site access on a schematic site plan. A
total of four driveways are proposed, two each on SR 99 and 220th Street SW. The
driveways on 220th Street SW would allow full access Ueft and right turns) to occur. The
driveways on SR 99 are proposed for limited turning movements (right -in, right -out) only,
due to the existing channelization on SR 99 adjacent to the driveways.
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 3
NELSON
MOTORS
114 Fal
k
tj
220TH SW�
. . .....................................
rrillill Hill fill I
7
A
North
The
Figize 2 ranspo
Site Plan W-
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Street System
The site is bounded on the east and north by two major arterials. It is located at the
southwest comer of SR 99 (north -south) and 220th Street SW (east -west), with access onto
both. SR 99 is a major, five -lane commuter route and links a number of nearly continuous
commercial areas stretching over six miles. It therefore carries high commuting volumes
plus shopping, recreation, and business trips in and between several jurisdictions. It is
laid out at a diagonal, with reference to the standard street grid. so that it Intersects both
streets and avenues at irregular intervals and land angles. It also has "strip commercial"
and major retail centers along both sides, creating frequent driveway intersections.
220th Street SW links the residential areas of Edmonds to the west, to the shop-
ping and services on SR 99. to the 1-5 freeway, and to Mountlake Terrace to the east. It is a
four -lane wide street adjacent to the project site. widening to five lanes at SR 99. West of
76th Avenue W. it narrows to two lanes with on -street parking on both sides of the street.
East of SR 99, it is a continuous five -lane section through Mountlake Terrace to 1-5.
Other major north -south streets in the pmJect vicinity include 76th Avenue W and
84th Avenue W. 76th Avenue W Is a four -lane street in the project vicinity. It directly
serves Edmonds High School and the Stevens Hospital complex, between 220th and
212th Streets SW. 84th Avenue W is a local collector street, with four-way stop control
at 220th Street SW.
The study area was coordinated with City of Edmonds staff. Specific intersections
which were identified for operations ana]ysis, including current traffic control and control-
ling Jurisdiction, are as follows:
SR 99 at 212th Street SW (s4�nalized). Edmonds/Lymwood/WSDOT
SR 99 at 216th Street SW (unsignalized), Edmonds/Lynnwood/WSDOT
SR 99 at 220th Street SW (signalized), Edmonds/Lynnwood/WSDOT
SIR 99 at 224th Street SW (signalized), Edmonds/Lynnwood/WSDOT
220th Street SW at 84th Avenue SW (umign� four-way stop), Edmonds
220th Street SW at 76th Avenue SW (signalized), Edmonds
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 5
• 220th Street SW at 66th Avenue SW (signalized), Mountlake Terrace
• 212th Street SW at 76th Avenue SW (signalized), Edmonds
• SR 99 at the two project driveways (unsignahzed). WSDOT
• S 220th Street at the two project driveways (unsignalized), Edmonds.
Traffic Volumes and Level of Service
Traffic volume information was based on counts performed in September 1989 and
January 1990. Figure 3 shows the existing PM peak hour traffic volumes in the project vicinity
based on these counts.
Existing PM peak hour levels of service (LOS) were calculated at the major Intersec-
tions in the study area using the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research
Board) methodology. Level of service is used to evaluate and quantify operating conditions
and traffic congestion at Intersections. Level -of -service values range from LOS A. Indicating
free -flowing traffic. to LOS F. indicating edmme congestion and long vehicle delays. Spe-
cific level -of -service criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections are presented in
the Appendix.
At signalized intersections, level of service is measured in terms of the average
vehicle delay. While calculated average vehicle delay is the criterion used to define
signalized level -of -service ranges, it becomes less meaningful as an indicator when an
intersection is operating in the LOS F range. Delay calculations are oversensitive to small
changes in traffic volume in the LOS F range. In these cases, the volume -to -capacity ratio
(v/c) can be a more representative indicator of actual operational change than calculated
average vehicle delay. The v/c ratio reflects the relative amount of critical intersection
traffic. compared to an Intersection's capacity.
At Intersections where stop signs control the minor legs, level of service is measured
in terms of the reserve (or unused) capacity available for critical turning movements. At
four-way, stop -controlled intersections, level of service is measured in terms of the volume -
to -capacity ratio.
Table 1 summarizes the results of the analysis of the Wsting PM peak hour level of
service at the study Intersections.
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 6
NELSON
MOTORS
0
T
'6 '\N
31
,127
.56--4-' �-*-83
184---s- -301
16-'%,N t f-0-34
30 37
222
224thStSW
- 2�
210 89
203-4 %.-85
352"o- --o-249
78 -k,4 #,-138
126 t & )
598
169
71JI".-399
303-8- .4-418
t if #--32
'6 '15
3'4-3 '/)
"357
2821147
249---d k,. :lo 1
303-s- -o-247
62 r--147
� 1
,�ltl31
1433 /)
212ffvSYSW
'047
155 1 214
120--d %,-173
455---D-. -635
36-A.1 -0-2D9
74 t 2"18
1457
1106 N
54 1 10P
29--d '*.-78
51— -e-125
45--� A-41
270 t 42
,555
Rgure 3
E)dsflng Traftkc Vbk=�es
and Levels of SepAce
(PM Peak HoLm)
North
Mr
1423
791 53
33-2 �"�140
2--0- -a- I
191-N trip-lo
101 t56
1564
2161h St SW
2201h$tSW
.33 1 4,11
57-4-' k'--- �303
918- -801
0 96 0'-' 126
loot W"
206
N -
ransoo
wv
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 7
Table 1. EAsting PM Peak Hour Level of Service
Signalized intersection
LOS
Avg Delayl
v/c5
SR 99/212th Street SW
E
48.5
1.06
SR 99/220th Street SW
E
57.6
1.10
SR 99/224th Street SW
C
17.07
0.727
220th Street SW/76th Avenue W
E
42.4
0.82
220th Street SW/66th Avenue W
E
43.2
0.85
212th Street SWI76th Avenue W
D
37.6
0.91
Unsignalized Intersection Movement?
Reserve
LOS
CapacIty3
SR 99/216th Street SW Westbound All
F
-20
220th Street SW/84th Avenue W4 N/AQ
B (v/c .66)
N/A
I Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle.
2 Worst movement shown.
3 Reserve capacity e*vssed in vehicles per hour.
4 Four-way stop. Level of service measured by volume-16,capacity (v1c) ratio.
5 v1c = Volume-tocapacity rado.
6 WA - Not Applicable
7 Dfiers from results shown in Top Foods report due to a coffeclion in Me application of lovel-of-service calculation
software.
The existing level of service reflects the heavy volumes on the major arterials in the
project vicinity with many signalized intersections currently operating at LOS E. This is
typical of traffic operation conditions on SR 99 and other major arterials throughout South
SnohomLsh County.
The traffic signals along SR 99 and 220th Street SW are interconnected, with their
signal timing patterns coordinated to allow progressed mainline traffic flow. This can lead
to less than optimized operations at individual intersections in order to better serve the
total signal system. Side -street traffic flow, in particular. is often compromised to meet
coordinated signal timing requirements.
At the unsigrialized intersection of 216th Street SW/SR 99, westbound traffic oper-
ates at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The majority (93 per -cent) of the current west-
bound approach traffic turns right. Very few vehicles currently attempt to cross or tum left
onto SR 99 at this location due to the uncontrolled 216th Street SW approaches and heavy
SR 99 thru. volumes.
90371-50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 8
This location currently meets the Manual on Uniform Traft Control Devices (MLFrCD)
Warrant No. 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic and Wan -ant No. 5 - Accident Warrant.
A traffic signal at this location on SR 99 would be ideally situated between existing signals
at 212th and 220th Streets SW; thus, future interconnection to the SR 99 signal system
could easily be accomplished.
Traffic Accidents
Historical traffic accident data at the study area Intersections for the years 1986-
1989 were obtained from WSDOT District 1. the City of Edmonds, and the City of
Mountlake Terrace. These data were reviewed and analyzed. WSDOT has indicated that
the section of SR 99 fronting the project site is considered a high accident corridor within
District 1.
Three of the study area intersections reflect relatively high occurrences of angle
and turning accidents: SR 99 at 220th Street SW, SR 99 at 216th Street SW. and
220th Street SW at 66th Avenue W.
At SR 99/220th Street SW. the majority of the angle or turning accidents involved
vehicles on the westbound approach of 220th Street SW. The combination of these types of
accidents averaged 11 per year in 1987 and 1988. The occurrence dropped to six per year
in 1989.
There are two contributing factors which affect the accident frequency at the SR 99/
220th Street SW intersection. First, drivers of westbound thru and left -turn vehicles
appear reluctant to stop on the uphill grade if they can instead proceed through the inter-
section on the green or yellow phase of the signal cycle. Therefore, there may be a tendency
for some drivers to proceed through the intersection at the end of the yellow phase, puffing
them in the center of the intersection during an opposing green phase and creating a
potential for conflict with SR 99 traffic.
A second factor contributing to accident frequency is a result of the progressed
signal timing pattern on SR 99. SR 99 traffic progression is favored over side -street traffic
flow to maintain and maximize north -south flow. At 220th Street SW. the current timing
plan creates relatively long delays on the side streets which can contribute to drivers
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 9
becoming impatient and running the yellow phase. If the high accident rate continues, the
possibility of retiming of the signal phases to allow more green time on 220th Street SW or
lengthening of the yellow or all red phases should be evaluated.
At SR 99/216th Street SW, an unsignalized intersection. an average of seven accidents
occurred per year from 1987-1989. Angle accidents would be correctable by proper signaliza-
tion of the intersection. This location meets MUTCD traffic signal Warrant 5 - Accidents.
Seven accidents exceeds the minimum warrant requirement of five accidents by 40 percent.
At 220th Street SW/66th Avenue W. there is an increasing number of accidents
involving opposing left -turn and thru movements on 220th Street SW. This type of accident is
currently occurring at a rate of four or five per year. When the accidents consistently occur at
ftve or more per year. the permissive portion of the protected/permissive left -turn, phase on
220th Street SW should be reconsidered and possibly removed.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity
Pedestrian and bicycle activity in the Immediate site vicinity is generally low. SR 99
is not conducive to pedestrian travel, with no defined sidewalks and varying degrees of
refuge from vehicular traffic. The strip development prevalent along these streets does not
generate substantial pedestrian activity, except related to parked vehicles. 'Ibis is due both
to the low density of strip development (from a pedestriaifs perspective) and to the types of
land uses which locate along strip commercial corridors.
West of the site, in Edmonds. higher pedestrian activity occurs adjacent to existing
residential development. In most cases, sidewalks are provided along arterUds (220th and
212th Streets SW, 76th and 84th Avenues W).
Transit Service
The area is served by transit. with routes running on SR 99, 220th Street SW. and
76th Avenue W. However, transit is not anticipated to play a major role in serving proposed
site development, since car dealerships are predominantly passenger -vehicle oriented.
Therefore, specific transit service information was not developed.
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 10
FORECASTED CONDITIONS
WITHOUT PROJECT
This section of the report highlights those elements of existing conditions which are
likely to substantially change between current and 1992 conditions. 1992 conditions with-
out the project become the baseline against which project traffic impacts are measured.
1992 was selected as the analysis horizon year since it is the first year during which the
project could be constructed and occupied. By selecting a near -term horizon. the relative
impacts of project traffic are maximized. A later horizon year would evaluate the effects of
longer term, nori-project traffic growth; however. project traffic would be proportionally less
of the forecasted conditiorL
To determine forecasted conditions without the project, changes to three primary
analysis elements must be Identifted. FIrst. changes to the existing street system which
are likely to occur by 1992 are listed. Next, increases in current PM peak hour traffic are
forecasted. Then, 1992 Intersection operations (level of service) are calculated considering
both increased traffic volumes and modified (where appropriate) intersection/street system
channelization.
Planned Street System Improvements
A number of documents have previously guided transportation Improvement plan
identification for the site vicinity. The 1987 College Place Traffic Study (Bell -Walker Engi-
neers for the City of Edmonds) proposed a number of transportation improvements. Other
studies identified longer range transportation improvements, Including the 1986 Alderwood
North Creek Transportation Study (ANCTS) and the 1987 South Snohomish County SR 99
Corridor Study. both conducted by the Puget Sound Council of Governments.
On June 19, 1990, Edmonds City Council adopted Resolution No. 700, a six -year
(1991 through 1996) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Table 2 summarizes the
location. type. cost. and schedule of TIP projects located in the project vicinity.
90371 _5M715R1 The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page I I
Table Z City of Edmonds Transportation Improvement Program
Location
Cost in $1,000s
Type/Description Local Total S&,edule
SR 99: 244th - 211 th SW
Widen tD seven lanes
$240
$1,200
1991/2
220th SW: 9th S - 84th W
Arterial Widen w/Sno. Co.
150
750
1992
76th W: 212th - 196th SW
Overlay w/Lynnwood
100
200
1992
SR 99/216th SW*
Signalize/Channelize
13
75
1991
220th SW/9th S
Channelize/Safety
10
10
1991
212th SW/72nd W
Install Signal
16
96
1991
220th SW/9th S
Install Signal
16
96
1991
220th SW/84th W*
Install Signal
16
96
1992
224th SW/76th W
Install Signal
16
96
1993
212th SW 180th W
Install Signal
16
96
1994+
*IndLded in baselm 1992 level -of -service calculations In project study area.
A number of these projects would have a positive effect on level of service and
should be taken into account In the 1992 baseline level -of -service armlysis. These include:
SR 99/216th Street SW - Signalization will Improve traffic operations at this
location. It is the highest priority project of all Intersection improvements listed
in the 71P and is scheduled for 199 1.
0 220th Street SW/84th Avenue W - Signalization is scheduled for 1992.
SR 99 Widening - Although this project is scheduled for 199 1, the time required
to perform design studies and acquire necessary right of way will likely preclude
completion of the widening until 1992 or beyond. However, the Improvement is
the number one priority In the entire state and has all funding secured. Only
an interlocal agreement needs to be completed prior to moving ahead. The
improvement will not be assumed as part of the 1992 non -project condition, but
the results of intersection operations with SR 99 widening will be illustrated in
the project impact analysis section.
90371-50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 12
Improvements described in the College Place study, but not shown in the stx-year
TIP include:
212th Street SW - Widen to five lanes between 76th Avenue W and SR 99. This
would increase capacity at its intersections with 76th Avenue W and SR 99.
220th Street SW - The City of Edmonds has been working jointly with Snohomish
County to develop a project to widen 220th Street SW from 76th Avenue W to
100th Avenue W. This project would widen 220th Street SW from four to five lanes
at the 76th Avenue W Intersection, improving operations there. 7he project is
programmed but unftmded. Snohomish County would be the lead agency for the
project. The county applied for Transportation Improvement Board trm) funds for
the project In December 1989 and the ftmds were denied.
1992 PM Peak Hour
Non -Project Traffic Volumes
To develop 1992 forecasted PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project, a two-
step process was employed. First. existing traffic volumes were increased by an annual
growth factor based on historical trends. Then, traffic from specifically Identified planned,
but unconstructed, projects was added to develop forecasted 1992 non -project conditions.
Existing traffic volumes In the pruject vicinity were Increased by an 8 percent
annual growth factor to obtain traffic volume forecasts in 1992. This growth factor was
based on the average historical traffic volume growth an SR 99, based on WSDOT traffic
count data, and Is due to development in the North King County/South Snohomish County
sub -region. The application of the growth rate used on SR 99 to the other streets in this
study will provide a conservatively high estimate of project year traffic volumes. It Is
unlikely that all of the area streets are experiencing as high a growth rate as SR 99, which
is the major sub -regional north -south arterial in the area and experiences the effects of
both local and sub -regional traffic growth. Further, since many study area intersections
are currently operating at or near capacity, the potential for traffic volume growth during
the PM peak hours is limited. Thus, the traffic forecasts may overestimate future PM peak
hour traffic.
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 13
Based on information supplied by the City of Edmonds. five other projects have
been proposed in the area and building permit applications have been received or are in
process. The five projects are expected to be occupied by 1992. Estimated PM peak hour
trips generated by these five projects were added to the factored volumes. These projects
are:
Top Foods - An 85,000 sf warehouse -style grocery store with added customer
service features.
Krug-er Clinic - A 20,094-sf addition to the existing complex at the southwest
comer of SR 99/216th Street SW.
Stevens Oncology Cente - A 17,700-sf complex to be located adjacent Stevens
Hospital to the southeast.
Stevens Health Cente - An 8,350-sf addition to the complex just south of
Stevens Hospital on the east side of 76th Avenue W.
Grease Monkcy - A proposal to add a car wash to an automobile oil -change
service center with two bays located on 212th Street SW between SR 99 and
74th Avenue W.
A high annual traffic growth factor, together with the effect of adding traffic from five
known developments, combine to result in a high PM peak hour 1992 traffic forecast base-
line. Thus. this is a conservattve estimate in that it may overstate the severity of future
traffic conditions, with or without the project. Figure 4 shows the resulting 1992 baseline
PM peak hour traffic volume forecasts in the project vicinity. These volumes are identical to
the 1992 condition with Top Foods Identified in the Top Foods DEIS.
1992 Baseline Level of Service
Level of service was calculated at intersections in the study area using the estimated
1992 b-dfric volumes without the project. Table 3 summarizes the results of this analysis.
For comparison purposes. existing levels of service (from Table 1) are also shown. These
LOS results are consistent with the 1992 with -project condition discussed in the Top Foods
DEIS.
SR 99 at 220th and 212th Streets SW would continue to experience the highest
congestion levels. which is consistent with current operations. Level of service would
decline from LOS E to LOS F. Calculated v/c ratios In excess of 1.25 suggest that the PM
peak hour traffic forecast may be somewhat high, resulting in intersection volumes over
25 percent higher than the intersection's capacity. The planned SR 99 widening to seven
lanes would Improve operations at these locations.
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 14
315 15&5
104 3281167
(230-4 *--99 325--4 ) 1�1'6- 110
1 -*-275
401-- 271 341-
107E-%� Al-166 73-k., 183
IN r63 14 It 1(65
72Z 1647
FA/ 212thStSW
67'
1675
62J
92162
37--d 163
f
2
223--N 12
118 65
1 W
'K
D
6.SSW
2161h St SW
861403
k-v-531
YF
84-.,l
(§
34 --N Ir
f
28 46
400
FL214
220fhStSW
96
1230
173
26141
k"--
1661259
f L.
19
431472
55-4-4
107
224--w- -e-371
-d .4
203
673--'@' 7
792
71
1087-
(§(
t
. ...... N
t r
107--N 0-142
51r2
31
136 242
t if
125 63
244
1704
237
224M St SW
D
1306
1306
631127
74-4
59-0- -* -146
3 6---A�
A-48
48
298 t 41f9
t
1819
NELSON Rgure 4
MOTORS 1992 Trafflc Volumes and Levels of Service
Wltt)out Project
(PM Peak Hour)
A
North
The
Tmnspo-
90371-50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 15
Other signalized intersections are also forecasted to drop to LOS F. Resulting v/c
ratios would be near 1.00, indicating that operations would be at or near capacity. Actual
operations at these locations could be better than forecasted if PM peak hour trafftc growth
Is constrained by existing congestion.
Traffic operations at 216th Street SW/SR 99 would continue to decline, without
installation of a ft�afflc signal. With the planned traffic signal, however, operations would
Unprove to LOS D.
At 220th Street SW/84th Avenue Mr. installation of a b-affic signal would result in
LOS C operation, which is shnilar to the level of service calculated under the current all -
way stop unsignalized operation.
Table & Level -of -Service Summary - 1992 Without Project
Existing (1990)
1992 W/O Project
ftnalized IntersectJon
LOS
Avg. Delay'
V/CP
LOS
Avg. Delay'
W65
SR 99/212th Street SW
E
48.5
1.06
F
112.9
1.23
SR 99/220th Street SW
E
57.6
1.10
F
132.9
1.30
SR 99/224th Street SW
C
17.08
0.728
D8
28.08
0.928
220th Street SW176th Avenue W
E
42.4
0.82
F
82.7
1.06
220th Street SWMM Avenue W
E
43.2
0.85
F
100.7
0.99
212th Street SW/76th Avenue W
D
37.6
0.91
F
68.6
1.07
SR 99/216th Street SW6
NA7
NIA7
N/A7
D
28.78
0.868
220th Street SW184th Avenue W6
NIA7
NIA7
N/A7
C
21.7
0.52
Reserve
Reserve
Unsignalized Intersections Movement2
LOS
Capacity3
LOS
Capacity3
SR 99/216th Street SW Westhound Al
F
-20
F
-232
M Street SW/84th Avenue W4 N/A7
B
(V/C=.66)
C
(V/C=.79)
I Average delay expressed In seconds per vehicle.
2 Worst movement shown.
3 Reserve capadly expressed in vehicles per hour.
4 Fow-way stop. Level of service measured by volume-10-capacity (VIC) radd.
5 VIC = Volume-tocapacity rafid.
6 If signalized per current TIP impro vement plans
7 AVA - Not Appricabie
8 Differs from results shown in Top Foods report due to a coffeclion in Me application of level -of -service calculation
software.
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 16
PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
PmJect traffic volumes were added to the surrounding street system according to a
standard three -step process of trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment.
When the net effect of project trips assigned to the street system is added to 1992 non -
project traffic, 1992 cumulative traffic for impact analysis results.
Trip Generation
The number of trips generated by Nelson Motors new car dealership was estimated
based on a body of data collected by The 11RANSPO Group over the last several years. This
data has been supplemented by tube counts collected by the City of Edmonds at two
Edmonds new car dealerships. TRANSPO has found that the number of service bays at a
new car dealership is the best indicator of the number of PM peak hour trips which can be
expected to be generated.
Number of service bays is likely the best indicator due to the fact that a high pro-
portion of customers stop by after work to pick up their cars which have been serviced
during the day. Service bays are In direct proportion to a service department's ability to
complete a volume of work. These customers are typically brought to the service depart-
ment in a second vehicle. Thus, each car serviced would typically generate three trip ends,
one In and two out.
The proposed Nelson Motors new car dealership will have some of its floor area
devoted to the display of power products. These products Include lawn mowers, snow
blowers. and electricity generators. While the power products display area occupies an
area which would otherwise be used for the display of cars, trip generation for this floor
area was accounted for by applying an additional trip generation factor to be conservative.
The additional rate accounts for the possibility that the power products, which are less
expensive than new cars. generate trips at a higher rate than new car dealerships.
Since no data are available for power products trip generation, the trip generation
rate for a comparable land use was selected from among the rates published in Trip Genera-
ttom Institute of Transportation Engineers (rM) 4th Edition. Furniture store was selected
as the most comparable land use. This is a reasonable comparison, since the similar price
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 17
range and life expectancy of furniture products and power products lead to similar shop-
ping characteristics. The furniture store trip generation rate of 0.4 trips per thousand
gross square feet (tgsO was used to estimate the number of trips generated by the power
products display.
Based on these trip generation rates. the Nelson Motors facility, with 20 service bays
and 1. 1 tgsf of power products display, is estimated to generate 128 trips (68 in. 70 out)
during the PM peak hour. ibis is equivalent to a PM peak hour trip rate of 6.4 vehicle trips
per service bay. It should be noted that, while service bays is the independent variable
used to forecast PM peak hour trip activity, the forecast encompasses aH PM peak hour
trips to/from the dealership including automobile and power products sales customers.
A trip generation rate was also estimated for a hypothetical worst -case scenario.
The worst -case trip generation rate used was 9.0 PM peak hour vehicle trips per service
bay. This is equivalent to the 85th percentile of the TRANSPO and City of Edmonds -
collected data. Based on these worst -case trip generation rates, the Nelson Motors facility,
with 20 service bays and 1. 1 tgsf of power products display. is estimated to generate 180
trips (81 in, 99 out) during the PM peak hour. This reflects about 40 percent higher trip
generation than the average value used in the basic analysis. The probability of this worst -
case trip rate being exceeded Is less than 15 p�rcent.
Trips generated by the existing mobile home park, which would be replaced by the
Nelson Motors project. were subtracted from the trips generated by the new car dealership
after the trip assignment process. The number of trips generated by the existing mobile
home park was estimated based on rates published in 7Wp Generattort, Institute of Trans-
portation Engineers (n7) 4th Edition. Based on the ITE rates. a mobile home park can be
expected to generate 0.559 trips per occupied dwelling unit. Thus, the 62 occupied mobile
homes are estimated to generate 34 trips (21 in, 13 out) during the PM peak hour.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution and assignment for the Nelson Motors project was based on
regional travel patterns and more localized turning movement volumes in the project
vicinity. Figure 5 illustrates the percentage distribution of new trips on the primary
streets providing site access.
90371-50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 18
The traffic assignment for the mobile home park (not shown) would be slightly dif-
ferent from the assignment for the Nelson Motors project. reflecting the fact that the mobile
home park does not have direct access to SR 99. 7hus, the combined effect of adding pro-
ject traffic assignment and subtracting the mobile home park traffic assignment causes a
nd reduction for a few turning movements at a limited number of Intersections. Overall.
however, the effect of replacing the mobile home park with the new car dealership is to add
trips to the local street system.
When the net PM peak hour project traffic Impacts are added to 1992 PM peak hour
volumes without the project, the forecasted with-prqJect traffic volumes in Figure 6 result.
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 19
NELSON
MOTORS
Rgure 5
Tdp DistrIbuflon
n
North
The
-Fra po
90371.50\903715Rl The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 20
317
2381104
8519,11
32 67
1
.J k�'
230-4 -99
401— -�)271
325-'1 �'�l 10
341-e-275
110 r-166
IM
73:
167t 1r63
�727
141 168!"�l
1662
212thStSW
214
8614
84-.4-4
3w--w
34� t
11 28 4
'11, 400
1689
92
37 163
2-0- a- 1
223 t (.w- 12
1 118 65
\' 1871 ,00l
Sf Sw
�M
�' Z� 1242 173
,141 1112-59
, %.-107 i6o.-d k,%.Z2D3 4 2
226� -374 5w--ow -o-774
15-W. o-Z)--49 I 10d- -o-952
)0::
W/ E,664 .0--241 iw-�t --142
I of
3) t 92 148 t242) 63
244 1704 237
0;�' M
1323
631127
74--,l '---91
591— --o-146
36--%� o-46
298 t 4(9
1831
A
North
The
NELSON Rg" 6 ra P0
MOTORS 1992 Tratfic VolLmes did Levels of SerAce
With Project brow
(PM Peak Hour)
90371-50\903715RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 21
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following sections address the primary elements which could be impacted by
p roject traffic. These include 1992 level -of -service anabrsis, local street impacts, project
access (driveway operations), safety, pedestrian and bicycle activity, transit, and parking.
Where project traffic impacts are Identifted. alternatives to mitigate the impacts may also be
explored.
1992 Level of Service with Project
Table 4 summarizes the results of the 1992 with -project level -of -service analysis
using 128 vph average trip generation developed in the preceding section. For comparison
purposes, levels -of -service for 1992 non -project conditions (from Table 3) are also shown in
Table 4. A worst -case analysis was performed at the intersections of SR 99/220th Street SW
and 220th Street SW/76th Avenue W using the 180 vph worst -case trip generation. These
intersections were selected since they represent the two locations which are likely to receive
the highest project traffic Impact. The results are also summarized in Table 4.
The impact of the project on traffic operations can be illustrated in a number of ways
including: relative change In intersection entering traffic volume: change in level of service:
change in calculated vehicle dela3r. change in volume -to -capacity ratio. Average delay is a
time quantity which is easy for the general public to relate to; however, it becomes nearly
meaningless when LOS F occurs. When LOS F occurs, the volume -to -capacity ratio (v/c) is a
more appropriate technique for measuring forecasted project Impact.
SR 99/212th Street SW is forecast to experience a minor degradation in operations
during the PM peak hour due to the project, although it would operate at LOS F In 1992
with or without the project. If the widening improvements proposed in the Cofte Place
7�-qtftc Sfttdy were implemented. the intersection would operate at LOS E in 2000 according
to the Bell -Walker Study. When SR 99 is widened to seven -lanes, as planned, forecasted
operations would remain LOS F; however, v/c would be reduced by 10 percent.
90371.50\903715RI The TRANSPO Gmup, Inc. Page 22
Table 4. Level -of -Service Summary - 1992 With Project5
1992 W/O Project 1992 With Project
S�nalized Intersection LOS Avg. Delayl V/C2 LOS Avg. Delayl W62
0 Boldface = Milgatedlimproved
SR 99/212th Street SW
• Rve-lane SR 99
• Seven -lane SR 99
SR 991220th Street SW
• Five -lane SR 99
• SeverWane SR 99
SR 99/224th Street SW
• Five -lane SR 99
• Seven -lane SR 99
220th Street SW(76th Avenue W
• Interim Restriping1l
• Rye -lane 220th StreeO
220th Street SW/66th Avenue W
212th Street SW176th Avenue W
SR 99/216th Street SW
• Rve-lane SR 99
(w/planned signal)
• Seven4ane SR 99
220th Street SW184th Avenue W
F
112.9
1.23
F
115.6
1.24
F
68.9
1.11
F
132.9
1.30
F
139.5
1.31
F
63.1
1.12
D6
28.06
0.926
D6
28.46
0.926
C
21.8
0.76
F
82.7
1.06
F
85.3
1.07
0
38.8
0.90
D
35.0
0.88
F
100.7
0.99
F
104.7
1.00
F
68.6
1.07
F
74.6
1.09
D 28.7 0.86
C 21.7 0.52
D 30.2 0.87
B 13.6 0.67
C 21.7 0.53
WORST -CASE SCENARIO 1992 W/O Project 1992 With Project
Sil;;nalized Intersection LOS Avg. Delay' V/C4 LOS Avg. Delay' VC2
0 Boldface z Millgated(Improved
SR 99/220th Street SW
• Five -lane SR 99 F 132.9 1.30 F 143.9 1.32
• Seven -lane SR 99 F 65.2 1.13
220th Street Sw/76th Avenue W F 82.7 1.06 F 86.8 1.08
0 Flve-hm MM RmO D 35.2 0.88
I Average delay expressed in seconds per vehide (all approaches).
2 VIC - Volume-tocapacity ratio.
3 Interim Improvement to reskipe the north and south 76M Avenue approaches and tephasing Me sonal.
4 Reflects widening 220th Stmet to rive lanes on both approaches per the City of EdmondslSoohomish County VAB
project appfkadon, but no changes on 76th Avenue approaches.
5 Actual level -of -service worksheets have been compiled and have been provided to City of Edmonds staff for their
files.
6 Difilers ftom results shown in Top Foods report due to a correction in the application of level -of -service calculation
sobare.
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 23
SR 99/220th Street would operate at about the same volume -to -capacity ratio,
with or without the project. LOS F operations would continue in either case. When SR 99
is widened to seven lanes. operations would improve substantially along the corridor, with
v/c reduced by almost 15 percent; however, the intersection would continue to operate at
or near capacity during the PM peak hour. Operations could be further improved if either
dual northbound and southbound left-tum lanes, or exclusive right -turn lanes are included
in the planned seven -lane widening project. The design report for the widening project
should consider these Intersection enhancement options. Operational benefits must be
weighed against impacts to adjacent comer properties.
Under the worst -case scenario. v/c in 1992 with the project would be about
1.5 percent higher than v/c In 1992 without the pmJect. No noticeable change in v/c
would occur compared to v/c using average trip generation rates. The worst -case scenario
does not lead to signifIcant traffic impacts at this intersection.
SR 99/224th Street would remain at LOS D when project traffic is added to
1992 baseline PM peak hour volumes. The intersection would improve to LOS C in the PM
peak hour with the planned widening of SR 99 to seven lanes. No other improvements or
modifications to operations are recommended.
220th Street SW/76th Avenue W is forecast to remain at LOS F in 1992 with or
without the addition of project traffic if no improvements are made. Ultimately, a Elve-lane
section should be constructed between SR 99 and 76th Avenue W. If this were completed
(including five lanes on the west approach to 76th), LOS D operations could result.
Under the worst -case trip generation scenario, v/c in 1992 with the project would
be about 1.8 percent higher than v/c in 1992 without the project. No noticeable change in
v/c would occur compared to v/c using trip generation rates. The worst -case scenario does
not lead to significant buffic impacts at this intersection.
The worst -case trip generation would not result In noticeable changes in intersection
operation (when compared with impacts using average trip generation) at the two intersections
which would experience the highest project traffic impacts. It can thus be concluded that
impacts would not be noticeably different at = study area Intersection using either average
or worst -case trip generation estimates. Since all other locations were analyzed assuming
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 24
average trip generation rates, conclusions reached can be reasonably assumed to reflect
results generated under a worst -case analysis.
An interim improvement could be constructed at the 220th Street SW/76th Avenue W
intersection to improve operating conditions without widening 220th. This would involve
restriping the north and south legs of 76th Avenue W to allow for an exclusive left -turn lane
and a right/thru lane. The signal phasing could then be revised from split phase to stan-
dard phasing to include north/south left -turn and thru phases. Phasing for the east and
west legs would remain split. In addition, it is recommended that a right -turn overlap
phase be added for westbound right turns. With these improvements completed, LOS D
would result for average weekday PM peak hour conditions. 7bese improvements would
require that the controller be replaced. If these Improvements were included with the ulti-
mate five -lanes along 220th Street SW through the intersection. operations would be better
than the LOS D identifted with either improvement.
220th Street SW/66th Avenue would operate at LOS F in 1992 with or without
the prrject. Retiming the signal could improve level of service to IDS D/E. 7he City of
Mountlake Ten -ace has a pmJect programmed to retime the 220th Street SW signal system
from SR 99 to 1-5.
212th Street SW/76th Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F with or without the
project. Project traffic impacts are estimated to increase v/c by about 1.8 percent. If the
projects identified in the College Place 7)-aj)7c Shidy were constructed, the intersection is
forecast to improve to LOS E in 2000 (according to the College Place Tralflic ShLdy).
SR 99/216th Street would experience additional degradation to side -street cir-
culation in 1992 during the PM peak hour if no signal were installed. All traffic from
216th Street SW would continue to operate at LOS F with or without the project. Left turns
from SR 99 would operate at LOS E. The project adds thru trips on SR 99 to this intersec-
tion which would contribute to both eastbound and westbound side -street delays -
The TIP identiftes this traffic signal as the top citywide Intersection Improvement
priority, to be completed In 199 1. If this occurs prior to the widening of SR 99 to seven
lanes, LOS D would occur with or without the project. With SR 99 widened to seven lanes,
LOS B would result. These results assume no shift in traffic volume when the signal is
installed. Some increase in side street (especially east approach) traffic may occur, as
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 25
SR 99 access becomes easier at this location. However, Increased side street traffic at
216th SW/SR 99 would cause an offsetting decrtase (beneftt) at some other location cur-
rently being used to gain SR 99 access. Specifically, 212th and 220th Streets SW
may experience minor reductions in traffic due to Implementation of a signal at
SR 99/216th Street SW.
220th Street SW/84th Avenue would operate at LOS C in 1992 with or without
the project, assuming the =-identified signalization is in place. Without the signal (four-
way stop -control), LOS D or better would occur with project traffic. The overall effects
would be negligible with or without the project in either case.
Signal System Considerations
The level -of -service analysis was done in recognition of the traffic signal system
which controls progressed traffic flows on 220th Street SW and on SR 99. The system is
controlled by the City of Lynnwood. While the indtvidual intersection calculations have
incorporated current signal timing patterns, future patterns will undoubtedly be Werent,
depending on the actual character of traffic flows. The level of accuracy inherent in the
best traffic forecasts is not appropriate to use for future signal timing. 'Ibus, the full -sys-
tem. Impact of the change in traffic patterns due to the project cannot be accurately
assessed.
Project Access
ne Nelson Motors new car dealership is proposed to be served by four driveways;
two each on SR 99 and 220th Street SW. Due to the raised center channelization on SR 99
at this location, the driveways on SR 99 will be right -in, rIght-out only. These driveways
will operate at LOS A during the PM peak hour in 1992 with the project. The two Nelson
Motors drtveways on 220th Street SW are proposed to be full access drtveways. The
ire aainder of this section deals with driveway operations on 220th Street SW.
The easterly Nelson Motors driveway is proposed to be located directly south of the
proposed Top Foods easterly driveway, creating a four -legged intersection. Level of service
at this intersection was analyzed assuming 70 percent of the Nelson Motors 220th Street SW
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 26
traffic will use this driveway. Under this assumption, traffic leaving Nelson Motors would
openate at LOS C. while westbound left -turns from 220th Street SW into Nelson Motors
would operate at IA)S A.
The worst turning movement at this Intersection would be the southbound left turn
z
from Top Foods onto 220th Street SW. This movement would operate at 1A)S F if no ad-
justments to Top Foods on -site circulation occur. Since Top Foods has four driveways,
some adjustment to Internal traffic patterns Is Mcely. For example, southbound left turns
from Top Foods onto 220th Street SW at the easterly Top Foods driveway could reassign as
either left turns at the westerly Top Foods 220th Street SW drtveway or as right turns from
the Top Foods drtveways onto SR 99.
The interaction between driveway operations on 220th Street SW and operations
at the SR 99/220th Street SW intersection was also assessed. Eastbound queues on
220th Street SW at the SIR 99/220th Street SW Intersection were calculated to average
15 vehicles (375 feet) in the left-tum lane and 10 vehicles (250 feet) in the thru/right-thru
lanes during the PM peak hour in 1992 with the project. Since the easterly Nelson Motors
and Top Foods driveways are 325 feet west of SR 99, the calculated left-tum queue would
interfere with left turns from these driveways onto 220th Street SW about half the time
during the PM peak hour. However. since queue length calculations are dependent on sig-
nal timing parameters and average vehicle delay, and the average vehicle delay calculations
are over-sensittve to small changes in traffic volume within the LOS F range (see level of
service for SR 99/220th Street SW), actual future queue lengths can be expected to be sig-
nificantly shorter than the calculated queue lengths. Ibis assumes that the planned
220th Street SW signal system timing improvements are implemented, as planned.
The westerly Nelson Motors driveway is proposed to be located about 182 feet west
of the easterly Nelson Motor's driveway, placing it about 26 feet east of the westerly Top
Foods driveway. Level of service at the westerly Nelson Motors and Top Foods driveways
was calculated assuming four -legged operation to reflect the close proximity of the two
driveways. Operations at the westerly driveways would be somewhat better than at the
easterly driveways.
The 26-foot offset of the Nelson Motors and Top Foods driveways would result in an
increased chance of vehicle conflicts between exiting left turns at the two driveways. How-
ever, since the conflicting turning movement volumes would be low, this conflict is not
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 27
anticipated to result In a signifteant hazard. Restriction of turning movements at the west-
erly driveways. In an attempt to alleviate this conflict, would only intensify potential prob-
lems at the other driveways and possibly increase traffic volumes on local streets by
encouraging circuitous traffic patterns.
Signalizing either the easterly or westerly Nelson Motors and Top Foods driveways is
not considered a viable alternative since the resulting distance between adjacent signals
would be less than accepted standards. It is recommended that this location be monitored
and If an Inordinate increase in traffic accidents occurs, some form of control, such as
signing the Nelson Motors westerly driveway for right -out only, should be considered.
Safety Impacts
Because the project would contribute additional traffic to the study area intersec-
tions. there could be a commensurate increase in the potential for accidents to occur. In
most cases, traffic added by the project during peak congestion periods would be small —
thus, the potential for increased accident experience attributable to the project would also
be small.
7bere would be an increased potential for accidents at all new driveway locations.
since new vehicle conflicts would be Introduced. As discussed above, 220th Street SW
driveway access operations should be monitored by the city to assure continued safe oper-
ation as thru volumes increase. If accident rates are shown to increase, more restrictive
driveway operations may be appropriate to reduce vehicle conflict potential.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity
Full curb. gutter, and sidewalks are included along the entire SR 99 and
220th Street SW pmJect frontages. This is a signiftcant enhancement to local pedestrian
facilities, however pedestrian activity is expected to remain low in this area.
Nelson Motors new car dealership is unlikely to generate noticeable off -site pedes-
trian volumes.
90371.00\90371RI The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 28
Transit Impacts
No noticeable impact to transit is forecasted. As discussed above, the Nelson
Motors facility Is an auto -oriented business.
Parking
A total of 82 customer and employee parking spaces has been identified on the site
plan. This is about two spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. No adverse parking impact is
expected.
90371.00\90371111 The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 29
MITIGATING MEASURES
A number of traffic improvements were identified which would generally more than
offset identified project impacts and also would relieve ongoing traffic congestion associated
with non -project conditions. By location, these include the following:
SR 99/212th Street My - Implement the planned TEP improvement to widen
SR 99 to seven lanes which would improve operations, with or without the pro-
Ject. No project -specific mitigation appears warranted.
0 SR 99/220th Street - Same as above.
0 SR 99/224th Street SW - Same as above.
220th Street SW/76th Avenue - Widen the 220th Street SW approaches to
five lanes (ultimate) and/or restripe the 76th Avenue W approaches and
re-signahze as described in the analysis which would result in acceptable
LOS D operations, with or without the project. If the ultimate five -lane section
is pursued, project participation should be based on "fair -share" contributions;
if the Interim improvement is Implemented by Top Foods, no further contribu-
tion would be necessary. If Top Foods does not construct the Interim Improve-
ment, Nelson Motors may be required to fund the Improvement at some level.
SR 99/216th Street - Implement the planned TEP improvement to signalize
the intersection which would result in LOS D or better operations, with or with-
out the project.
220th Street SW/84th Avenue - Implement the planned TIP improvement to
signalize the intersection which would result in LOS C operations, with or with-
out the project.
220th Street SW RUect Frontage - The eidsting eastbound left -turn lane
approaching SR 99 should be extended west with project development, along
the project frontage, to provide a continuous left -turn lane for access into/out
of the 220 Street project driveways. 'Ibis is currently planned along the Top
Foods frontage (north curb) as part of the project mitigation.
90371.00\90371 R1 The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 30
Driveway operations along 220th Street should be monitored and if an
inordinate increase in traffic accidents occurs, some form of control, such as
signing the Nelson Motors westerly driveway for right -out only, should be
considered.
SR 99 EUect Frontage - The project frontage Improvements should be devel-
oped compatible with the TEP-planned widening of SR 99 to seven lanes.
It is also recognized that project traMc contributes minor volumes to other local in-
tersections, which are planned for improvements in the six -year TIP, and would contribute
to the traffic impacts on the coordinated signal systems along SR 99 and 220th Street SW.
Table 5 summarizes the recommended mitigation measures. baseline and project
traffic volumes, and calculated "fair -share" contributions. Based on the results of this
analysis, Nelson Motors' share of planned vicinity transportation improvements is calcu-
lated to be $3,658. Nelson Motors has indicated a willingness to contribute $3,700 to the
City of Edmonds general transportation improvement fund for the purpose of mitigating
project -specific traffic: impacts. Nelson Motors has also proposed to develop project
frontages in accordance with planned and recommended roadway improvements. If the
220th Street SW widening project from 9th Avenue S to 84th Avenue W is Implemented,
Nelson Motors'"fair share" for the project would be $900. Together, the frontage
improvements and monetary mitigation offer will more than offset project -specific
transportation system impacts.
Table 5. Summary of Mitigation
Local
1992
Net
Nelson
Nelson
Nelson
Project
Baseline
Project
Motors
Motors
Motors
Location
Project
cost
Source
Volume
Traffic
Percent
Share
Offer
SR 99 (244th to 211 th St W)
Widen
$240,000
Edm. TIP
3,824
29
0.76%
$1,820
$1,8W
220th St SW (76th W-SR 99)
Widen
$46,000
Group 4
1,915
36
1.88%
$865
$9W
SR 99/216th St SW
Signalize
$13,000
Edm. TIP
4,303
32
0.74-1/6
$97
$1W
76th Ave S/220th St SW
Signalize
$40,000
TRANSPO
2,808
16
0.57%
$228
$200
84th Ave W/220th St SW
Signalize
$16,000
Edm. TIP
1,311
5
0.38%
$61
$100
220th St Signal System Retime $17,000 MLT 1,839 57 3.10% $527 $5W
SR 99 Signal System Retime $8,000 TRANSPO 3,824 29 0.76% $61 $100
Total $3,658 $3,700
90371.00\90371 R1 The TRANSPO Group, Inc. Page 31
APPENDIX
Level -of -Service Criteria
Level -of -Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Stopped Delay
Level of Service Per Vehicle (Seconds)
A Less than 5.0
B 5.1 to 15.0
C 15.1 to 25.0
D 25.1 to 40.0
E 40.1 to 60.0
F Greater than 60.0
Level-of-Servioe Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service Reserve Capacity
Expected Delay
A
400 or more
Little or no delay
B
300 to 399
Short delays
C
200 to 299
Average delays
D
100 to 199
Long delays
E
0 to 99
Very long delays
F
Less than 0
Failure - extreme congestion
Level of Service Criteria for Four -Way Stop Intersections
Volume -to -Capacity Ratio Level of Service
< .53 A
.53-.66 B
.66-.78 C
.78-.91 D
.91 -.99 E
> 1.0 F
..... ........
............
WE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINE
ERING STUDY
r
"M
Lynnwood Honda Automobile Deale ip -0,
r6h,
-Pacific Highway and 220th Street SW 1111
Edmonds, Washin t
g on 111
-1733
Project No. 7
Terra Associates, Inc.
FILE
-00'� r1iEL
I
t
k.
I
I
TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc.
Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology
and
Environmental Earth Sciences
April 18,1991
Project No. T-1733
Ms. Wendy Nelson
Nelson Motors, Inc.
P.O. Box 1214
Lynnwood, Washington 98036
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study
Lynnwood Honda and Automobile Dealership
Pacific Highway and 220th Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Ms. Nelson:
We have completed the geotechnical engineering study you requested for the site of the new Lynnwood
Honda automobile dealership in Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity
purpose of our study was to explore the subsurface soil and groundwater condition Map, Figure 1. The
recommendations for site preparation, foundation design, and earthwork s in order to provide
construction procedures. The
scope of our work included test pits, laboratory tests on representative soil samples and geotechnical.
engineering analyses. This rep6rt presents the findings of our study and summarizes our conclusions and
recommendations.
In general, the site is underlain at shallow depths by medium dense to dense gravelly sandy soils. It is our
opinion that the dealership building may be constructed using conventional spread footings placed on
competent native soils or on structural fill. Floors may be supported on grade. Pavements may be
constructed on recompacted native soil� or on structural fill.
Ibis report describes our explorations and explains our recommendations in greater detail. We trust,this
information is sufficient for your present needs. Please call if you have any questions concerning our report.
Sincerely yours,
TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dennis B. Green
Project Engineer
Anil�B�utail, P.E.
President
DBG/AB:tm
12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 * Phone (206) 821-7777 0 FAX 821-4334
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1-0 Project Description
2.0 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing
3.0 Site Conditions
3.1 Surface
3.2 Subsurface
3.3 Groundwater
4.0 Discussion and Recommendations
4.1 General
4.2 Spread Foundations
4.3 Ground Floors
4.4 Lateral Foundation Loads
4.5 Permanent Retaining and Foundation Walls
4.6 Excavation and Slopes
4.7 Drainage
4.8 Pavement
4.9 Site Preparation and Grading
5.0 Additional Services
6.0 Limitations
Fhwres
Vicinity Map
Exploration Location Plan
Soils Classification System
Test Pit Logs
Grain Size Analysis
Pm.e
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figures 4 through 6
Figures 7 and 8
(i)
Geotechnical Engineering Study
Lynnwood Honda Automobile Dealership
Pacific Highway and 220th Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The new Lynnwood Honda automobile dealership site is located at Highway 99 and 220th Street
Southwest in Edmonds, Washington. The project location is shown on Figure 1. Based on the site
plan provided to us, we understand that the project will consist of a concrete tilt -up building having
a floor area of about 27,000 square feet. Plans include roof top parking and an elevated ramp for
access. Building details are not known at this time. However, we expect that perimeter loads may
be in the range of 2 to 4 kips per lineal foot. Column loads may be in the range of 50 to 100 kips.
We anticipate that the building will be constructed at or near existing grade, requiring only minimal
cuts.
Once plans have been finalized we should be provided an opportunity to review foundation and
earthwork drawings and specifications. At that time we can provide supplementary
recommendations, if needed.
2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our field exploration was performed on March 27, 1991 with a rubber -tired back -hoe owned and
operated by Deeny Construction Company, Inc. Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by
excavating six test pits to a maximum depth of 8.5 feet below existing grade. The approximate test
pit locations are shown on the Exploration Location Plan, Figure 2.
The field exploration was conducted by an engineering geologist from our firm who classified the
soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples
and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification system described on Figure 3. The logs of the test pits are included in
this report as Figures 4 through 6.
Project No. T-1733
April 18,1991
Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken
to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was
measured and is reported on the test pit logs. Grain size analyses were performed on four samples.
The results are shown on Figures 7 and 8.
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 Surface
The property is an irregular shaped, ten sided parcel covering approximately four acres. It is
presently a mobile home park with paved streets, utilities, and several small, frame bu-ildings. The
site was graded and much of it paved during the development of the mobile home park some years
ago -
The site has approximately 300 feet and 427 feet of frontage on Pacific Highway (SR 99) and 220th
Street SW, respectively. The ground surface slopes very gently from the west to the east.
Topographic relief is about eight to ten feet.
3.2 Subsurface
Where it was not removed during development of the roads and parking areas, the topsoil consists
of loose, brown silty sand with some organic matter, to a depth of one to two feet. In general, gray
to tan, medium dense to dense, gravelly sand and gravelly, silty sand underlies, the site to the
explored depths. Very dense glacial till soil was encountered at the bottom of one test pit, below
the gravelly sand.
3.3 Groundwate
No groundwater seepage was encountered in any of the test pits. However, these holes were left
open only for a short time. Some changes may occur over time. However, we do not expect long
term groundwater will be a significant factor in site development.
4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATTONS
4.1 General
Based on our study, it is our opinion that the site can be developed as planned. Our
recommendations should be incorporated into design and construction of the project.
Page No. 2
PrOject NO. T-1733
April 18,1991
Our study indicates that the native soils underlying the site consist of medium dense to dense
gravelly sand and silty gravelly sand overlying dense to very dense glacial till soils. Wese materials
Mrt-
The Lynnwood Honda dealership building may be constructed Vg���§2rqad f92�
foundations placed on competent native soils or on structural fill. in
Ile following sections of this report present more detailed recommendations pertaining to the
geotechnical aspects of developing this site.
4.2 S read Foundations
.L_
The proposed building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on
the dense, native gravelly sand, or on structural fill placed over competent soils. Footings may be
proportioned for maximum bearing stresses of 3000 pounds per square foot, considering both dead
and live loads. When wind or seismic loads are included, a one-third increase is permissible.
Continuous wall footings should be at least 12 inches wide and isolated column footings at least 18
inches square. Footings exposed to the weather should bear at least 18 inches below adjacent
outside final grades.
All foundations should be provided with reinforcement in accordance with structural requirements.
43 Ground Floors
Ground floors may be framed over a- crawl space or constructed as slab -on -grade. �jlab-qn ra q
,goors ing bSA,4pp Z"
_pTtq4 on the dense native soils or on structural fill place on competent, native
soils. To provide a capilla
ry break, we recommend placing at least four inches of free -draining fill,
such as pea gravel, beneath the slabs.
In areas where moisture is undesirable, a plastic barrier at least ten mils thick should be placed on
the gravel. An inch or two of sand may be used to protect the membrane during construction.
4.4 Lateml—Foundation Loads
Lateral loads on foundations due to backfill stresses, wind, or seismic loads may be resisted by
passive soil stresses on the sides of footings and foundation walls, and by friction on the base of
foundations.
We recommend estimating passive resistances based on an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds
per cubic foot. This value assumes that the footing concrete is poured against "neat" excavations or
that the backfill is compacted to at least 90 percent of its ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density.
Page No. 3
Project No. T-1733
April 18,1991
The friction on the base of foundations should not exceed 40 percent of the foundation dead load.
4.5 Permanent !nine and Foundation Walls
Based on the site plan, it does not appear that retaining walls will be needed on the project.
However if needed, retaining walls including basement or dock walls, should be designed to resist
lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. Walls that are designed to
yield an amount equal to at least 0.002 times the wall height can be designed to resist the lateral
earth pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of 35 pounds per cubic foot. If
walls are to be restrained at the top from free movement, a uniform pressure of 100 pounds per
square foot should be added to the pressure exerted by the equivalent fluid weight. It is assumed
that no hydrostatic pressures will act behind the walls and that no surcharge slopes or- loads will be
placed above the walls. If surcharges are to be applied, they should be added to the above lateral
pressures.
Retaining and foundation walls should be backfilled with compacted free -draining granular soils
containing no organics. The backfill material should meet the criteria for soil's imported for use as
structural fill, as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. The purpose
for using a free -draining, granular backfill is to assure that the design pressures on the retaining
walls are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls. Perforated
Ri�pe drains shoul4 IL
q!�Atjhe 'll iehin the
-basv thq wall footi rainin backfi
walls. 'Mese pipes should drain to the storm drain syst
em.
4.6 ExcavatLon and Slopes
We do not anticipate that any significant steep cuts will be required to create site grades. However,
should excavation slopes become necessary, they should be constructed in conformance with the
limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a
height of four feet may be made vertical. For slopes having a height greater than four feet,
temporary cuts in the dense, native sandy soils should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1
(Horizontal:Vertical).
All permanent cut or fill slopes should be made no steeper than 2:1. Water should not be allowed
to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slopes. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded
with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion.
Page No. 4
4.7 Drainaee
Project NO. T-1733
April 18,1991
We recommend the use of drains
at the base'of all foundation -and retainin walls. The drains
pja�
should drain to the storm drain system. The footing drains should be surrounded by at least_lk
i - The pea gravel should be wrapped with woven geotextile filter fabric. Roof
drains sho Id se aratelY tightlined to the storm drains. In areas adjacent to the building final site
grades should be sloped away from the building.
4.8 Pavement
Access roads and driveways may be supported on recompacted inorganic native soils, or on
structural fill. Where structural fill is required, the upper twelve inches of subgrade soils should be
compacted to at least 95 percent of its ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Below the top foot, a
relative compaction effort of 90 percent is adequate. Regardless of the compaction effort used or
the results obtained, all subgrade areas should be in a stable, non -Yielding condition prior to paving.
We anticipate that little if any fill will be required to achieve the desired elevation for the planned
paved areas. However, any fill needed should meet the requirements for structural fill presented in
the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. The allowable thickness of the fill layer will
depend on the material used, compaction equipment and the number of passes made to compact
the layer. In no case should the layers exceed twelve inches in loose thickness.
The use of geotextiles and/or crushed rock may help expedite subgrade preparation where wet or
yielding soils are present. We recommend using Mirafi 500Y, or a woven fabric with equivalent
strength and permeability. In most instances, twelve inches of granular fill will stabilize the
subgrade except for very soft areas where additional fill could be required. The subgrade should be
evaluated by qualified technical personnel after the site is stripped and cut to grade.
The pavement section for light traffic areas should consist of two inches of asphalt surfacing over
either four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) or three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB). For
heavily loaded areas, such as main driveways and areas with truck traffic, we recommend three
inches of asphalt surfacing over six inches of crushed rock base or four inches of asphalt treated
base. Pavements should be placed over an adequately prepared subgrade as discussed above.
4.9 Site Preparation and Grading
Building and pavement areas should be stripped of any vegetation, topsoil, loose surficial soils and
any other deleterious material. We recommend that any soils to be imported for use as structural
fill be evaluated by Terra Associates, Inc. before they are brought onto the site. For import fills, we
suggest that no more than five percent of the soil fraction passing the 3/4-inch screen should be
finer than the No. 200 sieve.
Page No. 5
Project No. T-1733
April 18,1991
Native soils are granulate in nature and should be generally suitable for use as structural fill except
under wet conditions. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal layers and compacted to a
density equal to or greater than 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test
Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). The fiff material should be placed at or near the optimum
moisture content. The individual fill layers should not exceed twelve inches in loose thickness.
5.0 ADDMONALSERvICES
We recommend that Terra Associates, Inc. be provided the opportunity to review the final design
and the earthwork specifications in order to verify that our recommendations have been properly
interpreted and implemented in the project design.
To observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and recommendations, and to allow
expedient design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated, we also
rec I ommend that Terra Associates, Inc. be retained to provide geotechnical services during
construction. These services should include:
1) observing all earthwork operations and the placement and compaction of any
structural fill that may be required;
2) observing all footing and slab areas Prior to forming and concrete placement;
3) Performing field densibr tests on compacted fills and backfills;
4) observing and testing the subgrade under pavement.
6.0
LIMITATIONS
The analyses and recommendations submi tted herein are based on data from test pits. However,
actual subsurface conditions may differ from those observed in the test pits. The nature and extent
of any such variations may not become evident until construction.
If variations are observed during construction, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to
evaluate the actual site conditions and review the recommendations in this report prior to
proceeding with construction.
This report has been prepared specifically for this project. It is the property of Terra Associates
and is intended for the exclusive use of Nelson Motors, Inc. and its representatives. We do not
guarantee project performance in any respect, only that our work meets normal standards of
professional care. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is provided.
Page No. 6
PROJECT
Ref* Thomas Bros. dated 1989.
TERRA
ASSOCIATES
VICHTY MAP
LYNNWOOD HONDA
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
Geotechnical Consultants Proj- No. 1733
I I Date 3/25/91
SOIL
CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM
MAJ OR DIVISIONS
LETTER
GRAPH --------
SYMBOLSYMBoL
TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
.*0:
Clean'
GRAVELS Gravels
GW
well -graded gravels, gravel-sa_____�
.:0,. nd mixtures,
_j
little or no fines.
0
co
CD
More than 50% of (less than
coarse fraction 5% fines).
GP
Poorly -graded gravels. gravel -sand mixtures,
...... little or no fines.
is larger than Gravels
GM
511ty gravels, grave Csand silt mixtures,
.W
No. 4 sieve. with fines.
non -plastic fines.
<
Cr
E >
0
GC
Clayey gra Is, gravel-sand-cla
plastic fines. Y mixtures.
0
aR Z
0 0
0 0
SANDS Clean
Sands
—
S W
.
Well -graded sands, gravelly sands,
W
C C-4
little or no fines.
(j)
Cc
to
.a 6
z
More than 60% of (less than
fines)
SID
PoorlY-graded sands or gravelly sands,
<
W, C
_5%
coarse fraction
little or no fines.
0
I-
0 ca
:E
is smaller than Sands
SM
T
Silty sands, sand -silt Mixtures,
non -plastic fines.
with fines.
No. 4 sieve.
Sic
Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures,
0)
_j
SILTS AND CLAYS
ML
plastic fines..
In :1 1: .M. I il -
�
org 11`11111C� !: I!S 0[ 1111EI1,11 fliniii! 14 ''Id-s-7—rocTi-flour.
0
;Silt or cl eyi:111
a . fine sand or cayey silts with,
0)
a) 0
Liquid limit is less than 50%.
CL
Inorganic clays of Ipw to
ve 7medi I
clays, sandy PM P asticity,
C)
E Cy
!Iy clays, si ty clays, lean
M
W
Z
* 0
OZ
OL
Organic silts and organic clays of low
<
Cc
U) C
C
SILTS AND CLAYS
MH
plasticity.
InOrganic silts,, micaceous or diatomaceous
0
fine sandy 0`r silty soils, elastic.
W
a)-
>
Liquid limit is greater than 50%.
CH'
Inorganic clays of higii p ___ clays.
FaSt[Cltyiie fat-
z
0 E T
co 0
U_
OH,
III,
I I
Organic clays of medibm to higii �_L,_srjcrLy,
io�ganic sits.
HIGHLY
ORGANIC SOILS
PT
Peat arid other highly*organic soils.
P
11
L
DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS.
2' OUTER DIAMETER
SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
C TORVANE READING,7tsf
.2.4" INNER DIAMETER RING SAMPLER
OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER q U PENETROMETER F
3EADING, tsf
SAMPLER PUSHED W MOISTURE, percent of dry weight
SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
WATER LEVEL (DATE)
WATER OBSERVATION WELL
TERRA
ASSOCIATES
Geotechnical C`OfISLIltants
PCf DR.Y DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot
LL LIQUID LIMIT,percent.
PI* PLASTIC INDEX
N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot
LYISM001) FIONDA
EDMONDS, WASFINGTON
Proj. No. 1733 1 Date 3-91 1 Figure 3
TEST PIT NO. 1
Logged By DBG
Date _, 3-27-91
Depth
k'"I votlb .
sc lition
Tan -Gray gravelly SAND, moist, fine to
coarse grained, medium dense.
SW
'12Y9 -`L�Uq graVe.UY bAW, Moist, very dense.
(Glaciai Tan,
10— Test pit terminated at 8 feet.
No groundwater seepage encountered.
No caving.
fl
Logged By --PBG TEST PIT NO. 2
Date 3-27-91
1
ill
Elev. 361
W
KE
.4
.7
Elev. 358
SM
Brown, gravelly, �ty NMU with SOW Orprli�, moist
10.?
Tan gravelly SAND, fine to coarse grained,
SW
moist medium dense to dense.
5
4.61
Test pit terminated at 8 feet.
No groundwater seepage encountered.
No caving.
TERRA
ASSOCIATES
Geotechnical Consultants
TEST PIT LOGS
LYNNWOCID HONDA
EDIVIONDS,WASHIINGTON
Proj. No. 1733 1 Date 3-91 Figure 4
Logged By DBG
Date 3-27-91
Depth
Soil Description
SM _yq 5LaVtMj SIUM with some orgmdcs, moist,
dense. (IMM)
rayt gravelly SAND, fine to coarse grained,
Dist, dense.
Sw
TEST PIT NO. 5
10] 1 est Pit terminated at 7 feet.
• groundwater seepage encountered.
• caving.
I
Elev. _363
W
Logged By DBG TEST PIT NO. 6
Date 3-27-91 Elev.
1
1 �
Brown, silty gravelly SAND with some
Sm
SM
organics, loose. (TOPSOIL)
Reddish -tan pilty, gravelly SAND, moist,
SM
medium dense.
5
Gray, slightly gravelly, silty SAND, fine to
Sm
medium grained, moist, medium dense to dense.
8.0
Test pit terminated at 8.5 feet.
No groundwater seepage encountered.
No caving.
TERRA
ASSOCIATES
Geotechnical Consultants
TEST PIT LOGS
LYNNWOOD HONDA
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
Proj. No. 1733 1 Date 3-91 Figure 6
09:11 FAX 206 4404804 'FFIC SERVICES
TRA 1z.
Ccimmndr� Lc-6.��MP 1 nv 42S 774 94Z*zl
us
FIE
JUN - 2002
1),vis,01V
At I'stge.', mo W
cc
Cf)
-JOBEPH WALLIS
LU
Orle. 1(425) 775-0427
489
[my, 34±
`7
W 0
QD) 6
C—
.2 ,
-7—
L
D-
-.pv A-4
e. t exi RA
sum i" --�
IN —
6"
Se e,
T- I-s
3 Otez.1 4- Cie, U.XU
,Yr;
OTED
,PROVQ AS A
TRAFFIC OPER 'IONS
0
P - M/0:3
Critical Areas Checklist CA File No:
Site Information (BO]ls/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
I. Site Address/Locatioru - t-LO'&c �;,4wott4 1,9
2. Property Tax Account Number: to I
AMoy'*0�77001
3. Approxinmte Site Size (acres or square feet): —117,
4. Is this site currently developed?,X yes, _ no,
If yes., how is site developed?
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that appi�.
Flat less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
RoftF. slopes on site generally less &an 15% (a vertical vise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly, slopes present on site of more than 15% and less dian 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 descril)e):
6. Site cointains areas of year-round standing water: Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains area of seasonal standing water: - 4 0 Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway floodplai. of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
g 0 Mows are seasonal? No (What tizu of year?
10. (,�Slte is
��y: fo�r*SW.�; meadow shrubs n-dxed
iirban a AW110 e
11. Obvious wedand is present on site:
For City Staff Use Only
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. Site is Zoned?
3. SCS mapped soil type(q)? f.--)
.JL� , - -
4. Critical Areas Inventory or C.A. map ind�atw CriticaJ Area site?
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? -A
112.11M "
gs i'QQ 6QQ � "I, a I :tx� 11) ja rl '0 cA a i-
LXD - —
DETERMINATION
_STUDY REQUIRED X, — WAIVER
Reviewed br.-9A,,., n"-
�.;ntical Ams Checkhst-OW4222903
MI.
TOTAL P.03
City-4 Edmonds Date ReeA*ed- -9,Q
Development Services Department City Re"."tilk
Planning Division Critical Aron File *.,.A
Phone: 425.771.0220 Critical Areas Checklist
Fax: 425.771.0221 Date Mailed to ApplicaW
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this fonn is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
hiw1w submittal of ft aplication to the City.
'The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas an, or
may be, present on the subject property. Ile information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or date available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, rnaps, or soil
Surveys).
A property owner, or hisAw autbwized representative,
must fill out the chacklA sip and deft it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklin, m&M a
precursory site visit, W make a determination of the
subsequem stepa necessary to oomplft a developmerit
permit application.
Please submit a vicitfity map. alms with the sisned copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
"cific piece of prqperty described an fts km In
addition, the applicant WWI mclu& odw perimetit
information (e.S. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with dik Checklist to assistant staff
in completina their preliminary assessmimt of the site.
The undersigned applicant and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in comideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from =W and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, &rising from any action or infraction based in whole or pot upon fain, misleading. inaccurate or
incoTnplete information furnished by the applicant, hisAw/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the ini on and exhibits herewith subinitted we true and correct to the bat of my
I
knowledoe and that I am authorized to e thi li fion on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
0
SIGNATURE OF APPLICA HIA /7
AGENT W7 DAT11 -61ULO±
Property Owner's Authorization
on
By my signature, I certify that I have a ornized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application.
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of E4monds to enter the sutied property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER C2� Z��— DA-M
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
�ner p AppHeant Representative: (Anemt)
6p keg It" (EA* . � - (V10ft4,0LfA40L4/ At
0401,J00L 1�� W&�. hek) J 1, V4 $�-V 644A He L64 5)
Ka —me, Name
W �. W
Street Address V I
EjsvvtA6, wA- qbo-,�o
city state Zip
Telephone: 5-- -7-75' - Jr7JT
Ernail addreas (optional):
CrIdW Arus Check)*WW4.22,2003
Sftet Address
-qtA� WA -
City state zip
Telephone: Ub
Email Aftess (optiond):
Ll
USE
ZONE PERMIT
if cv- NUMBER 920880
CITY OF EUMONDS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER ME�NAM�EC�FISUSINESS
r-
A�DDRESS
ADDRESS to W16 SUITE/APT #
Ig 95,
EGAL DESCRIPTION CHECKI
9V
$UBVVISION NO
2, MAILING
0 0� 9
TY ZIP
17 7
,7
TELEPHONE "MIER
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP
EXISTING — REQUIRED DEDICATION _ RW
Street
PROPOSED Ins
q=-
Approyed
Permit Required 0
Use Permit Req-d 0
ect�.. Required 0
k 9--ird 0
r
REMARKS
U6. W11z(N3<, MOP 1,5/u)
ADORES
—AS
u
CITY ZIP
ABER
NAME
ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
ADDRESS
C
METER SI*
IBUILDING SYPPLY SIZE
ci CITY 411
z
0
TELEPHONE NUMBER
-,�&
mt—
;V/f V A?&6
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
15Tf191137k1Y`0
SIGN AREA
ALLO,UED PROPOSED
*V�, )I
105
1105
SEPA REVIEW
COMPLETE JEIEMPT
E.P
4DB
I ( ,
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
c
Ra
VA�,IANE� C��U
`6
PLANNING REVIEW BY
�:Eq
z
z
SETBACKS FEET
FRONT SIDE REAR
-4 YR 70 j
V C'O/ 11&7
Tax A c c o u nVi, ay� N o? 9 2. - 70
76 oc-,C>7
REMARKS
V�Z
NEW 8 ESIDENTIAL 11 PLUMBING
ADDIALTER COMMERCIAL El MECHANICAL
REPAIR APT BLDG. 1:1 SIGN
GRADING E] FENCE
DEMOLISH CIDS X —FT
CARPORT
GARAGE swim
REMODEL 7 POOL
[]WOOD STOVE I F7 RETAINING WALL/
INSERT II ROOKERY RENEWAL
z
CHECK
TYPE OF CONS LICTION
CODE
HEIGH T
SPECIAL INSPECTOR
REQUIRED XYES__ JAREA
--F—
I
7-
I
R M.-b
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER USC 305
C,
0 7_ IE1114�� EXPLAIN:
(TYPX, Bust
E 0
z1)&1i loeg- 10 6 Ao!nAF4
M
NUMErER- OF STORIES
NUMBER OF ',r
DWELLING
UNITS
2. DESCRIBE WORKAI�OPONE (A PLOT PLAN)
FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED
S%fhowr -4v 7e-.-jcA 466m.
.1 VALUATION
—
PLAN CHECK FEE
,W11b-A4fAW4- 0144r AY
cl-III'lli
BUILDING
PLUMBING
rr
MECHANICAL
rr
Plan Check No.
3 ? (�
--
This Permit,COvers work to be done on private property ONLY.
Any cons ruction on the public domain (ci a! dew.,Iks,
GRADING/FILL
O"Ml 7-
STATE SURCHARGE
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
STORM DRAINAGE FEE
Su''AppliCant, on behalf of his or her spouse ' heirs, assigns and
Ccessors in interest, agrees to indemnify ' defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages Oi
0
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance o f this permit shall not be deemed to
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
T6 nor Ii m it in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
provision.''
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
14202�y
V'
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
1 hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVlAL
G
Lauthorized age'nt of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT
U
state laws reg U lating construction; and in doing the work authoriz- AUTHOR411E This application is not a permit until
ad thereby, no pers 'on will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY T HES signed by the Building Official or his/her
Code of the Stateof Washington -relating to Workmen's Compensa- WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
It n Insurance. INSPECTION acknowledged in space provided.
P
SIG ATURE (OWNER _ OR AGENT) JOATE SIGNED DIEPARTMENT OF
_L� CITY OF
EDMONDS
ATTENTION CALL FOR 14ELEASED Or DATE
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE INSPECTION
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR 771-3202 ORIGINAL - File YELLOW - Inspe lot
A CERTIF CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3,
102-87 PINK - Owner GOLD - ASSeSSor
a
CITY OF EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME, NAME OF BUSINESS
I�Fl �, n tj I kn=4 < :�:
MAILING ADDRESS I
0 4ELHONE
ZIP
NUMBER
N
U ADDRESS
CITY
-PHONE NUMBER
NAME
A 'Es,
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Z
0
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
3 r7 (, A) n
Z
C
reVCE�6FTjpfion Of Property - include all ea8f7e
<
�377;?92 -741V -3�6r-3 F
r7 NEW RESIDENTIAL 7 PLUMBING
71 ADDIALTER COMMERCIAL 7 MECHANICAL
REPAIR APT BLDG. El SIGN
GRADING CYDS FENCE C
DEMOLISH (_
x _FT)
CARPORT swim
REMODEL El GARAGE S
POOL
0 000 STOVE/ F7 RETAINING WALL/
w INSE RT I I ROCKERY RENEWAL
U
R
(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: F
4aw a
NUMBER —OF STORIES
NUMBER OF
DWELLING
UNITS
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
F
Pi
BI.
PL
Plan Check No.
This Permit Covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GI
Any cons I ruction On the public domain (curts, sidewolks,
driveways, marquees,
etC.) Will require separate permission. si
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days ST
"Applicant,oin behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and EN
,n
successors i nterest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to PIL
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
nor it m it in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance T(
provision,"
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
information gi ven is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
state laws re g u lating construction; and in doing the work authoriz-
ed thereby, n 0 person will be employed in violation of the Labor
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's
tion Insurance.
SI 7N (OWNER OR AGENT)
DATE SIGNED
USE
ZONE PERMIT
JOB NUMBER
ADDRESS
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP I TESCIP Approed 0
EXISTiNG — REQUIRED DEDICATION Sw P,eUrni El
Required
Paii'm Req of 0
PROPOSED Inspection Requ:tred 0
Sidewalk Required 13
MEMO
NO,
EMARKS
SIGN AREA SERA REVIEW
ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE 1EXEMPT
PLANNIN. RIVIEW BY
ETBACKS — FEET �HEIGHT
RONT SIDE REAR
TYPE
.OUIRED 0 YES Glcou��
WRKS
ROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305
INAL INSPECTION REQUIRED
VALUATION
AN CHECK FEE
ILDING
JMBING
CHANICAL
ADING,FILL
kTE SURCHARGE
)RM DRAINAGE FEE
5. INSPECTION FEE
W
Ain
ADS
DATE
LOAD
AN CHECK DEPOSIT
TAL AMOUNT DUE
7T;-�4,titio
Lm
ATTENTION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
THIS PERMIT
AUTHORIZES
This application is not a permit until
ONLY THE
signed by the Building Official or his/her
WORK NOTED
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
I INSPECTION
acknowledged in space provided.
DEPARTMENT
ITY OF
�0F7FIC) S21GN�T
EDMONDS
2RE /.,TE
ATTENTION CALL FOR LEASED BY
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE INSPECTION
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR 771-3202 ORIGiNAL — F,le YELLOW in , pector
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3.
10287 PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor
a
'look
USE
CITY OF EDMONDS ZON
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME/NAME OF- BUSINESS
& LEG
MAILIAG ADDRESS'
z
0 7 tz Put
Y ZIP I
LVFHUNtNU. Exti
PFK
NAME
RE
ADDR
SS
411
ITELEPHONE NUMBER
EN,
ADDRESS'
0
/v ME
CITY ZIP
T ELEPHONE NUMBER
z
Q
0—Ea RE
U
ST TE LICENSE NUMBER
z
egal Descr ption of rrope-rTy - all easements
0
VA
SE
4
Pf
�RINEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
ADDIALTER COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL
REPAIR APT BLDG. El SIGN
C
/ GRADING [:] FENCE
FT)
DEMOLISH _ Y.S I —X
CARPORT 1-7 swim a
RE Mo DEL GARAGE t I A
fol.
Wool) STOVE 1 RETAINING WA)-L/. 4 [
INSERT ROCKER RENEWAL
P
(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS�t!i I EXPLAIN.
0
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF
DW LLING
UNITS
C.
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE IATTAC. PLOT ILAN)
Plan Check No.
This Permit covers work to be don6 on private property ONLY.
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, SIdewF1k5,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs assigns and
successors in interest, agrees to indemnity, def�nd and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washingtob, it$ Officisalls;
and agents from any and all clalms�for damag Ei
employees,
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
Issuance o�f this permit shall not' be deemed to
of this permit.
m odify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
0. nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
Provision
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly
a thorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
u
I.
state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work author z
ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compen sa.
tion Insurance.
R N
IlLif,4!-Kc�
GNED
1—
&,,, ne,
4- / Al(—
—C/
PERMIT
9
NUMBER
qESS Z 2- 0 2 0 I-IlLee--7
0/,q y
L DESCRIPTION CHECKI
SUBDIVISION NO
LID NO
11q
LIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET
MAP.
TESCP Approved 13
RW Permit Required 13
TING — REQUIRED DEDICATION
_
Street Use Permit Rsq'd 0
Inspection Required 0
POSED
Sidewalk Required 0
!INEERING MEMO DATED
RE IEW BY
?/
SUPPLY SIZE
NO, OF FIXTURES
IARKS
SIGN AREA
SEPA REVIEW
ADS NO
ULOWED
PROPOSED
P
COM LETE
IGG,
105'
C 5
17Z
�
JEXEMPT
SHUE N
50
?19
9vP
ItITANCE OR CU
PLANNING REVIEW By
DATE
F-BACKS — FEET
DINT ArR EID,k�A
REARJ I
HT�(JIITCOTrE
z
:�Jfflp:r
, A
HECKVI TYPE OF CONSTRU ION
PECIAL INSPECTOR AR A OCCUPANCY-
OCCUPANT
EQUIRED
11 YES
GROUP
LOAD
J
MARKS
z
ROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305
FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED
VALUATION
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
GRADINGIFILL
STATE SURCHARG�
,%T6RM DRAINAGE FEE
EING. INSPECTION FEE
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
0 19�57 S o
/Vai
ATTENTION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
THIS PERMIT
This application is not a permit until
AUTHORIZES
signed by the Building official or his/her
ONLY THE
WORK NOTED
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
acknowled d in space pr ided.
INSPECTION
DEPARTMENT
OFF TU E 'DATE
CITY OF
EDMONDS
CALL FOR
R EA By DATE'
ATTENTION INSPECTION
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE 77�1-3202 ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR
A CERTIFICATE 'OF OCCUPANCY HAS 'BEEN GRANTED. UBC PINK Owrer GOLD — Assessor
CHAPTER 3.
CITY C
1- El F- V,
civic C rR UTILITY EASEMEN-OW
-T F"
V020 1 0 i i , L i
IN CONSIDERATION of benefits to accrue to the grantors herein, the
undersigned, Nelson Motors, Inc., hereby grants to the CITY OF
EDMONDS, a Municipal Corporation, a permanent easement for the
installation, operation and maintenance of a sewer over, across,
through and below the following described property; and the further
right to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions
interfering with the location, construction and maintenance of said
utility, together with the right of access to the easement at any time
for the stated purposes.
The easement hereby granted is located in the County of Snohomish,
State of Washington, and is more particularly described as follows:
A strip of land, 10.00 feet in width, lying 5.00 perpendicular
feet on each side of the following described centerline, and
includes the Easterly and Westerly projections of said sides.
Commencing at the Southeast corner of Lot 2, Swan's Addition, as
recorded in Volume 16 of Plats, Page 110, records of Snohomish
County, Washington; thence Northerly along the Easterly line of
X NCO said Lot 2 for a distance of 6.00 feet; thence Easterly, parallel
it with the Southerly line of said Lot 2 for a distance of 7.00 feet
13 W to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the centerline herein described;
C11J >,
W LLI cn thence continuing Easterly 5.00 perpendicular feet; thence
0) W
Southerly, parallel with the Easterly line of said Lot 2, a
distance of 115.00 feet, more or less, to a point which lies 5.00
X W perpendicular feet North of the North line of the South 200.00
C=
LLI W CL feet, as measured along the Westerly right-of-way margin of State
CC Road No. 1, of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of
0 the Southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 27 North, Range 4
Z East, W.M.; thence Easterly, parallel with said North line to the
Westerly right-of-way margin of State Road No. 1 and the terminus
of said centerline.
THE CITY agrees to restore to substantially the original condition
such improvements as are disturbed during the construction, maintenance
and repair of said utility or utilities; provided the grantors, their
heirs, or assigns shall not construct any permanent structure over,
upon, or within the permanent easement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to
be executed by it roper officers--Md its corporate seal to be herunto
affixed this I/se day of 19
By-_--:
'92 :4 2 President
?
AtE OF WASHIN f b''
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day personally appeared before me ywc,�
President, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within
and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that the said instrument to
be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the
uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that
L�-, authorized to execute the said instrument and
that the seal affixeU7s the corporate seal of said corporation
UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF �'- -
Lv, L,, aL
19
L -a 61, - Vn rn a�t- �1
NOTARY PUBLIC in and fot the State of
Washington, residing at
NLSNMTRS.EAS/TXTFORMS
i�Z0416042U HL. 2 S 6 0 PAGE I 'a G."i
CITY OF EDMONDS -IMCEIVED Permit No. --:�OcD
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT SEP 1 1 1991 IssueDate-.
A. 0 Owner: 1./ 17.L CAI B. 0 Contractor: f 7A4 f04
Name Name
--P a - I 10 157
Mailing Address Mailing Address
I- %I A) A I 1,c -5,01) - 9 9eo'V4 /(JiZ94/4'-Q 9'? 0 �Z#
6ty- Sfite Zip City State Zip
State License Number Telephone Number
C. *Address or Vicinity of Construction: 2;20;to '0y&_'V
Type of Work to be Done: J4,1 A7,t�'is� 4,t,6_j1:7' i,u %L I A , 'CZ-7al d"47 e!m�- - Ar'!W.'4 C47
D. 0 Work in Connection With: 1� Sub or Plat El Single Family
;K Commercial El Multifamily
E. 0 Pavement Cut: JN Y El N F. 0 Size of Cut: X _130'
'F/ 0;;P:Ly
El City Projects
0 Utility
APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds
harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforseen, that may
be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense
of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit.
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE
YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK.
Estimated restoration fees will be held until the final street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be
processed for issuance to the applicant. <-" b
• A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Engineering: 771-32&_�-�
• Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion.
• Restoration to be in accordance with City Code.
• Street to be kept clean at all times.
• Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations.
• All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to end of working day;
NO EXCEPTIONS.
I understand the above and that this permit must be available at the job site for inspection purposes at all times.
Signature: (i,4, 4 A,,d AtZ-,__ 17,CAAIN 1411 - Date: 9
�7'_ - -Owner or Contractor
This Permit Must be Posted at the Job Site For Inspection Purposes
Call DIAL -A -DIG Prior to Beginning Work
APPROVED BY: PERMIT FEE:
Z Time Authorized: Void after U" —days Restoration Fee:
S ial Conditions: I W''y' ap (I J Receipt No.:
Fund I I I Fee:
Street Cut Dimensions-
(19;? -b-'t'a'51C /0
U RELEASED BY: A -A Dateqv4� INSPECTED BY Date
NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE
Eng. Div. March f989
FIELD INSPECTION NOl nS (Fun,- , I I - Route copy to Street Dept.)
Comments:
Diagram:
CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION 0 YES 0 NO
Partial Work Inspection by P. W.:
Work Disapproved By: Date:
FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date:
..a. 1. .
Z
0
W
V)
44�_�-RECEIVED
CjTqY OF EDMONDS Z) 6 , " ��.M Permit No. 0
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1991
RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Issue Date
A. * Owner: Washington Natural Gas Company B. *Contractor:
W?911�ercer Street Name
Mailing Address Mailing Address
Seattle WA 98111
City State Zip C-OtA 10 City State Zip
A .11(0
�4'0 cot (( 110 State License Number Telephone Number
C. 0 Address or Vicinity of Construction: - 22020 Highway 99
Type of Work to be Done: 0nstall New Service—
D� 0 Work in Connection With: 1:1 Sub or Plat El Single Family El City Projects
k] Commercial 1:1 Multifamily 0 Utility
E. 0 Pavement Cut: 91 Y El N F. 0 Size of Cut: 2 X 4 (1) @ Gas on Shoulder
APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds
harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any,kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforseen, that may
be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its'depariments or einploy4es, irtcluding or not 11mited to the defense
of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney.fees by reason of granting this permit.
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WOP,'KMANSHiP'A�_D'i M' ATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE
YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK.
Estimated restoration fees will be held until the final street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be
processed for issuance to the applicant.
• A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Engineering; 771-3202
• Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion.
• Restoration to be in accordance with City Code.
• Street to be kept clean at all times.
• Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations.
• All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to end of working day;
NO EXCEPTIONS.
I understand the above and that this permit must be available at the job site for inspection purposes at all times.
Signature: — MEAUX&" I - Date: September 6, 1991
Owner or Contractor
This Perm -it Must be Posted at the Job Site For Inspection Purposes
Call DIAL -A -DIG Prior to Beginning Work
APPROVED BY: 9VJ
Time Authorized: Void after DEL IS days.
Special Conditions: NA
PERMIT FEE:
Restoration Fee:
Receipt No.:
Fund I I I Fee:
Street Cut Dimensions: — x
RELEASED BY: Date 9- INSPECTED BY Date
NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE
Fng. Div. March 1489
FIELD INSPECTION NOTES
(Fund I I I - Route copy to Street Dgpt.)
Comments:
Diagram:
CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION 0 YES El NO
Partial Work Inspection by P. W.:
Work Disapproved By: —
FINAL APPROVAL BY:
Date:
Date:
hng. ijiv. July IY153
#VW '9N�
Washkxjton Ammmur�
NaturMd��
AVA-�B--rgyCcqpaN
Addendum to City of Edmonds
Right of Way
Permit Application
Submitted by:
Z 2DZ0 �W "-f- q 9
f (+
3
WNG to wi dow
qAWater main depth
unknown
2- 11 gas main
Kerry Walsh
Engineering Aide
Washington Natural Gas
622-6767 x2761
pager 995-6914
rLK4� (F
.1
���Ll Looz-)
—W—
WCILeE
-g-
gas
-ss-
sewer
-e-
water hydrant
0
water valve
Mercer St. (P.O. Box 1869), Seattle, WA 98111 (206) 622-6767
NELSON MOTORS
NB JOB NO.91118C
AUGUST 22, 1991
SEDIMENT TRAP DESIGN
SOIL TYPE ALDERWOOD/GRAVELLY
USE 'C' FOR HYDRO GROUP
ASED = R K L S C V P R
2 YEAR 24 HOUR ISOPLUVALS IS 1.2
R = 2.22 (1.2)2.2 = 3.31 PR = 1.3
K = 0.15 CV = 1.0
SLOPE 10'/500 OR 2%
LS = 0.33 TABLE 5.4.413
ASED = (3.31) (.15) (.33) (1.0) (1.3) = 0.21 TON/AC
AREA OF SITE (CLEARED) = 3.8AC
TOTAL ANNUAL SEDIMENT LOAD 3.8(.21) = .8 TONS
SEDIMENT STORAGE VOLUME (USED)
VSED = .8/.05 = 16 FT3 SEDIMENT STORAGE
W A Sly,
A�'
rv� �
yq1
o 1;
pEP1011 COUNTER
NELSON-BOURDAGES, INC., P.S.
Consulting Engineers * 11411 N.E. 124th Street, Suite 230 * Kirkland, WA 98034 * 206/823-6667
40W low
21-91 WED 1,-5 STRAND INCORPORATI S E A
SENT BYIXQrOX T91000PLIr 7020 i 8-21-91 ; 3:21PM 2057785322-4
690.199-
CITY OF EDMONDS
950 - ITH AM N, ROMON09. WA 08o2o , (206) 771-3202
COMMUNITY' SEAVIC58:
Public Wotl($ PlAnning Parks and Racrootlon E igineelina
August 211 1991
P . 0:2
12068238835;# 2
LARRY S. NAUGHTEN
MAYON
PETER E. MAHN
DMEOTOR
Erik Nelson
Nelson Motors
20307 Highway 99
Lynnwood* WA 08036
Rei: Temporary erosion aontrol,plan
Nelson motors
DQ&r Eriko'
Nelson-Bourdages, Inc. submitted a teift'00r&rY OrOglft control plan
August Igo-1991- After reviewing the planj the following information
eads to be added to the drawings:
Show filter -fabric fence,slong'property line behind existing
vex service station. I
2. Show where sediment will drain to and lveation of sediment trop.
V 3. $how Ideation of interdeptor ditchas.
4. Reference erosion control details drawn by David Evans and
Associates (Shoot C-31).
you h4vt any questions) con tact Gordie Hyce at 771-32020 extension
262,
Sincerely,
ADDISON1. CHRfSMAN IV
Ehoineering Inspector
ALC/sdt
c: Sharon Nolan; Permit Coordinator
NLSNMYRS/TXTSTB'30
KING COUNTY, Wi. HINGTON,
SURFACE WA'h _R DESIGN MANUAL
AsgD - A*K*LS*cv*pn
Where Aszo
annual sediment yield In tons per acre
)2,2.
rainfall erosion Index; use W-2.22(P2 . where P. Is
the 2 year/24 hour In
precipitation Inches (Sed 2 year -
24 hour Isopluvial Map In Figure 3.5.1C)
K.
soil erodiblifty factor, from Table 6.4.4A or as determined
by field and laboratory testing by a geoidgigt, son
scientist, or gootechnical engineer.
LS -
length-slopq f6cto0:'from Table 5.4.48 (note, lengfhs
measured are horizontal distance from.a plan view)
CV W
cover factor hich represents no ground cover
ARM
during the orn process.
PR W
erosion control practice factor-SMhich represents
Co pacted and smooth slope
Not6, the USLt rainfall erosion Index equation for the SCS Type I A storm region Is R 10.2
(P2) 2 ', where P Is the total precipitation for the 2 year, 0_bQML_dmr I
2 --at on design storm. Since
the total precipitation for the 2 year, 6 hour duration design storm Is equal to exactly one-half of
the total precipitation for the 2 year, 24 hour duration design storm, the equation can be
rearranged as shown.
0 Annual sediment yield calculation, step-by-step procedure:
a. Compute the R value by obtaining the P2value from the 2-year/24-hour Isopluvial Map
In Figure 3.6.1 C.
b. Divide the she Into areas of homogeneous SCS. Sol type and of uniform lope a
length.; 8 nd
Note the K value from the SCS soils chart (Tablo SAAA) for each soil typ
d. Determine the LS value for each uniform area (See Table SAAB).
0. Compute the annual sediment yield (A,,d) In tons per acre for each
homogeneous/unlform area by multiplying A times the K and LS values for each area.
Multiply the annual sediment yield (A..d) for each area by the acreage to be exposed
(only that area to be cleared) of each area. Sum the results to 'compute the total annu I
sediment load (In tons to the trap (L,.d)
01" --.The sediment
storage volume (V,,a) Is then determined by dividing the total annual sediment
load In tons (L..,j by an average density for the sediment deposited Use 0.05 ton
Percublcfoot. V,.d m Lmed/ &Va.
0 To comg!ete the I n I th tamnnraru on
Thb *Pond Geometry Equallonso section In the "Reference" portion at the back of the
Manual may also be useful In designing the sediment trap.
5.4.4.1-2 2/89
1 . .
K I N G COUNTY, WAS NGTON, SURFACE WAT`H. t)ESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE SAAB SEDIMENT TRAP
6mfmlo�
0.
j?# settlim
Max.
WOO 4vAvel
_4
CROSS SECTION
NO SCALE
Ove.-11mv 4��171&,,I
P'Afllf- RJidH(
Dep.�h of 2 - 41 pock
PePfh OP 514 "1 00,fd -4 Ve- I
SEDIMENT TRAP OUTLET
NO SCALE
COUNTY, WASHIN rON, SURFACE WATER D r-SIGN MANUAL
b. A 3:1 aspect ratio between the trap length and width Of the trap Is desirable Le I ngth is
defined as the average distance from the InIet to the outlet of the trap. ThIs*ratIo is
Included In the computations for Figure SAAC for the surface area at the Interface
between the settling zone and sediment storage volume.
C. Determine the bottom arid top surface area of the sediment storage volume to be
provided (see Figure 5.4.41C) while not exceeding 1 .5' In depth and 3:1 side slope from
the bottom of the trap. Note the trap bottom should be level.
d. Determine the total trap dimensions by adding an additional 2' of depth above the
surface of the sediment storage volume, while not exceeding.3:1 side slopes, for the�
required settling volume. (see Figure 5.4.4C)
TABLE 5.4.41A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY
SOIL
EROD- SOIL
JIU
HYDROLOGIC IsluTy EROD-
CTO
SOIL GROUP OUP:�= HYDROLOGIC IBILITY
GROUP* FACTOR,"K* SOIL GROUP GROUP* FACTOR.-K'
Alderwood C 0.16 Orcas Peat
Arents, Alderwood C 0.15 D 0.00
Arents, Everett 0.17 Orldla D 0.49
Beaushe Ovall C 0.1
C 0.16 0.17
PlIchuck C 0 10]
Bellingham D 0.32 0.10
Puget D 2 2
BrIscot D 0.32 ruyahup 0.28
Suckl D 0.32 Ragnar B 0.28
8 0.32
CoostarBoachos Variable 0.05 Renton
Eadmont Sill Loam D D 0.43
Edgewick 0.37 Alverwash Variable
C 0.32 Salal
Everett A 0.17 Sammamish C 0.37
Indianola A 0.15 Seattle D 0.37
Klisap C 0.32 Shacar D 0.00
Waus C D 0.00
Mixed Alluvial Land Variable 0.17 Sl Silt C 0.37
0.10 Snohomish D 0.32
Nellton A 0.10 Sultan
Newberg C 0.37
B 0.32 Tukwila
Nooksack C 0.37 Urban D 0.00
Norm. Sandy Loam D Variable
0.24 Woodinville D 0.37
..... ........... ....
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS
A. (Low r=otential). Solis having high Infiltration rates, even when thoroughly wetted. and consisting
chiefly
transmission. P. w011-10-Oxcessively drained sands or gravels. These Solis have a high rate of water
B. (Moderately low'runoff potential). Soils having moderate Infiltration rates when thoroug y wet
water transmission. . These Bolls have a mod ad - and
consisting chiefly of moderately fine to moderately coarse textures t
orate rate of
C. (Moderately high runoff potential). SONS having slow Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and
consisting chiefly Of Soils with a layer that Impedes downward movement Of water, or SONS with moderately
fine to fine textures. These 8003 have a slow rate of water transmission.
D. (High runoff potential). SONS having very slow Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting
chiefly of clay SOPS with a high Swelling potential. Solis with a permanent high water table, Soll$ with a
hardpan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow sons over nearly Impervious material. These SONS
have a very slow rate of water transmission.
From SCS, TR-55, Second Edition, June 1986. Exhibit A-1. Revision$ made from SCS. Soils Interpretation
Record, Form #6. September 1988.
5.4.4.1-3
2/89
KING COUNTY, WAShINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE SAAC SEDIMENT TRAP SIZE AND DIMENSIONS
Vled - sediment Mrags volume (cu. ft.). Ab a bottom area (sq. ft.); Aset a area of sediment storegovolurno (sq.'R.)
bw - bottom width (It.). bi w bottom length (11.); tw - top width (33 feet total depth); d - top length (ft.)
R
A.,
Veed
Ab I
Met
At
bw
bl I
tw
it
I Veed
Ab
Aset
At
bwl
bl
tw
t 1
230
0
459
'1323
0
42
21
63
1 1111114
6480
0379
11163
401
162
61
183
370
46
640
146
1
46
22
66
1 11568
$765
8700
11532
"' 32
41
165
62
1186
484
96
627
1587
2
48
23
69
1 12032
7056
9027
11907
19 0 7
42
160
63
109
602
153
720
1728
3
51
24
72
12505
7353
9360
1258
1 22 0 8
Ei3
43
171
64
192
728
216
$19.
1075
4
64
25
75
12986
7666
9699
12675
1 26 7 5
44
174
65
195
061
285
924
20281
6
57
26
78
13477
7965
10044
0 a
6
45
177
661
198
1003
360
1036
2187
6
*60
271
Si
13976
8280
10395
13467
46
180
671
201
1153
441
1152
2352
7
63
26
84
14485
8601
10752
13872
47
183
601
204
1312
528
1275
2523
8
66
29
871
'15002
8928
MIS
14283
48
186
691
207
1479
621
1404
2700
9
69
3090
1 16529
9261
11464
14700
49
ISO
70
210
1666
720
163
288
10
72
31
93
116064
9600
11669
16123
50
192
71
213,
1841
825
1680
30721
11
75.
32
96
1 16609
9945
12240
155521
51
195
72
2161
2035
936
'1827
3267
12
78
33
99
17163
10296
1262
15987
52
198
73
-2191
2238
1053
1980
3468
13
01
34
102
17725
10653
13020
16428
531
201
74
2221
2451
11761
2139
3675
14
041
35
106_
ISM
11016
13419
16876
541
204
75
226
2671
13051
2304
3006
16
07
36
100
18877
11305
13824
17328
56
207
76
220
2901
14401
2476.
4107
16
90
37
111
19467
11760
14235
-17787
56
210
77
231
3140
15811
26521
4332
17
93
301
114
200651
12141
14652
182S2
57
213
78
234
3308
17281
28351
4563
18
96
39
117
20673
12526
15076
1187231
58
216
79
237
3645
1801
3024
4800
19
99
40
120
21289
12921
15504
19200
69
219
80
240
3911
2040
3219
6043
20
102
41
123
21915
13320
15939
19683
60
222
Oil
2431
4186
2205
3420
5292
21
105
42
126
22549
13725
16380
20172
61
225
62
246
4469
2376
3627
5547
221
1081
43
1 9
23193
14136
16827
20667
62
220
83
249
4762
25S3
3640
5808
231
111
44
4 4
132
23645
14553
17280
21168
63
231
84
262
6064
27361
4091
6075
24
114
45
4 5
135
245071
14976
177391
21675
64
234
85
255
5374
29251
4284
6348
25
117
46
46
138
25178
15405
162041
22188
65
237
86
258
5694
31201
4515
6627
26
120
47
47
L4
141
25657
16840
16675
22707
66
240
87
261
6023
33211
4752
6912
27
123
48
a
144
26546
16281
19152
23232
671
243
881
264
0360
3528
4995
7203
28
126
49147
27243
16728
19635
23763
661
246
691
267
6707
3741
6244
7500
291
129
50
160
27950
17181
20124
24300
69
249
901
270
70631
3960
6499
7603
30
132
51
153
20665
176401
20619
24843
70
252
91
273
7427
4185
5760
8112
31
135
52
156
129390
181051
21120
25392
71
255
92
276
7801
4416
6027
8427
32
138
53
159
30123
18576
21627
25947
72
250
93
279
6`184
4653
6300
8746
33
141
64
162
30866
19053
22140
265081
73
261
94
202
6575
4896
6579
9075
34
144
65
166
31617
19536
22669
27075
74
264
95
265
8976
5145
6664
9400
361
.1
147
56
166
32370
20025
23184
27648
751
267
961
288
9365
6400
7155
9747
36
150
57
171
33147
20520
23715
20227
76
270
97
291
960 1
§ .
74521
10092
37
1531
50
174
33926
21021
24262
28812
77
273
98
294
102321
5§9§2
77551
10443
301
1561
59
1771
134713
215281
24795
29403
781
276
99
297
1 106681
6201F-8064FIOSOO
391
1591
601
1801
135 5101
220411
25344
30onn,
791
--QI
ind
3001
5.4.4.2 SEDIMENT POND,,
Purpose
To collect and store sediment from sites cleared and/or graded during construction prior to
establishment of permanent vegetation and/or construction of permanent drainage facilities. It Is usually
a temporary measure with a design life less than I year; however, ft may be a more permanent facility,
especially If required to provide runoff quality control until the site area, Is permanently stabilized.
Conditions Where Practice Applies
Where the tributary drainage area Is 10 acres or less.
A
5.4A.2-! 1 2/89
--sk'Pe
I-S values f(w AsIlowing skin lengths 1. rt, (m)
IZ valises ror rollowing sk" lengths (t (m)
.41--pe graclient 10
ratin
m
.10 40 so GO
(9-1) (12-9)
70
80
90
100
150 2W 251) 300 350 '400 450 500
600
700
800
goo
1000
(15-2) (18-3) (21-1) (24.4) (27.4)
- 30-5) (46) (61 � (70 (91) (107) (122) (137) (152)
(Im)
(213)
(244)
(274)
(305)
(IS
a()S
mum
0.07
0.()g
0.07 LOS 0.09 0.()g &09
0.10 0.10
0-09 M09
&10
0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 M13 & 13
0.14
&14
0.14
(LIS
0.15
a -1(1
0.12
all (111
.1
(" 0-15 (LIS
0.12
0.12 0-12
&I�
0.14 0.14 (X 1.5 am mis als 0.17 a 17
0.18
ara .
o.19
M19
0.20
3
0.14
U8
0-17 0-19
(I -*If) a:M O.Z, 0.25 US
a 19
0. Us
-0.2S
&2"
0.'-n 0.25 0.2r. o.28 &29 (Lj(j .0-12 OM
0.34
0-M,
0.37
0 .39
0. 40
4
OL16
0.21
ati OL28 0,10 &.13 O_jj
0.27
0-29
0. XZ 0.35 0-:18 OL40 0.42 0-43 0.45 0.46
0.49
-0-51
0.54
0.55
0.57
0_17
0-18
M40
0.47 0.51 0.58 0.62 0.69 &70 0.73 WS
0.82
0.87-
0.92
0.96
1.00
0.21
&24
a.10
0-29 O-U US 0.41
tLr, 0-4-1
0.45
US, OZI
OM
0-66 0-76 0-85 0-93 1-00 1.07 1.13 1.20
1.31
1.42
I.Sl
1.60
1.69
CL26
0-37
0.49 0-52
OAS M52 US ar,4
0.156
arO
0-64
0-67
0.82 0.95 1.06 1.16 1.26 1.34 1.43 I.W
1.65
1.79
1.90
2.02
Z13
8
U I
(X44
0.54'_ 0.&1 M78
O-G9
0.74
0.78
&S-9
1.01 1.17 1.30 1.43 1.54 1.65 1.75 1.84
Z02
LIS
2M
Z47
Z61
9
0-37
0-52
0-77
0.64 M74 0.83 0-91
0-83
0-89
0-94
OM
1.21 1.40 1.57 1.72 1.85 1.98 2.10 =
-2.43
2-62
2.80
2.97
113
ags
1.05
1.11
1.17
1.44 1.66 1.85 Z03 2.19 2.
U .2.49 2.62
2.87
3.10
3.32
3.52-
171
10:1
0.43
(Lc4
.0.61
0-71
0.75 0.87 0.97 I.os
US 1.00
1.15
1.22
1-10
1.37
1.68 1-94 LIS 2-37 LS6 174 2-90 3-06
3-U
3.62
3.87
4.11
4.33
8:1
12-1
&61
0-86
1.12 L=
"IS 1-22 1-16
1.32
1.41
1.50
1.58
1.93 2.2.1 2.50 2.74 Z95 3.16 2.35 3.53
3.97
4.18
4.47
C74
4.99
15
0.81
1.14
1.49
1.40 1.62 1.81 1-98
1.61
Z14
1.72
1.82
1.92
2.3s 2.72 3.04 3M 3.59 3.84 4.08 4-11
4.71
SAS
5.43
&76
8.08
6:1
16.7
0-96
1-:16
1-67 1-92 2-15 2-16
2.54
Z29
Z43
ZW
3.13 3.62 4.05 4.43 4.79 &12 5.43 &72
6.27
IL77
7.24
7.69
' &oq
Z72
ZSS
3.04
3.72 4-30 4.81 &Z? &69 6.08 6.43 GM
7.45
&.04
8.60
9.12
9.62
5:1
4Y.: 1
20
22
1.29
1-51
1.82
Z 13
Z23 2M 2 88 3.IS
2.61 3-02
3.41
165
3M
4.08
.
&00 &77 6.457 7.06 7.63 &IS US 9.12
9.99
10-79
11-54
1124
ILV
4:1
25
1.86
2.63
= 3.69
3.XI 3.73' C16
3S9
4.27
4.53
4.77
&84 &75 7. &
54 26 &92 9.54 10.12 10-67
11.68
IZ62
13.49
14.31
ls.os
4�6
.30
Z51
3-%
4.M
4.36 &03 &62 &IS
4-93
5.2T
5.59
SM
7.21 aM 9.31 IM20 1.02 11.78 12.49 13.17
1
14.43
IS.58
16.66
17.67
1&63
3:1
-.TU
2.98
CZ2
5.17 &N W
&65
7.11
7-54
7-%S
9.74 11.25 12-57 13.77 14.88 13.91 16.87 17.78
19.48
21.04
22.49
23.86
25.IS
7 _10
7.89
&4.-,
US
9.43
11.55 13.34 14.91 16-13 17-64 IS.86 20.00 21.09
23.10
24-%
26.97
28.29
29.82
2Y#: 1
is
40
3.2.1
4.00
4.157
5.66
5. Y CL46 7.23 7.92
rL93 &()0
&5.j
9.-
14
9-70
lar-
12-52 14.49 16.16 17.70 19.12 20.44 21.138 MAS
25.04
27.04
28.91
30.67
32.32
4S
4.81
6-80
&95 9.80
&33 9.61 10.75
10. 59
11.32
IZOO
I ZSS
15.50 17,89 20.01 21.91 23.67 25-30 26.84 28.29
30.99
33.48
35-79
37.96
40.01
2:1
-
.50
5.64
7-97
11.77
9.76 11.27 Ilso
12.72
13.(;0
14.42
1.5.20
18.62 21.50 24.03 26.33 28.44 30.40 32.24 33M
37.23
4a22
42.99
45.60
48.07
55
6.48
9.16 11.22
13.S1
12.9S 14.48 15.87
14_91
15.94
16.91
17.82
21.&1 25.21 28.18 30-97 33.34 3&65 37.81 39z5
43-66
47.16
50.41
53.47
SC36
-
17.14
1 &.Tl-
19.43-
2IL49
25-09 28.97 32-39 35.49 X32 40-97 43.45 45.80
50.18
S4-20
57-94
61.45
64.78
lk 1
-So
&82
-7-12 10-35
9-94 1
IZ68
NW 1-163 1&24 16.69
14.rA
t&ol
19-28
20.45
21 M
26.40 10-48 .14.08 37.33 40.32 43.10 4&72 48.19
52.79
57.02
60.96
64.66
6&IS
6&7'
8.44 11-9.3
14.61
16-17 17.93
16.38 I&S7
19-:17
20.71
21..96
23.15
28-35 3ZT4 36.60 40.10 43.31 46-10 49.11 51.77
W.71
61.25
65.48
69.45
73.21
70
8.98 IVO
20.67
15.55 1 T.96 20-08 21-99
22.:12
23-97
25.31
2CL68
=69 37.74 4ZIT 4&22 49.92 53.37 36.60 59.66
65.36
7OL60
75.47
80.05
84M
75
9- 78 13.
&1 1 CL94 19-156 21-87 2195
2175
25.87
25.39
9-7.66
26-n
2&--0
34.7T 4&15 44.89 49.17 53.11 56.78 6CL23 63.48
69.54
7&12
80.30
85.17
89.73
29-34
X92
37.87 43.73 48.89 SIM 57AS 61.85 6&60 GRAS
75.75
81.82
87.46
92.T7
97.79
10.5& 14.93 I&2S 21.11 -LGO 25.85
11-10 15-98 19.58 2161 2&27
27.93
29M
31.116
33-18
40.88 47.20 52.77 57.81 67-44 WS 70.80 74.63
81.76
K3 1
.41 1
94 00 oim
1
90
27.69
12.02 17A) 20.82 24.04 26.88 29.44
29-90
31.97
31.91
3&74
43.78 50.55 56.51 61.91 66.87 71.48 7&S2 79-92
97.55
94.57 101.oq
.13
107.23 113.03
95
12.71 17.97 22.ol 25.41 28.41 31.12
31-80
3:1.62
34.00
36-06
X0 1
46.55 53.7r, rwo 6s.s4 71.1 t 76.02 80.63 84-99
93.11 10CL5T 107.51
114.03 l2a.10
1:1
100
11:16 18.89 2-1. 14 26.72 29-87 39-72
35.94
.18. 12
41118
49.21 56.82 63-53 69.59 75.17 80.36 85.23 89.84
98.42 106M 113.64
120.54
127.06
35.34 37.78
40.08
42.24
51.74 591.74 G6.79 73.17 79,03 84.49 89.61 94.46 103.48
111.77 119.48
126.73
133.59
9&41 x ez
+
4.56 x S
10.000
0'0"
72.5
( ),
I'S - toprwap it factm
I - Slope lenghth, ft (m X 0.30431
s - slope a-pness,
me - capontat dependent upon slope steelinces
(0.2 few siot�ft < I �' , 0.3 (at lopes I to 3
M4 fow slolve 3.5 to 4.5�;. end
OA row slopeo > sr.)
4h-
A#'k
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-3202
COMMUNITY SERVICES:
Public Wor!�s 9 Planning * Parks and Recreation * Engineering
, 8 9 0 . I () 9 -
August 21, 1991
Erik Nelson
Nelson Motors
20307 Highway 99
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Re: Temporary erosion control plan
Nelson Motors
Dear Erik,
LARRY S. NAUGHTEN
MAYOR
PETER E. HAHN
DIRECTOR
Nelson-Bourdages, Inc. submitted a temporary erosion control plan
August 19, 1991. After reviewing the plan, the following information
needs to be added to the drawings:
1. Show filter fabric fence along property line behind existing
service station.
2. Show where sediment will drain to and location of sediment trap.
3. Show location of interceptor ditches.
4. Reference erosion control details drawn by David Evans and
Associates (Sheet C-3).
If you have any questions, contact Gordie Hyde at 771-3202, extension
282.
Sincerely,
41;
ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV
Engineering Inspector
ALC/sdt
c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator
NLSNMTRS/TXTST530
I
Alberts
* Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
M
STRAND INCORPORATED - GENERAL CONTRACTORS
Erik Nelson
Nelson Motors
P. 0. Box 1214
Lynnwood, WA 98046
rmz
August 7, 1991
Re: Sanitary Sewer
Nelson Motorsy Edmonds, Washington
Dear Erik:
As requested, the cost to provide the sanitary sewer work indicated
in the clouded area of the attached sketch is as follows:
1) a inch PVC, 126 lineal feet $2,898.00 �z 'e,
at $23.00 per lineal foot. I " I i� �' 1
2) Saddle manhole (1) at $4,200. 00 $4,200.00
3) Xanhole (1) at $2,800-00 $za-JgSL9J
$9,898.00
7L
Overhead at 5% $495,
$10,393.00
Fee at 2'1/4% $234,
$10,627.00
Business Tax at .65% $6.9.00
Total $10,696.00
If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact the
undersigned.
Very truly yours,
-L"9 ST" I P T E D
2Iu
rni . ZQuackenTbush
Project Manager
rg
C/ Rollie Hunt
Jim Davidson Y
A,;
(061820-2801 FAX(200)823-8635
KIRIKLAND. wASHINGTON 98034-02$ , 010
'12015 115th AVENUE N.E., SUITE 220
ALASKA OFFICE � 237 EAST FIREWE�D LANE, SUITE 201 6 ANCHORAGE � AK 99503-2025 0 (9071276-7214 * FAX(9D7)276-S441
T 0 -J 1:1 :3 -L " --21 CI -J Z-3 C1 0 t-4 I a II -A -- -.A -L S 0 T : -1, T. a :a rl Ca. - n n
4
1 7
AAN I tAf,-r QO,:WtP- AOLX.ATl&M4
m i a R P.,q arr or- wHaHvo)
PW6,Q-10
40 F VC
:!:� .
10
T-f ro I
1�02 w
17
%L
mole, - "loe I
OIL-/w4ep- 4p
10
OIL. w
xv. ee� rap
w- -ripe r to
MH
AW." IF
Le. Llv Del "'MV011W
1''J''1111MR
-rmopo'�)rw 4*pww- MH' I
101
a ---A -L ZA 0 =I -A 0 0 H I Cl 1-4 Ztl J- S T T -t,- T Cl al M 0 E. —.L
OWN
A NEW DEALERSHIP FOR
NELSON MOTORS
Pem-dt Addenda No. 1 August, 11991
A. DETAIL BOOK
SHEET 2-1.1 FOUNDATION DRAIN DETAIL
ADD: entire detail.
B. DRAWINGS
SHEET A2.1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
REPLACE: sheet with new sheet A2.1
SHEET A4.1 MAIN LEVEL PARTIAL PLAN
ADD: entire sheet.
el!�
AUG
collftER
PAGE I OF 1
7-1,11117-zlAjr- 1;�OOF 4)1'RAIIU
wlteRE - DO
AjoT elo"lUel-7- 7o
/:�'007-1AJe-, OR,4 IN
'o
41
0
M MIA)
1A)
I
DEALERSHIP
THE A
BUNIGARDNER
ARCHITECTS—— FOR
LE.- V SH140TO4. 98111 'ORS
lei STEJ(jAt War
216-22?-136AI E L S GN MO rt
SUITE 2" -N
SEAT7
..y -y p... Thall-g-J.- A—k.f.0.
---- --- ...
1329.00
AW
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-3202
COMMUNITY SERVICES:
Public Wor!�s e Planning e Parks and Recreation * Engineering
� 8 9 0 . 19 4
July 22, 1991
David Evans & Associates, Inc.
301 - 116th Ave. S.E.
Bellevue, WA 98004
Gentlemen,
LARRY S. NAUGHTEN
MAYOR
The Engineering Division has completed the initial review of the
engineering site plan for the subject property. The following
revisions/additions need to be made:
1) Dimensions and survey data need to be included on engineering
drawings for City Engineer's approval.
2) Sidewalk on 220th St. S.W. frontage to be removed and replaced
with seven foot sidewalk.
PETER E. HAHN
DIRECTOR
7 12, -Z-b
3) Sidewalks to be blended into existing sidewalks using concrete
taper at 5:1. If no sidewalk presently exists, transition is to
be made with asphalt.
4) Highway 99 frontage elevations to be approved in accordance with
Entranco Engineers' design of Highway 99 Transportation
Improvement Board project.
5) High traffic load driveway entrances to be provided at all access
points (see attached detail).
6) Provide additional cover on storm pipe adjacent to Highway 99.
7) Provide perf pipe between swales.
8) Drainage easement needed.
9) Provide separate oil separator/grit traps upstream of detention
vault.
10) Check pipe crossing clearance.
11) Conflicting pipe sizing exiting vault.
12) Show transition detail for sidewalk at south property line.
* Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
9
L-2
David Evans & Associates
July 22, 1991
Page 2
13) Provide erosion control plan.
14) Install fire detector double check vault at property line or
connect water to existing line west of site to create loop. An
easement will be required in the latter case.
15) Tie-ins to sanitary sewer system to be covered to reduce rainwater
infiltration.
16) Provide swale detail.
17) Provide calculations for swale capacity.
18) See notes on swale section.
19) See notes on pump detail.
When revisions have been made, please resubmit three (3) copies with
the enclosed red -lined drawings for additional review.
Sincerely,
ORDON C. HYDE
Engineering Coordinator Alberts
GCH/sdt
Enclosure
NELSON2/TXTST530
Admbk
Washington State
Department of Transportation
District 1
15325 S.E. 30th Place
Bellevue, Washington 98007-6568
(206) 562-4000
Mr. Gordon Hyde
Engineering Coordinator
City of Edmonds
250-5th Avenue North
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Dear Mr. Hyde:
I r,7 0
LIk C E I V E D
J U L 0 2 1991
ENGINEERING
Duane Berentson
Secretary of Transportation
June 27, 1991
SR-99 M.P.45.16 Vic. C.S.3101
Nelson Motors, Inc., Second Traffic
Analysis Review
City File No. V-3-91
This letter is in response to the developer's request for
our preliminary comments on his proposed development's
revised traffic analysis. This revised traffic analysis was
requested by WSDOT in our last letter dated March 18, 1991
to Mr. Ed Somers of the City's Planning Department. The site
of this proposed development is located in the southwest
quadrant of the SR-99/220th Street S.W. intersection.
The State's preliminary comments on the revised traffic
analysis for this proposed development are as follows:
The traffic consultant has determined that the existing LOS
at several SR-99 intersections will be worse when this
proposed development is occupied in 1992. However, with the
exception of one SR-99 intersection, 212th Street.. S.W.,
these impacted State highway intersections LOS will be
improved from their existing LOS in 1992 when SR-99 is
widened to seven lanes and a new signal is installed at the
216th Street S.W. intersection.
The City of Lynnwood is the lead agency f or a three stage
SR-99 improvement project that is currently being designed
by the City. The first stage of this project is scheduled
for construction in 1992. This project will consist of
widening SR-99 to seven lanes from 244th Street S.W. to
216th Street S.W. and installing a signal at.the SR-99/216th
Street S.W. intersection. With these improvements in place
prior to this development being occupied, the traffic
impacts from this development will be sufficiently
mitigated.
The second stage of this SR-99 improvement project is
scheduled for construction in 1993. It will consist of
widening SR-99 to seven lanes from 216th Street S.W. to
196th or 164th Street S.W.. The traffic study shows that the
0 0
June 27, 1991
Gordon Hyde
Page 2
SR-99/212th Street S.W. intersection has an existing LOS of
"Ell and will drop to an 'IF" with or without this
development's traffic in 1992. With the planned SR-99
improvements (second stage project) in place at this
intersection in 1993 the LOS will still be an 'IF"' but the
average delay of the existing signal will be improved to a
better LOS 'IF".
The developer has proposed to contribute his proportionate
share towards the City of Edmonds general transportation
improvement fund for the purpose of mitigating his traffic
impacts to SR-99 and City street intersections. we concur
with this form of mitigation as being sufficient for this
development's impacts to the impacted SR-99 intersections.
As we stated in our previous letter, we request that the
developer have his consultant analyze the I-5/220th Street
S.W. ramp intersections. This development sends 25% of its
peak hour traffic to this interchange. When we have reviewed
the traffic analysis for the ramp intersections we can
determine if this development should mitigate it's traffic
impacts at this interchange.
We concur with the consultant's recommendation that the
developer improve his site's SR-99 frontage in accordance to
the planned SR-99 Stage One widening project. WSDOT would
appreciate an opportunity to review the surfacing depths the
developer plans to put in SR-99 since WSDOT is responsible
for maintaining the SR-99 surfacing.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer our preliminary
comment's on this proposal. once we have' reviewed the
traffic analysis for the I-5/220th Street S.W. ramp
intersections and the, SR-99 surfacing depths for this
development we can complete our review of this proposal's
State highway impacts. Should you have any questions, please
feel free to contact Donald Hurter (562-4274) or Ed Giraud
(562-4262) of my Developer Services Section.
; Si �re ly,
;ES L. LUTZ, P.E.
tilities/D loper
Services Engineer
EG: eg
cc: Nelson Motors, Applicant
Transpo Group, Inc.
OJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST
PROJECT NAME: Is PLAN CHECK #:
PROJECT ADDRESS: -2-20:2 6 <A/�o RECEIPT DATE:
REVIEWED
BY: (Initial/Date)
PLAN.
WATER
COMMENTS
-IFIRE
BLDG.
SEWER
STREET
ENGi
Setbacks/Variance/Setback Adjustment -
Conditional Use Permit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...........
ADB Requirements
3
Other Zoning Requirements
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
Underground Wiring Required
5
Lot Slope 15%
SEPA Environmental Checklist/Hydraulics Permit
Mit
I T
,Tree Cutting'Plan
........
....
Plat/Subdivision Requirements
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..... ...........
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
Legal Description Verification
Quit Claim/Street Dedications
.1-11, -
....................
X1.1 . . . . . . . . . . ...
. . . . . . . ...........
------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10`
Easements - Public/Private
Engineering Storm Drain Review Fee
-------- ...
............ .....
t3...
Engineering 2.2 Inspection Fee
............
14
Drainage Plan (On -Site)
..
....
Setback - Top ofBank, Stream, Water Courses
. . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ................... .........
.............
46: ...
Setback - Storm Drain Line
. . . . . . . . . . . .
......
Open Ditch - Existing
Culvert fftguired
lCulvert Size
. . . . . . . . . .
..
.....
. . ...... ...
... . . ........ .
18.
........... -
19
20::,
Shoulder Draina .ge/Shale -Open Runoff
. ......
21
Catch Basin Required
22...
Driveway Slope & Vehicle Access
.. ... . . .. .
. . . . . . . . . . .
23:::�"
Sidewalk Required
Curb & Gutter Required
Curb Cut For Driveway Required
Street Pavi!lg Required
Right -Of -Way Construction Permit
28
Street Name Sign Required
...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other Signing Required
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bond Required For Public Improvements
--------- --
---------- --
3f
FEMA Map Check/Water Table
::32:
Side Sewer Availability
. 33
Calculate Sewer Connection Fee If No LID #
Create Street File
.......... ....
.. .......
. .. ......
... ...
,Existing Water Main Size
. .
. . ..
...... ....
........
. . . .......
- ------
'36
Water Meter Size
�S
Service Line,Size-
'38
Water Meter'Charge Required
39.
Hydrant Re'quiir�d
. . ....
Hydrant Size Existing
4 1 1
Fire Line Charge Required - Sprinkler
Istreet Cut
......
43
I Miscellaneous
Reviewed By:
FIRE
PLANNING
ENGINEERING PUBLIC WORKS
R E C' 0 R D OF C 0 N T A C T S
21
2
22
3
23
4
2 . 4
5
25
6
26
7
27
8
28
RW PERMIT # DATE ISSUED RECEIPT #
9
29
10
30
31
12
32
1 13
-PAID $ RECEIPT # DATE
33
SS PERMIT # DATE ISSUED RECEIPT #
14-
PAID $ RECEIPT # DATE
34
35
16
36
37
METER SIZE PAID $ DATE RECEIPT #
18
.38
39
20
401
'91 16:44 TO FROM THE TT-'Qr4SPQ 3ROUP T-977 P. 01
MIA* - - - 14 TM:W7
PO
14716 UL-RED RD.- SUM 100- DELLSW, WANW-00
0*W-=-FAXW7V4U
FAB X TRANSMITTAL
RaW. R TO: EtRV hLr--6�z� Traw. Mg to Fax Numt*r 125 S300
hi Numbor of Pages TnnmkW 13
oneWe ft transm]U in =M:
TRANSPO ftloot Numbor.
Re-.-
a(mot-i �A'Y�
t
t:
Please review the accompanying It
1) We will send a copy of our rep:,.irt to MOT
2) Gordy's comparison Qf your project with Top Food3 is
fine, as far as it goes. gowev-er, he neglected to Point
Oct that the "fair 6hare" mitiqation payment which we
calculated for Top roods waB 08j427. For whatever
reason, the Top roQds develoye-ra elected to offer
substantially more than the calcuTa-ted amount.
3) During our analysis of your p--ojeqtls traffic impacts, we
carefully analyzed tne relatiTe merits of using number of
service bays, Square footage, and acrea5e as the
independant variable and determined nat number of
service bays ia the beat predictor Of trips generated.
Trip generation is often estimated using independent
variables other than square fcotage or acreage (eg.
number of drive-thru windowss ntutber of employee5p tennis
courts, theater seatar golf riolest slUp berthB# dwelling
units, motel roomsp 00=ercial fiights per day), Gordy
approved our trip generation estimation methodology a
long time ago,
4) 7 don't know what the point of: Gordy's letter IS, other
than to ask us to send a cc y of our report to WSDOT. If
you want us to respond to h�s letterr we can do so on a
tim&-and-materials basis at ycur request. I will be On
jury duty and will not be back in the Office during the
day until June 11. However, : will be doing some work in
tha evenings and can be reachpd any time by voice mail,
89 0 . 199
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 * (206) 771-3202
COMMUNITY SERVICES:
Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation * Engineering
May 22, 1991
Doug Coxon
The TRANSPO Group, Inc.
14715 Bel -Red Road, Suite 100
Bellevue, WA 98007
Re: Proposed new car dealership (Nelson Motors)
Doug,
'r�j�k )_ d
0-1.4y
LARRY S. NALIGHTEN
MAYOR
PETER E. HAHN
DIRECTOR
Please send a copy of the April 10, 1991 Traffic Impact Analysis for
Nelson Motors to:
Washington State Department of Transportation
District 1
15325 S.E. 30th Pl.
Bellevue, WA 98007
Attention: Ed Giraud
Because of the proposal fronts on state routes, Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) needs to review impacts.
Apparently, they have only received the January 23, 1991 report.
On May 15, 1991, Mr. Erik Nelson transmitted a letter requesting that I
provide you with supporting figures for the requested $8,500 traffic
mitigation for your review.
TRANSPO has completed a very thorough traffic impact analysis for the
Top Foods project across the street from Mr. Nelson's proposed project,
in which the mitigation proposal for their impact of 428 new and
diverted trips is approximately $103,000 or $240.66 per trip. In that
scenario, frontage improvements of both Highway 99 and 220th St. S.W.
are considered a condition of development. Applying that per trip
contribution to the Nelson trip generation of 66 new trips produces a
mitigation total of $15,883, exclusive of frontage improvements. Based
on that reasoning, the $8,500 request is very conservative. How can a
traffic engineer analyze two projects within the same area of influence
and come up with two such substantially differing impact mitigations?
I would further point out to Mr. Nelson that the traffic report, as
submitted, suggests appropriate trip generation numbers based upon an
unaccepted standard of "number of service bays". If one were to take
0 Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
Doug Coxon
The TRANSPO Group
May 22, 1991
Page 2
the more traditional approach of trip generation based upon square
footage of building area or acreage of development, the resultant trip
generation figures go from the 66 as proposed in TRANSPO's report to
the neighborhood of 107 to 118 p.m. peak hour trips. These generation
figures would result in numbers nearly triple the requested mitigation.
I remain,
Sincerely yours,
?GRDON C. HYDE
0
E F a
ngineering Coordinator
GCH/sdt
c: Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor
Planning Division
NLSONTRF/TXTST530
Al berts
E
0
fson Motors Inc.
May 15, 1991
Mr. Gordon C. Hyde
Engineering Coordinator
250th 5th Ave. N.
Edmonds, Wa 98020
RE: Tr&4--'--,?ic Ml..t.--.i-gation
Dear Gordon,
No
6 IVGI
1V'6'61?Z1VG
We have received your letter dated May 9, 1991. We
acknowledge the request that Nelson Motors Mitigation offer
be $8500-00. in addition your letter acknowledges acceptance
and agreement by you that Transpo's numbers are a true
representation of the facts.
Based on these facts we feel our proposed mitigation, as
calculated by Transpo, is appropriate.
We have also contacted Scott Snyder, Edmonds City Attorney
who confirmed that the City can only ask for the actual cost
of the impacts for mitigation. If the City disagrees with
the proposed mitigation the City has the burden of proof to
prove new substantial and competent numbers supporting the
requested mitigation amount.
Nelson Motors Inc. requests that the City of Edmonds
the proposed $3700.00 amount or that substantial and
competent numbers supporting the requested $8500-000
available for Transpos review.
We appreciate your assistance in this matter.
Erik S. Nelson
Nelson Motors Inc.
cc: Jeff Wilson, City of Edmonds
Doug Coxon, Transpo
approve
be made
20307 HIGHWAY 99 .* P.O. BOX 1214 * LYNNWOOD WA, 98036 * (206) 775-7575
NELSON MOTORS
NB JOB NO.91118C
AUGUST 22, 1991
W g 5) c-1 woo how w-1 m 1) :,;4. " "'I
SOIL TYPE ALDERWOOD/GRAVELLY
USE 'C' FOR HYDRO GROUP
ASED �-- R K L S C V P R
2 YEAR 24 HOUR ISOPLUVALS IS 1.2
R = 2.22 (1.2)2.2 = 3.31 PR = 1.3
K = 0.15 CV = 1.0
SLOPE 10'/500 OR 2%
LS = 0.33 TABLE 5.4.413
ASED = (3.31) (.15) (.33) (1.0) (1.3) = 0.21 TON/AC
AREA OF SITE (CLEARED) = 3.8AC
TOTAL ANNUAL SEDIMENT LOAD 3.8(.21) = .8 TONS
SEDIMENT STORAGE VOLUME (USED)
VSED = .8/.05 = 16 FT3 SEDIMENT STORAGE
, S11111188 4#.
" '$%N.QUA7t, .
n
WASly Q
-'s- 4p
'v- —
9, 04
�'j
NELSON - BOU RDAGES, INC., P.S.
Consulting Engineers o 11411 N.E. 124th Street, Suite 230 o Kirkland. WA 98034 o 206/823-6667
FAX (206) 820-0947
AUC-Ml-91 WED 1�5�or SYRAND INCORPORA, P ' SEA
SENT BY!Xerox TelOCOPLOr 7 6-21-91 ; 3:21PM 2 78 5322-1
P. 02
120682386354 2
- 'y 9 0 - 19 4 -
CITY OF EDMONDS
960 - ATM AVt, N. 0 ROMONDS, WA 00020 - (200) 771-3202
COMMUNITY §ERVICES:
Publlo Works PlAnning Parke and Recreatlon E ighoodna
August 21# 1991
LARRY G. NAUGHTEN
MAYOA
PETER E. HAHN
01MOTOR
Erik Nelson
Nelson Notors
20307 Highway 99
Lynnwoods WA 98036
Ri:' Temporary erosion oontrol.plan
Nelson Motors
Dear Eriko'
Nelson-Bourdages, Inc. submitted a temporary erosion control plan
August 19,-1991. After reviewing the plan, the following information
,.. /sods to be added to the drawings:
—If Show filter.febric fence.elong' property line behind existing
serVice st4tion.
V/2- Show where sediment will draih to and kcation of sedimept trpp.
3. $h0W location of lnterd*eptor ditches.
4. Reference erosion control details drawn by David Evans and
Assoolates (Shoat C-3).
If you havo any questions, contact Gordle Hyce at 7714202p extension
Sincerely,
A=
ADDISON'L. CHRiSMAN IV
Engineering Inspector
ALC/sdt
c: Sharon Nolan; Permit Coordinator
NLSNMTRS/TXTSTS30'
KING COUNTY, AH'IN'GT'ON, SURFACE WAR DESIGN 'MANUAL
-FA611D - R*K*LS
Where A8zD annual sediment yield In tons per acre
R rainfall erosion Index: use R*-2.22(P2 )2,2; where P2 18
the 2 year/24 hour precipitation In Inches (See 2 year -
24 hour. Isoplyvial Map In. Figure 3.6. 1 Q
K. soil erodlbllfty factor, from Table 6.4.4A or as determined
by field and laboratory testing by a geoldgistj soil.-'
scientist, or geotechnical engineer.
LS length-slopia factor:'from Table 5.4.48 (note, lengths
measured are horizontal distance from.a plan view)
Cv
coverfact u vhIch represents no ground cover
during theorfio;
co ruc ion process.
PR erosion control practice factor hich represents
compacted and smooth slopef-Ra
*Not6 the USLt rainfall erosion Index equation for the SC& Type I A storm region Is R 10.2
(P2 where P2 Is the total precipitation for the 2 year, 6 hour durall
on design storm. Since
i the total precipitation for the 2 year, 6 hour duration design storm Is equal to exactly one-half of
the total precipitation for the 2 year. 24 hour duration design storm, the equation can be
rearranged as shown.'".
0 Annual sediment yield calculation, step-by-step procedure:
a. Compute the R value by obtaining the P2 value from the 2-year/24-hour I'sopluvial Map
In Figure 3.5.1C.
b." Divide the site Into areas of homogeneous SCS. soil . type and of uniform slope and
length.',
C.
Note the K value from the SCS soils chart (Tabla SAAA) for each soil type.
d. Determine the LS value for each uniform area (See Table 5.4.4B).'
0. Compute the annual sediment yield (A,,,) In tons per acre for each
homogeneous/uniform area by multiplying R times the K and LS values for each area.
Multiply the annual sediment yield (A..d) for each area by the acreage to be exposed
(only that area to be cleared) of each area. Sum the results.to compute the total annual
sedi , ment load (In tons) to the trap (Lsj.
0 -The sediment storage volume Is then determined by dividing the total annual sedIment
`Vload In tons (L..d) by an average density for the sediment deposited Use 0.05 ton
: per cubic foot. V,id 7 Lsed/ &vs. . &vs
0 To comi2lete the design e!emnora[y sediment tram'.
6 oPond'Ge6metty Equatlonso section In the "Reference* portion
a. Th
Manual mayalso be useful In.designing the sediment trap. at the back of the
5.4.4.1-2
2/89
KING COUNTY, WA INGTON,'SURFACE WA7'0 DESIGN MANUAL
FIGURE SAAB SEDIMENT TRAP
60ti e-te vq
FY4aV4Hvll
V74" gock-
R, selfling De
19
ve.
CROSS SECTION
NO S CALE klote" My be to464,114ki
epAmpiw oil l9vild"ll '%elm
4
Z—Z
I Pepth of z aock
'514 k.-. ': lil'i-Med 41-4vil
V Pe-pfh OIL
SEDIMENT TRAP OUTLET
NO SCALE
5A.4.1.6
2/89
k (N G COUNTY, WASH T O*N, SURFACE WATERAS, IGN MANUAL%
b. A 3:1 aspect ratio between the trap length and
width of the trap Is desirable.; Length Is
defined as the average distance from the Inlet to the outlet 6f the trap. This ratio Is
Included In the computations for Figure 5.4.4C for the surface area at the Interface
between the settling zone and sediment storage- volume.
C. Determine the bottom and top surface area of the sediment storage volume to be
provided (see Figure 5.4.4C) while not exceeding 1.5' In depth and 3:1 side slope from
the bottom of the trap. Note the trap bottom should be level.
d. Determine the total trap dimensions by adding an additional 2' of depth above the
surface of the sediment storage volume, while not exceeding 3:1 side slopes, for lhe�
required settling volume. (see Figure 5.4.4C)
TABLE 5.4.4A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY
SOIL
EROD- SOIL
HYDROLOGIC IBILITY EROD-
SOIL GROUP HYDROLOGIC IBIUTy
GROLIP* FACTOR.-W SOIL GROUP GROLIP* FACTOR,-K-
Alderwood
C 0.16 Orcas Peat D 0.00
Arents. AJderwood C 0.16 Orldla
Arents, Everett D
Beausile 0.17 Ovall C 0.49
0.17
Bellingham C 0.15 Pilchuck C :
BrIscot D 0.32 Puget 0.10
D 0.28
Buckley D 0.32 Puyallup 13
D 0.28
0.32 Ragnar 0.32
Coastal Beaches Variable 0.05 Renton
Eadmont Silt Loam D 0.37 Riverwash D 0.43
EdgewIck C 0.32 Salal Variable
Everett A 0.17 Sammamlsh C 0.37
Indianola 0 0.37
Misap A 0.15 Seattle D 0.00
Maus C 0.32 Shacar
C 0.17 Sl Slit D 0.00'
Mixed Alluvial Land Variable 0.10: Snohomish C 0.37
Nellion
D
A 0.32
Newberg 0.10, Sultan C 0.37
8 . - 1 0.32 Tukwila D
Nooksack C 0.37 Urban 0.00
Norm. Sandy Loam D Variable
0.24 Woodinville
D 0.37
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS
A. (Low runoff potential). Sobs having high Infiltration rates, even when thoroughly wetted nd
U . a consisting
chiefly of deep, well-10-OXCOSSIvely drained sands or gravels. These so a have a high rate of water
transmission.
B. (Moderately low'runoff potential). Soils having moderate Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted. and
consisting chiefly of moderately Me to moderately coarse textures. T
water transmission. 118116 soils have a m
oderale rate of
C.. (Moderately high r�unoff polentlal)." Sops
having slow Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and
consisting chiefly Of soils with a layer that Impedes dow rd movement of water. Of Soils with moderately
line to fine textures. These Sops have a slow rate of wanwa
ter transmissiom
D. (High runoff potential). Soils having very slow Infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting
phlelly of day soils with a high Swelling potential. soils with a permanent high water table, 8003 with a
hardpan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow sons over nearly Impervious material. These SOBS
have a very slow rate of water transmission,
Flu") QuO. I H-55, 50cond Edition, June 1986. Exhibit A.I. Revisions made from SCS� SOI1$ Interpretation
Record. Form #5. September 19M.
5.4.4.1-3
2/89
N
KING COU-N-T*Y, WAMINGTON, SURFACE'WATO DESIGN -MANUAL
FIGURE SAAC SEDIMENT TRAP SIZE AND DIMENSIONS
Vaed - sediment storage volume (cu. It.); Ab bottom area (sq. ft.); Aset area of sediment storage -volume (sq. ft.)
bw - bottom width (11.); bI - bottom length (It.); tw - to p width (3.6 feet total depth); It - top length (ft.).
CF-V
Vx
Veed
Ab
Aset
A I
bw
bl
1w
11
Veed
Ab
Aset
At
bw
IbI I
1w,
It
230
- 0
469
1323
0
42
21
63
1111114
6480
' 8379
11111163
40
162
61
183
370
45
640
1462
1
46
22
66
11668
6765
8700
11632
41
165
62
1 .
484
96
627
1587
2
48
23
69
12032
7056
9027
111907
42
168
63
169
602
153
720
1726
3
61
24
72
12505
7363
9360
12268
43
171
64
192
728
216
819
1875
4
54
25
75
12986
7656
9699
1?675
44
174
65
195
861
2851
924
20281
5
671
261
78
134771
79651
10044
130681
46
177
" 661
198
1003
360
103§
2187
6
'60
27
81
13976
" 8280
10395
13467
46
180
671
5 1
1111s
441
1152
2362
7
63
28
84
14485
8601
10752
13872
47
1831
681
204
1312
628
1276
2523
8
66
29
87
16002
8928
11111116
14283
48
1661
69
207
1479
621
1404
2700
9
60
30
90.
16529
9261
11484
114700
49
1891
70
210
1666
720
1639
2883
10
72
31
93
16064
9600
11660
16123
60
1921
71
213
1841
825
1680
3072
1 1
76
32
96
1 166091
9945
12240
16552
61
1961
72
216
20351
9361
1827
32671
121
78
331
99
171631
1029612827
15987
62
196
73
219
2238
1053
1980
34681
131
81
341
102
177251
10653
13020
16426
53
201
74
222
2451
1176
2139
36751
14
84
361
105
182971
11016
13419
16876
64
204
761
225
2671
1305
2304
36601
15
87
36
108
18877
11385
13824
17328
55
207
76
228
2901
1440
2476
41071
16
90
37
111
1 9467
11760
14235
-17787
56
210
77
231
3140
1581
2662
4332
17
93
38
114
20065
12141
146521
16262
5 7
213
78
234
338
1728
2835
4663
18
96
39
117
20673
12528
160751
18723
68
2161
79
237
3645
1881
3024
4800
19
99
40
120
21269
12921
15504
19200
5 9
19
80
240
3911
2040
3219
6043
20
102
41
123
21915
13320
15939
19683
60
_2
222
81
243
4186
2205
3420
5292
21
105
421
126
22649
13725
16380
20172
61
225
821
246
4469
2376
3627
5547
22
108
43
129
23193
14136
16827
20667
62
220
83
2491
4762
2SS31
3840
6808
23
111
44
132
23846
14653
17280
-
21168
63
231
841
262
5064
2736
4059
6075
24
114
46
j 35
2450
14976
17739
21675
64
234
85
255
5374
2925
4284
6348
25
117
46
138
25178
16405
18204
22188
65
237
861
i58
5694
3120
4515
6627
'2 6
120
47
141
26857
.16840
18675
2270
6
240
871
261
6023
3321
4762
6912127
123
48
1441
26546
16281
19152
2
23232
67
243
eel
264
6360
3520
4995
7203
28
126
491
147
27243
16728
19635
23763
3
68
2461
89
267
8707
3741
5244
7500
29
129
601
160
27950
17181
20124
24300
01
69
2491*
90
270
706%
39601
6499
7803
30
132
1
153
28665
176401
20619
24843
70
252
91
273
7427
4186
5760
8112
3 1
135
62
156
29390
18105
21120
25392
71
2561
92
276
7801
4416
6027
0427
32
138
53
159
30123
18576
21627
25947
72
2581
93
279
8184
4653
-6300
8748
33
141164
1162
30866
19063
22140
26606
73
261
94
28
8575
4896
6679
90761
34
144
66
166
3`1617
19536
22669
27076
74
264
961
285
8976
6145
6864
9408
35
147
66
166
32378
20026
23184
27648
76
267
961
2661
9385
5400
7`165
9747
36
1601
67
171
33147
20620
23716
26227
76
270
97
291
98041
66611
7462
10092
37
1531
661
17i—
339261
210211
242621
28812
77
273
96
294
102321
69281
7766
10443
30
156F
69FI?
347131
215281
247961
29403
70
276
__QA_M
106681
62011
—
OR4
—
-TO 80079
1591
601
18
355101
220411
253441
30000
0
FT
- i 79M
5.4.4.2 SEDIMENT POND
Purpose
..To collect and store sediment from sftes cleared and/or graded during construction prior to
establishment of permanent vegetation and/or construction of permanent drainage facilities. It Is usually
a temporary measure with a design life less than I year; however, ft may be a more permanent facility,
especially 9 required to provide runoff quality control until the she area Is permanently stabilized.
Conditions Wherefractice Applies
Where the.tributar'y drainage area Is 10 acres or less.
2/89
:5.4A.2-:1
I-S v8lues 1�r tullowing sIcn)e lengths 1, ft (m;
-Shipe I.S.Vallses for following sloN lengths ft (m)
:1 Ibb
-Slc)pe Irradient 10 2n W 40 50 SO 70 so 90 100 150 2fX) 250 3DO 350 -400 450 500 600 70D goo 9w low 4b
rati'D
(10) AGA) A9.1) (12-9) (1&2) (18-1) (21.3) (24.4) (27.4) (30-5) (4G) (61) (76) (91) (107) 4122) (137) (152) -083) (213) (244) (274)
305)
0.5 OAK 0.07 0.07 0.08 On8 0.09 O-nq 0.09 0.09 CLIO 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.1, --
2 'n.12 0.13 M13 0.13 0.14 OA 0.14 0.15 W5
("n 0.10 0.11 0.11 nA2 0.12 0.12 ml� om aw mis Air, 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.13.
2 .0-19 0.19 0.20
... : 0-10 (1-12 0.14 0.15 MIG 0.17 0.18 0-19 0. U1 - 0-20 0-M 0.25 0.2r, m2s, o.29 am Om 0.33- U4 OM. -0-37 0.39 0.40
3 0-14 0-18 0-'-N) 0.22 O-ZI &25 0.26 (1-27 0.28 O-M 0.32 0,15 0.38 0.40 0.42 &43 0.45 &46 0.49 '0.51 0.54 0.55 o.57
-4 0.16 11.21- 11.2.5 0.28 li-lo OM 0 -1% 0
_17 O-U 0.40 0.47 0.53 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.70 0.73 0.76 0.82 0-87- 0.92
O-W 1.00
LWA 5 M17 0.24 0.29 O-U o-18 0.41 0.45 &.18. 0.51 0-53 0.66 0.76 0.85 0.91 1.06 1.07 --- -
1.13 1.20 1 M 1.42 1.51 1.60 1.69
c 0.21 0-30 0.17 0.4.3 0.48 -
0.52 OM 0.60 0-64 O-G7 0.82 0.95 1.06 1.16 1.26 Uf 1.43 1.50 1.65 1.78 1.90 2.02 2.13
'17
0-:M 0- 0.45. 0-52 &.$is 0.64 0-69 0.74
0.78 &V2 1.01 1.17 1.30 1.43 1.54 1 AS 1.75 .1.84 2.02 Lis IM
'0.54' 0.9 0.70 ' B.77 OM oM 0.94 O�99 1.21 1.40 1.57 1.72 145 1.98 2.10 2.22 -2.43 2.62 2.80 2.97
12'1: 1 0-11 0.44 2.47 2.61
3.13
0.64 &74 0.83
Wrl ..0-52 0-91 0-98
1.05 1.11 1.17-1-44 1.66 1 M 2.03 .11.9 2M .2.49 2.62 .2.87 3.10 3.32 152- 3.71
06 1.15 1.22
10: 1 LIO
.0.43 .0.61 &75 OM 0-97 1.30 1.37 - 1.68 1-94 116 2.37 2.56 174 2-90 3.06 3.35 3.62- 3.s7 .4.11 4M
CLSO 0.71 -0.86 1.00 1.12 IM 1-12 1.41 1-50 IM 1.93 2-2.1 2.50 Z74 195 3.18 3M = 3.87 4.18 4.47 - C74 4.99
8: 1 12-5
&61 0-85 LCLS 1.22 1.36 1.49 1.61 1.72 IM 1-92 2M 2.72 3.04 IXI 3M 1&1 4.08 4.301 4.71 LOS &43 5.76 6.08
-15 0.81 1.14 1.40 1.62 1.81 - I _qS 2.14 2M 2.43 2-56 3.13 3,62 4.05 4.43 4.79 U2 5.43 *&72 6.27 6.77 7.24 7.68 8.09
6:1 1 fi.7
0'96 1-36 1-67 1-92 2-15 2-16 LU 2-72. 2M 3.04 3.72 4.30 4.81 5.27 5.69 &08 6.45 6.&D 7.45 8.04
8,60 9.12 9.62
5:1 :20 Im 1.8,2 2.23 2.58 2.88 3.16 3.41 3.65 3.87 4.08 10.79 -
4Y.: 1 .22 1.51 2.13 2.61 3.02 = 3.69 3-99 4.27 4M 5,00 &77 6.451.06 .7.63 8.16 US 9.12 9.99 11.54 12.24 12.90
4:1 -.25 1.86 - 4-77 5.84 CL75 7.54 8,26 8.92 9.54 )0.12 10.67 11-68 12.62 13.49 14.31 -15.08
163 3. ZI 3.73' 4.16 4-56 4-9.3 5.27 5.59 5.89 7.21 '8M 9.31 10-20 11.02 11.78 12.49 13.17 14.43 15.58 18.63
2.51 3.56 4-36 &03 &62 &16 6.65 7.11 7.54 7.95
. ........ .. . .. ']m 16-66 17.67
9.74 11-25 12.57 13.77 14.88 15.91 I&V 17.78 19.48 21.04 22.49 2186 25.15
3:1 XL1 2.98 4.22 5.17 &96 6.67 7M 7.89 8.41 &95 9.43 IIM 13.34 14.91 16M 17.64 18.86 2D.00 21.09 =1
0 24-95 26.67 28.29 29.82
is 111 4.57 5-GO 6.46 7M 7-92 "S 9.14 9.70 10.22 12.52 14.46 16.16 17.70 19.12 20.44 2118 218G 25.04 27.04 28-91 30.67 32.32
2%:1 .40 1 4-W 5.66 6,93 &W - &95 9M 10.59 11.32 12.00 17-65 15.50 17M 20.01 21.91 23-67 25.30 26.84 28.29 30.!)g 33.48 35.79 37.96
45
4.81 6-80 &33 9-61 10-75 11-77 12-72 13.60 14.42 1.5.20 18.62 21.50 24.03 26.33 28.44 30.40 32.24 33-" 37.23 40.22 42.99 45.60 48.07
2:1 -50
14-91 15.94 16.91 17.82 21.83 25.21 28.18 30.87 33.34 35.G5 37.81 39.85 43.66 47.16 50.41 53.47 56.36
5.64 7.97 9.76 IIM IZ60 13.81
55.
6.48 -
.9.16 11.22 1 Z96 14.48 15J7 17.14 18.3.1: 19.43 20.48
'7 25.09 28.97 32-39 35.48 38.32 40-97 43.45 45.W 50.18 54-2D 57.94 61.45 64.78
IX:I -57 6.82 9.64 1 tM I.L63 1514- 16-69 l&Q3 19-28 20.45 21.55 37M 40.32 4110 45.72 4&19 52.79 57.02 60.96 64.66 G&IS
- 8 34-08
_fm ---7-12 IOM 12-68 14.64 16.37 -:17M 19.37 20-71 2 L.96 -23.15 28.35 32.74
26.40 .10.4
66.7--- &44 11.93 14.61 1&88 18-87 2D.67 22.32 23.87 25.31 26,68 3Z 36.60 40.10 43.3t 46.30 49.11 51.77 5G.71 SIM 65.48 69.45 73.21
70 68 37.74 42:19 46.22 49.92 53.37 56.60 59.66 65M 70.6D 75.47 80.05 S4.38
8,98 12.70 15.55 17M 2D-08 21-99 23.75 25.39 26.93, .2LIq 34.77 40.15 44.89 49.17 53.11 5&78 60.23 6148 69.54 7&12 80.30 8& 17 89.78
.7-5 9.78 11&1 16,94
19-.56 21M =95 25.97 --)7 -66 29-34 =92 37.97 43.73 4&89 53.56 57.85 61M 65.6D 69.15 75.75 81.82 87.46 92.T7 � 97.79
go JOA5 14.93 18,28 21.11 XLGO 25-85 77M 2D.85 31.66 33-38 40.88 47.20 52.77 S7.81 SZ44 66.75 70M 74M. 81.76 88.31 94.41 100.13 105.55
845 11-30 15-98 19.58 22.61 25-27 27-G9 29.90 31.97
33-91 3&74 43.78 50.55 556. 5 1 61.91 66.87 71.48 7&82 79.92 87M 9kV 101.09 107.23 113.03
90 12-02 17-00 2n.82 24.04 29M 29.44 31.80 34 -00 36-()6 3&01 46.55 53.76 GO.10 65.84 71.11 76.02 80.63 84M 93.11 JOU7 107.51 114.03 12O.W 0
95 12-71 17.97 27-01 25.41 28,41 31.12 3162 35-94 38.12 40.18 49.21 56.82 63 69.59 75.17 80-36 95.23 89.84 98.42 106.30 11164 120.54 127.06
100 M16 18.89 'M. 14 26.72 29.87 32.72 35.34 37.78 40.08 4Z24 51.74 n.74 GS.79 73.17 79.03 84-49 99,61 94.46 .103.48 111.77 119.48 126.73 133.59 z
.*Calculsted fnwn
65.41 X .2 + . 4..j6 X + I.S � toprArmphic factor >
0 + uxono Va + jo.ono a-065) G-213J. 1 - slope length. ft (m X 0 1048)
s - sJope sLeepnewk
a - ezpDnent depenclent upon alops minvness
(0.2 few slapes < 1%, 0.3 for alopts I to 3%. >
0.4 for alopn 3.5 to 4.5%. mW
t
04 fur akqm > 51.)
MENOWNED, A�
--- Im
0
Date: December 29, 1999
To: File ADB-99-221
Street File 22020 Hwy 99
From: Steve Bullock 49P
Senior Planner
Subject: ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
FREESTANDING SIGN REPLACEMENT.
APPROVAL FOR A
Identity Signs is proposing to replace I existing freestanding sign on Highway 99 with a new
freestanding sign. The existing sign is mounted between to poles and has a sign area of
approximately 69 square feet. Although the sign is fairly open at the bottom, it is 15 feet wide at
the top.
The proposed sign is an eight foot wide pylon sign. It has less than 64 square feet and is using the
same colors as the original sign, blue and white.
Review of the application has deemed it complete. Because the proposed sign is smaller in area
than the existing sign, and because it is using the same colors as the existing sign and because the
design of the proposed sign is consistant with the development of the site, I am administratively
approving the Design Review element of this project subject to the applicants receiving a Building
Permit for its installation and the Engineering Division's approval of the pylon design as it pertains
to sight distance and vehicles safely exiting the site.
Attachments: Existing Sign Design
Proposed Sign Design
City of Edmonds (ze Planning Division
99221SR ' DOC
l2t29/99.
15*'!a" L k I S-- I NG,
61604 6p
TUR
EXISlING SIGN ANO STRUC E. RLMAIN-- Al�
4 f#
&.) 0
"k, FRAME ICAE It N"
!ACF. Wl H APPLIED
"N: PAWINAT 1014.
A
0.
I
I
E-
A
8 21-691
rr-n
WHITE RING
& LOGO
BLUE
BACKGROUND
WHITE COPY
BLUE REVEAL
REMOVABLE
CLAD PANEL
CONCRETE
PEDESTAL
q
-Flz,crro 6, et.>
< C.A 0
i)wA5
6 lei
6 99
GRAD[
E
4-2-98
MCL
oo]jMX
El -ADDED 110 MPH DATA. EZ-REVISED CAM DATA FOR aXa (3 PAMEL) FOR 110 MPH. E3-AOOED PART NUMERI
D
2-25-98
VAL
6664
DI -TOTAL CONNECTED LOAD 105 16 AMPS. 02-CHMGEO DESCRIPTION 70 DISTINGUISH FROM 1 2 PANEL INS
D3-OIM WAS 8'-C'. 04-ON MRS 3'-9'.
C
2-18-98
HE
6652
"' "'ED ma'OR 90"s 10 NEw smE- LEFT OLD PART NUMBER ADDED NEw.
81: ADDED DATA FOR 8 X 8 (3 PANEL) 0 21.5' DAN ADDED TO SGN SKCFICATIONIS 'CIRCUITS. TOTAL CONE,
8
1-16-98
HE
6589
A
7-22-97
JHP
6289
Al-OTY WAS 16 A2- WAS CZ) 6911 & (1) 4116
REV
DATE
INIT
. ECN
DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
PROPERTY OF PLASTI—LINEJNC
NOT TO BE DUPLICATED,
UNSPECIFIED RADII
=.015 R
TOLERANCES: mL oimmsiotoi
I XX-*.03
2L
-
L
5 1
It
Uj
.4i ik
A
IoAl
2D
f
-W a -Bi)
i _04.
_J
101
17
4 -
S-4
L
E�5
t
_T
31va
S.L33HS-, :10 V-2133HS
V2Kr_r>,4 "nS-IC�W HOUALOMOX
FfIrl
&*I
AN&
50C,O- xv)sj�, qw
As
ONI'SUM(VW SNVA9 GIAVU Qp)�@
�� DAVU) BANS AN�IAM, M
I-IIEWL
� J_AA
joe t)EscRipnoN rv- a io cA :
<7)e —
BY- Vw
SHEEt�OF_SHEETS
DATE 4) (f M I
HI
?m
-Ive
t4
4-
0 .:3
'#j
...... ....
I
--F