22617 76TH AVE W.pdfFIA
0
a
LU
U.
z
Ej
m
:0.
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
z I
PLANNING DIVISION
EXTENSION REQUEST
DECISION
71 0i
To: File 0 -97-
LU
Lu 3:1
From:
U) U.
SteveAuliock, AICP
ui 01
Senior Planner
U-
Date: NOVEMBER 9,1998
File: CU-97-5
F-
z
0
1. INTRODUCTION
uj Uj
A. Application
T;
0
1. Applicant RobertT Canaan (see Attachment 2).
LU LUI
2. Site Location: 22617 70h Ave. W (see Attachments I and 2).
oil
3. Request: An extension of an approved Conditional Use Permit to allow an elderly assisted
z!
care facility in an RM-13 Zone'
4. Review Process: Extension of Time, Planning Staff makes final decision.
0
5. Maior Issues:
z
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.05.020.0
(CONDITIONAJ, USE PERMITS — General Requirements).
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.95
(Application and Staff Review).
B. Description of Proposal
The applicant has submitted a letter requesting an extension to their ConditionaLUse Permit which
was issued August 13, 1997.
C. Decision
Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions and Attachments in this report we approve the
extension request.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:
A. Request
1. Facts:
a) The extension request was filed August 6th, prior to the expiration date, August 13 "of:
the originally approved Conditional Use Permit. It has been filed in a timely manner.
b) The code allows for one 1-year extension, for approved Conditional Use permits
97005xtn.doc November 9, 1998 Staff Report
7f
0
Fairmont Homes
File No. CU-97-5
Page 2 of 2
1. c6ficlusion:
a) The extension should be granted.
III.'
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS
:'The following is a suminary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and'appeals. 'Any
person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department
for further procedural information.
A. Request for Reconsideration
Section 20. 100.01 O.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
V) U.
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial
Lu 0
decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or
presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the
subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific
references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of
application bel ng reviewed.
Z
B. Appeals
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
LU Lu�
2 :);
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name
0
of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the
appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community
Ul
Development Director within 14 calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed.
U. 01
IV.
LAPSE OF APPROVAL
yl
Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building is required,
substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use
z
pemiit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the ti me
before the expiration date.'
V.
APPENDICES
Attachments I through 2:
1. Vicinity and Zoning Map b
2. Extension request
VI.
PARTIES OF RECORD
0
Fairmont Homes Engineeringbivision Planning Division:,
Aun. Robert T. Canaan Fire Department Public Works Division
21902 38"'Ave. W Parlm Division
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98036
2
47005xtn.doc November 0, 1998 1 S !�,,, e
0 777
--T 5;
7777777: 71,
'77777777777;
z
uj
D
u
0
LI) 0
Ct) LU
U5
V) LA.
0
Lij
U.
0)
!E
Lid,
z F-
�- 0
Z �--
ui LU
0
P
L-l- ol
Z;
LU cn,
U- I
�— Fl
0
z
r
UWE
101
L7�
SiLd
F14
LLJI
LU;
Ef
E%
L-P Frankl*n- monds
61D
91 #240
David Pirzadeh
John Marshall
Ranj CA
�22729 74th Pl W,
7403 228th St SW
"Wamonga
917 0
'Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Lp Franklin -Edmonds.
MCDONALDS CORPORATIO,
L Homea
.Mark Hodgson
z
I Mcdonalds Plz
22720 74th P1W
7428 228th"St SW
Oak Brook IL 60521
Edmonds WA,98026
Edmonds WA 98026
-J
U
Christian International
I
Cn 0i
Uj!
Relief International
I
SHURGARD STORAGE10ENTERS,
I � I I -
Boo Nam & Bang Kang,Han
U)
LU
1716 214th St SE #3
3rd Ave #2200
741,6 100th Ave SW'
cn LL
Bothell WA 98021
Seattle WA 98101
Tacoma WA 98498
LU 01
U-:4
U-SAVE OIL CO
L
Robert Armstrong
cn 0
x 1
9076 Holman Rd NW
24 * ay 99
.22717 Highway 99
I— :C
Seattle WA 98117
E 8026
Edmonds WA 98026
z
LU Lui
2 =)!
C & Karen Smitherman
Bi r 'Riley
Hung Quach & Tram Phan
M Angela
2 2 e W
22815 76th Ave W
22814 75th Ave W
E i�s W 980 26
dntp
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Uj
X
Y
z
lij cn
Frank Marier
Gerard & Julie Scott'Jr.
Laurie Carter
22806 76th Ave W
22902 74th.Ave W
22908,74th Ave,W
0
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA98026
z
Teresa Wippel
Lane GusUafson
Matthew Waldron
James McCoy
1232 121st Ave SE
7413 230th St�SW,
22907 75th Ave W
Lake Stevens WA 98258
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Jonathan &'Nada Down
Dean & Helen Shuff
STEPHANIE LIMITED PARTNE
0
7428 229th St SW
22721 76thAve W
21,20 N,122nd St.
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Seattle WA 98133
Aichael & Susan Tschohl
Ja nna Riggs.
Mr..Richard Gill.
7503 228th St SW
Ws& *.u*
27 r St
22706 74th P1
0
Edmonds WA 98026
v 01
Du 19
Edmondso WA 98,026
Laura Lundberg
Charles Richard
Craig . iWhipke y:
22630 .74th Pl W
74thPl W
_22.5715 74th,.Pl. W,
Edmonds WA 98026
.22620
Edmonds, KA 98026
Edmonds WA 98020.�
y
jj AM
4
'�i,
Margaret Couchee,
Doris Dewees Peter.Davidsen
22705 74th Pl W
22701 74th Pl W 22619 74th Pl W,
Edmonds WJ� 98026
Edmonds WA 980281'�' Edmonds WA'98026�,
Robert Michlitch Jr.
IlicheleMichlitch Jr.:.,
i
19911 20th Ave NW
Seattle WA 98177
IC) Q!
(n LU,
LU X!
b
U) Ut
w 0
F uh
z
0!
z
L" Lui
0
LU
0.
La W
U
z
0
0
77,
�'V'
Z 1—�
Z
UJ L":
0
LAJ UJ
Z
LU (n
EF
[A
AU 4 19,97
BARBARA FAHEY
CITY, OF EDMONDS MAYOR
250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX 1206) 771-0221
HEARING EXAMINER
4�' 189' FINDINGS, CONCLUSIL INS AN" 10—
OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICANT: Fairmont Homes
CASE NO.: PU-97-5
LOCATION: 22617 & 22701 76th Avenue West
APPLICATION: The subject property is a vacant parcel located at 22617, & 22701
76th Avenue West. The applicant has requested a Conditional Use
Permit for the development of a 104 bed assisted living facility,
and convalescent care facility with 84 beds to be used for a, sisted
living, and 20 beds used for long term Alzheimer patient care. The
proposal uses two vehicle entrances both off of 76th Avenue West,
with the visitor and delivery access in the southwest corner ofl. the
site, and the staff and residents' parking under the building,
ite. The applicant is
entering at the northwest comer of tile s
Proposing to leave a landscaped buffer between the proposed
building and the residential uses to the east of the site. The
proposal requires approval by the ADB and approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has requested a
B has held a public meeting
consolidated hearing process. The AD
where a recommendation for approval was made.
REVIEW P I ROCESS: Conditional Use Permit; Environmental Review; Hearing
Examiner conducts public hearing and makes final decision Oil the
Conditional Use Permit.
NW, OR ISSM:
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECPQ Section 16.30.010
a.
RESIDENTIAL - USES).
(SINGLE-FA�MY
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDQ Section :20.1 O�
(ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD)
c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code.(EPPC) Chapter 20.05_
(CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS).
d. Compliance with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.
SUMMARy OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION:
Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions
Hearing Examiner Decision: Approve with conditions
Incorporated August 11,1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
------------- 7-
0,
77 T
W
77777"'
x�v
-J
Heating Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 2
'PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the official file which included, the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report; and
after Visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The
hearing on the application was opened at 9:00 a.m., August 7, 1997, in the Community Services
Conference Room, 250 5h Ave. N., Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 9:03 a.m. Participants
at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim
recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division.
Ln LL
HEARING COMMENTS:
The following the hearing.
is a summary of the comments offered at public
-J1
From the City:
John Bissell reviewed the staff report and recommended approval with conditions.
Z P�
Rf
From the Applicant: I I . I 1
Z
LU Lu��
I -1 1
Burt Reanier, agent for the Applicant, saidL he concurred with:the conditionsof approval
recommended by staff.
0
From the Community:
LU UJ
No one from the general public spoke at the public hearing'
Z!
UJ M1
0— 5
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
Z
A. Site Description
Site Development, Neighboring Development, And Zoning:
Eacts.
Size: The subject property is a rectangular shaped property with 260 feet
of frontage along 76th Avenue West and 300 feet of depth.
Land Use: The property is currently vacant and undeveloped.
ZMiLnZ.- The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential,
0
(RM-1.5).
Terrainand Veggetation The subject property is nearly flat with grasses,
Himalayan blackberries and some native trees. The site contains a
water course which has been determined to be a man-made drainage
ditch, and not a stream.
0
Neighboring Development And Zoning:
Facts:
North: Developed with an office building, zone CG.
0
Z F-,
�- R!
Z i
Lu UJ;;
2 D;
D
0
0
W LJJ
3:
Z
LU (n
0
Z
S
E-1
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 3
South: Developed with multiple family residential uses, and zoned RM
2.4.
East: Developed with single family residential uses, and zoned RS-8.
West: Developed with commercial offices and cabinet shop, and zoned,
CG.
Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent With the
surrounding zoning and development.
B. Edthonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance
ECDC Section 16.30.010 (MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - USES)
Fact: ECDC 16.30.010 allows convalescent homes and rest homes as
permitted primary uses in the RM- 1.5 zone subject to a conditional use
permit.
Conclusion: The proposal meets the criteria for application for a conditional
use permit in the RM-1.5 zone.
C. Compliance with Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.05 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS)
Facts:
ECDC Section 20.05 contains the review and approval criteria for:
Conditional Use Permits. According to the aforementioned code:,
section, "No Conditional Use Permit may be approved unless all the
findings in this section can be made." The findings are as follows:
ComRrehensive Plan - The proposed use is compatible with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning Ordinance - That the proposed use, and its location, is
consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the
purpose of the zone district in which the use is to be located, and
that the proposed use will meet all the applicable requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Not Detrimental - That the use, as approved or conditionally
approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare, and to nearby private property or improvements
unless the use is a public necessity.
Transferability - The Hearing Examiner shall determine whether
the conditional use permit shall run with the land or shall be
personal.
The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Residential Development:
Policy B.5. states "Protect residential areas from incompatible lan'4.
0
T
Y
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 4
uses through the careful control of other types of development and
expansion based upon thefollowing principles.
Z
Residential privacy is afundamental protection to be upheld by local
government.
Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be
LU Ly
discouraged.
-J
0
Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land
use encroachments.
LU
-J
Private property must be protectedfrom adverse environmental
Cn LL
impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides,
etc."
U. <
The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for corridor development
In M
and residential use.
The development proposal includes landscaping a man-made drainage
Z
ditch to appear more like a natural stream. This landscaped area will
LU LU,
act as a buffer between the proposed building development and the
residential buildings to the east, thus preserving residential privacy.
0
The proposal places traffic onto 76th Avenue West, which is an arterial
LU LU
street. Since the surrounding residential uses are primarily located on
X
adjacent streets to the south and to the east, the proposed traffic will
U- 01
not be directly accessing residential streets.
Z
Z
t1i cd
Future development must be approved by the ADB. The ADB may only
grant approval of a proposal if the proposal is found to be in
0
Z
compliance with the aforementioned comprehensive plan sections.
ECDC 16.30.010 allows convalescent homes and rest homes as permitted
primary uses in the RM-1.5 zone subject to a conditional use permit.
Convalescent homes and rest homes are not defined in the ECDC. The
applicant is proposing a long term care center for patients with
Alzheimer's Syndrome and for residents needing limited medical care
and living assistance. Staff has determined that the proposal wouldbe
considered a convalescent home or a rest home.
0
Conclusions:
The proposal is in compliance with the requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan.
y in
Future expansions may not be approved unless the are compliance with
the Comprehensive Plan.
0
The proposal meets the criteria for application for a conditional use em
p
in the RM-1.5 zone.
The proposal does not appear to create any new detriments,
q
nA
z
D
U
0
13
LU
LL
di
0
z
0
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 5
1) Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.15A (State Environmental Policy Act)
Facts:
The applicant submitted an Environmental Checklist with their
application.
Staff reviewed the Environmental Checklist and issued a Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance for the application on April 30,
1997. The deadline for appeals was June 20, 1997 (see Attachment 8).
No appeals of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance were
received.
Conclusion The applicant and the City have complied with the requirements
of the State Environmental Policy Act.
E. Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.15B (Critical Areas)
Eacts:
The applicants submitted a Critical Areas Checklist and received a
Determination as required prior to the issuance of any permit.
The Critical Areas Determination indicated that no further Critical Area
studies would be required to develop these lots.
Conclusion: The applicant and the City have complied with the requirements
of ECDC 20. 1
F. Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Compliance
Land Use
Facts:
The. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Residential Development
Policy B.5. states "Protect residential areas from incompatible land
uses through the careful control of other types of development and
expansion based upon the following principles. -
Residential privacy is afundamental protection to be upheld by local
government.
Traf ighborhood must be
_flc not directly accessing residences in a ne
discouraged.
view.. trafflc'or land.
Stable property values must not be threatened by
0
Z
uj�
LU
-J
L) 0
Ln C3
(n Lu�
LU
-J
LO LL
0�
UJ
U-
z I.-
�- 0
Z �-
LU LU
OC ;7_1
LLI LU
LL- 0
z
UJ (n
0
z
E,
M
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 6
-1 1 A- 1 .4
111r. opmem. popos, in, u s. cu, scap ng a man-made d mage
ditch to appear more like a natural stream. This landscaped area will
act as a buffer between the proposed building development and the
residential buildings to the east, thus preserving residential privacy.
The proposal places traffic onto 76th Avenue West, which is an arterial
street. Since the surrounding residential uses are primarily located on
adjacent streets to the south and to the east, the proposed traffic will
not be directly accessing residential streets.
Future development must be approved by the ADB. The ADB may only
grant approval of a proposal if the proposal is found to be in
compliance with the aforementioned comprehensive plan sections.
Conclusions:
The proposal is in compliance with the requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Future expansions may not be approved unless they are in compliance with
the Comprehensive Plan.
G. Technical Committee
The proposed Conditional Use Permit has been reviewed,and evaluated by other
Departments/Divisions of the City.
No substantive comments were subn-dtted regarding this application.
DECISION
Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the request for a conditional use permit is
approved, subject to the following conditions:
I . All future expansions or site modifications are subject to approval by the
Architectural Design Board.
2. The conditional use permit shall be transferable.
3. Prior to occupancy, a fence must be installed along the perimeter of the property
except along the 76th avenue portion of the site.
4. The sign shown in the application materials is for reference only and not approved as
part of this application.
Mo.
LLij
z I--
�- 0�-
cu- LU
5 L
(J (J)i
0 Ei0
La UJI
L)
LL 0
z
LU U)
z
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 7
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and
appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact
the Planning Department for further procedural information.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Section 20. 100.01 O.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the
initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register
and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land
which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite
specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the
type of application being reviewed.
APPEALS OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the
name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons
why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the
Community Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date of the decision
being appealed.
APPEALS OF SEPA DETERMINATION APPEAL DECISIONS
Section 20.15A.240.0 states that "The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final and shall
not be appealable to the city council." Further appeals must be made to Superior Court.
NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a
change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office.
0 LAPSE OF APPROVAL FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building is
required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval,
the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an
11 application for an extension of the time before the expiration date.'
The following exhibit was offered and entered into the record.
0
U.
0
z 1-�'
0
LU Lui
0
a �-
LU
LU 'I
0
z
0
z
141
lrllf
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. CU-97-5
Page 8
A., Planning Division Advisory Rdport
PARTIES oF RECORD:
Fairmont Homes Burt Reanier
Architect
4
39th Ave W 832 Black Forest Ln
-Gary.,
'3017 1 Ith Ave, West
Mount Lake Terrace, WA 98036 Everett, WA 9820i
Seattle, WA, 08119,
Edmonds Planning Division
Edmonds Public Works Division
Edmonds Engineering Division
Edmonds Parks & Recreation Division
Edmonds Fire Department
Architectural Design Board
w
q:
0
7
AUGUST 7,199
:PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND ZIP
CODE BELOW IF YOU WISH TO. SPEAK ON THIS ITEM
z--------------------------------------------------------------
CU-97-5 FAIRMONT HOMES, INC.
Lu
U) LU'
Lu
cn U.
z �-i
Lu Lul
LU Uj
tl; (a
E7 7
7 Z
LLJ
0
LU
_u =
F-
LL
0
6u
<
CC <
LL D
�) 0
r Lij.
z
F- 0
Z �-
LLI uj
U
0-
a �-1
LU LU
Ll
�L- 0
z
LU cn
0
z
.r.,
A
d"
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION
ADVISORY REPORT
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
LU U�
To: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner
Ul
From:
5j X,
John Bissell, AICP
' - 11
Ln LL
Associate planner
LU
0-i
Date: JULY 28,1997
U-
File: CU-97-5
La
x
Heating Date, Time, And Place: August 7. 1997, At 9:00 AM,
Plaza Meeting Room
Z
Library Building
0
650 Main Street
Lu Lu
a
(J)i
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
5
uj
Section Page
X 0
LINTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 2
A. DESCRIPTION OFTHE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROPOSAL ....................................................................... 2
B. REviEw By THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ............................... p ...................................................... 2
C. RECOMMENDATION 2
Z
I 1
IL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
...................................................................................... ......... 3
A. SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ 3
B. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE ........................................................ 3
C. EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE ......................................................................................... 5
D. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ..... ........................................................................................................................ 6
III. RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS .............................................................................................................. 6
A. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION ........... ........................................................... ................. ...................... 6
B. APPEALS OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ..................................................................................................... 6
IV. NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR ............................................ w 7
0
............................................. ...............
V. LAPSE OF APPROVAL FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .............................................................. 7
VI. APPENDICES ................................. ....................................................................................... I ................................ 7
VILPARTIES OF RECORD
.......................................................................................................................... . ......... 7
CU9705.DOC August 7,1997
Staff Report
0
J
Fairmont Homes
File No. CU-97-5 J
Page 2 of 7
I. INTRODUCTION
The following is a staff report for the combined hearing of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a new elderly
care facility, in an RM zone district. The facility is proposed with 84 beds for those only needing moderate
assistance, while an additional 20 beds will be for the care of patients with Alzheimer syndrome. The
facility will provide on -site staff and a common dining room. The Architectural Design Board has reviewed
the proposal for consistency with the Design Guidelines, and has made a recommendation for approval to
uJ!
the Hearing Examiner.
U, A. Description of the Conditional Use Permit Proposal
LU The subject property is a vacant parcel located at 22617 & 22701 76th Avenue West. The
applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit for the development of a 104 bed assisted living
facility, and convalescent care facility with 84 beds to be used for assisted living, and 20 beds used
0 for long term Alzheimer patient care. The proposal uses two vehicle entrances both off of 76th
Avenue West, with the visitor and delivery access in the southwest comer of the site, and the staff
and residents'parking under the building, entering at the northwest corner of the site.
The applicant is proposing to leave a landscaped buffer between the proposed building and the
Cl.
Wi residential uses to the east of the site. The proposal requires approval by the ADB and approval of
X �
I.- L a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant has requested a consolidated hearing process. The ADB
0 has held a public meeting where a recommendation for approval was made (see Attachments 6 and
1.- 7).
uj�
B. Review By the Architectural Design Board
L
The proposal requires approval by the ADB and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The
applicant has requested consolidated hearing process. The ADB held a public meeting where a
Ott recommendation for approval was made with the following conditions: "That a fence be installed
Z! along the perimeter of the property except along the 76th Avenue portion of the site; and that it is
t
CA understood that the -Architectural Design Board is not including any free standing sign in their
recommendation for approval at this time" (see Attachments 6 and 7).
I . Applicant: Fairmont Homes (see Attachment 2).
2. Site Location: 22617 & 22701 76th Avenue West (see Attachment 1).
3. Review Process: Conditional Use Permit; Environmental Review; Hearing Examiner
conducts public hearing and makes final decision on the Conditional Use Permit.
4. Maior Issues:
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 16.30.010
(SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - USES).
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.10
(ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD).
c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.05
(CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS).
d. Compliance with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.
C. Recommendation
Based on Findings of Fact, Conclusions in, and Attachments to this report we recommend
Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for theAssisted Living Facility subject to the following
conditions:
CU9705.DOC I Aupst 7, 1997 Staff Report
7r— 7 7�,
77-
_0
. . . . .. . . .
Fairmont Homes
File No. CU-97-5
Page 3 of 7
I . All future expansions or site modifications are subject to approval by the Architectural Design
Board,
2. The conditional use permit should be transferable.
3. Prior to occupancy, a fence must be installed alo ng the perimeter of the property except along
U.11
the 76th avenue portion of the site,
L<
U
4. The sign shown in the application materials is for reference only and n ot approved as part of
Oi
this application.
V)
Lu X!
_J
11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
Lr) LL
—0
LU
A. Site Description
U.
1. Site Development, Neighboring Development, And Zoning:
u):D
a
a) Facts:
flit
Z P�
(1) Lize: The subject property is a rectangular shaped property with 260 feet of frontage
01
along 76th Avenue West and 300 feet of depth (see Attachments I & 4
UJ UJ;
(2) Land Use: The property is currently vacant and undeveloped,
:3
(3) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Single-Fan-dly Residential (RM-1.5)
0
(see Attachment 1).
LU Uj
(4) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject property is nearly flat with grasses,,
X
I— F—i
Himalayan blackberries and some native trees. The site contains a water course
U_ 0
which has been determined to be a man-made drainage ditch, and not a stream.
Z
2. Neighboring Development And Zoning:
0 R
a) Eacts.
Z
(1) North- Developed with an office building, and zoned CG.
(2) South: Developed with multiple family residential uses, and zoned lW-2.4.
(3) East: Developed with single family residential uses, and zoned RS-8..
(4) West: Developed with commercial offices and cabinet shop, and zoned CG.
b) Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding
zoning and development.
B. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance
0
1. ECDC Section 16.30.010 (MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - USES)
a) Fact: ECDC 16.30.010 allows convalescent homes and rest homes as permitted
primary uses in the RM- 1.5 zone subject to a conditional use permit.
b) Conclusion: The proposal meets the criteria for application for a conditional use'liermit
in the RM- 1.5 zone.
G
3 CU9705.DOC August,7, 190 gel';t.
0
2. Compliance with 4
PERMITS)
a) Facts:
(1) ECDC Sectiot
Perinits. Accc
may be appro,
are as follows:
Compreh
Plan.
ode (ECDC) Chapter 20.05 (CONDITIONAL USE
20.05 contains the review and approval criteria for Conditional Use
ding to the aforementioned code section, "No Conditional Use Permit
A unless all the findings in this section can be made." The findings
isive Plan - The proposed use is compatible with the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance - That the proposed use, and its location, is consistent with the
'f the Zoning Ordinance and the purpose of the zone district in which
purposes o
the use is,to be located, and that the proposed use will meet all the applicable
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
0 Not De niental - That the use, as approved or conditionally approved, will not
be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and to
nearby private property or improvements unless the use is a public necessity.
0 Transferability - The Hearing Examiner shall determine whether the conditional
use permit shall run with the land or shall be personal.
I
(2) The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Residential Development Policy B.S.
states "Protect residential areasfrom incompatible land uses through the careful
control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following
principles:
(a) Residential, privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local
government.
(b) Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be
- , ,
I
discouraged.
. 1.
(c) Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land use
encroachments.
(d) Private property must be protectedfrom adverse environmental impacts of
development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc.
(3) The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for corridor development and
residential use.�
(4) The development proposal includes landscaping a man-made drainage ditch to
appear more like a natural stream. This landscaped area will act as a buffer between
the proposed building development and the residential buildings to the east, thus
preserving residential privacy.
(5) The proposal places traffic onto 76th Avenue West, which is an arterial street. Since
the surroundin � residential uses are primarily located on adjacent streets to the south
9
and to the east,,the proposed traffic will not be directly accessing residential streets.
(6) Future develo 'ment must be approved by the ADB. The ADB may only grant
P,
approval of a'proposal if the proposal is found to be in compliance with the
aforementioned comprehensive plan sections.
(7) ECDC 16.30.010 allows convalescent homes and rest homes as permitted primary
uses in the RMI 1.5 zone subject to a conditional use permit.
(8) Convalescent homes and rest homes are not defined in the ECDC. the applicant is
proposing a long term care center for patients with Alzheimer's Syndrome and, for
4 CU9705.DOC August 1, 1997 Stdf R�port
. ...............
0
Fairmont Homes
File No. CU-97-5
Page 5 of 7
residents needing limited medical care and living assistance. Staff has determined
that the proposal would be considered a convalescent home or a rest home.
b) Conclusions:
(1) The proposal is in compliance with the requirements of the Comprehensive, Plan.
(2) Future expansions may not be approved unless they are in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
(3) The proposal meets the criteria for application for a conditional use permit in the
RM- 1.5 zone.
(4) ne proposal does not appear to create any new detriments.
3. Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.15A (State Environmental Policy
Act)
a) Facts:
(1) ne applicant submitted an Environmental Checklist with their application.
(2) Staff reviewed the Environmental Checklist and issued a Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance for the application on April 30, 1997. The deadline for appeals was
June 20, 1997 (see Attachment 8).
No appeals of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance were received.
b) Conclusion The applicant and the City have complied with the requirements of the State
Environmental Policy Act.
4. Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.15B (Critical Areas)
a) Facts:
(1) The applicants submitted a Critical Areas Checklist and received a Determination as
required prior to the issuance of any permit.
(2) The Critical Areas Determination indicated that no further Critical Area studies
would be required to develop these lots.
b) Conclusion: applicant and the City have complied with the requirements of ECDC
20.15B.
Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Compliance
1. Land Use
a) Facts:
(1) The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Residential Development Policy B.5
states "Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful
control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following
principles:
(a) Residential privacy is afundamental protection tobe upheldby local
government,
(b) Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be
discouraged.
(c) Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land use
encroachments.
Fairmont Homes
File No. CU-97-5
Page 6 of 7
(d) Private property must be protectedfrom adverse environmental impacts of
development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc.
(2) The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for corridor development and
residential use.
(3) The development proposal includes landscaping a man-made drainage ditch to
appear more like a natural stream. This landscaped area will act as a buffer between
the proposed building development and the residential buildings to the east, thus
preserving residential privacy.
(4) The proposal places traffic onto 76th Avenue West, which is an arterial street. Since
the surrounding residential uses are primarily located on adjacent streets to the south
and to the cast, the proposed traffic will not be directly accessing residential streets.
(5) Future development must be approved by the ADD. The ADD may only grant
approval of a proposal if the proposal is found to be in compliance with the
aforementioned comprehensive plan sections.
b) Conclusions:
(1) The proposal is in compliance with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
(2) Future expansions may not be approved unless they are in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
D. Technical Committee
1. The proposed Conditional Use Permit has been reviewed and evaluated
by other Departments/Divisions of the City.
a) No substantive comments were submitted regarding this application.
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any
person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department
for further procedural information.
A. Request for Reconsideration
Section 20. 100,010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial
decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or
presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the
subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific
references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of
application being reviewed.
B. Appeals of Conditional Use Permits
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name
of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the
appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community
Development Director within 14 calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed.
6 CU9705MOC /August 7,1997 /Staff Re,!!�arl'�
-A
77
0
M 1�
Page 7 of 7
IW: NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in
the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office.
z
V. LAPSE OF APPROVAL FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Lu,
cc 2i
<
Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building is required,
LU
substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use
permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time
U) Lu;
before the expiration date.'
Uj
LL
VI. APPENDICES
—01
W
:3
Attachments I through 8:
U. <
I . Vicinity and Zoning Map
01
2. Application
z
3. Declarations of the Applicant
0;
4. Site Plan
Lu Lw
5. Building Elevations
01
6. Staff Report to the ADB, dated April 29, 1997
0
7. Minutes from the May 7, 1997, ADB Meeting regarding CU-97-16
LU
8. SEPA Determination dated 5/20/97
0
z
LU W;
VII. PARTIES OF RECORD
R
z
Fairmont Homes Burt Reanier Gary Ard Public Works Division
21902 38th Ave W 4832 black Forest'Ln Architect
Mount Lake Terrace, WA Everett, WA 98203
98036
Parks Division Fire Department Architectural Design Plannifig'Division
Board
Engineering Division
0
U) LL
0
LL <I
DI
C)
M;
z
z
w W:
0
a_
Lu Id
Ll- 0
z
LU CA
U!E
0
z
EW
Al
z
Lu�
LU
-i
uj
Ef) U.
0
uj
"T"
z �-,
0:
Lu uj�
cl;
0
a
Lu ul
Lu (J)
0
z
1*1
E
NOI
REMOTE STATION I.D.
START TIME
DURATION
#PAGES
COMMENT
11
12063393049
7-20-97 9:09AM
1-20",
2
", 7;
E.
M
u
0
0
LU
LL
Iii
0
z
E
EW
0
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THA
THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
lb
1 "1"': :7
4 aiK
L P Franklin- monds
91 0#240
David Pirzadeh
John Marshall
Ran amonga CA
VO.
22729 74th Pl W
7403 228th St1SW
91 7
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Lp Franklin -Edmonds
z
MCDONALDS CORPORATIO
0 L Homea
.Mark Hodgson
I Mcdonalds Plz
22720 74th Pl W
7428, 228th St SW
UJI
Oak Brook IL 60521
.Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 980 26�
<
Uj
_j 0;
01
Christian International
V)
V) LW
Relief International
SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS
Boo Nam Bang Kang Han
LU
_j
1716 214th St SE #3
1201 3rd Ave #2200
7416,100th Ave SW
LO LL
LU 0
Bothell WA 98021,
Seattle WA 98161
Tacoma WA 98498
_j
<01
S2
U_SAVE OIL CO
L 1 ma
Robert.Armstrong
x Uj
9076 Holman Rd NW
oimoa
2
a y §9
22717 Highway 99
z
Seattle WA 98117
E
9
98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Uj Uj::
C Karen Smitherman
U
r Riley
k- r;
Hung Quach & Tram Phan
M Angela
OL
22 e W
22815 76th Ave W,
22814 75th Ave W
LU LU
E 98026
d s W
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98626
X
:J
W c4i
U T'
Frank Marier
Gerard Juli 6 Scott Jr.
Laurie Carter
i=
22806 76th Ave W
22902 74th Ave W
r 22908 74th Ave W
0
z
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Teresa Wippel
Lane GusUafson
Matthew Waldron
James McCoy
1232 121st Ave SE,
7413 230th St SW
22907 75th Ave.W
Lake Stevens WA 98258
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Jonathan & Nada Down
Dean & Helen Shuff
STEPHANIE LIMITED.PARTNE
0
7428 229th St SW
22721:76th.Ave W
2120 N 122nd St
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Seattle WA 98133
Michael & Susan Tschohl
Ja s u nna Riggs
ni
Mr. Richard'Gill
7503 228th St SW
27 r St
2270'6 74th:Pl W,
0
Edmonds WA 98026
Du U19
VW*O
Edmonds,:WA 96026,...,
Laura Lundberg
Charles Richard
Craig Whipkey:.
22630 74th Pl W
22620 74th Pl W
74th PI W
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 9 8 0 2'0
Jif 0
7
Margaret.Couchee,
Doris Dewees
Peter Davidsen
22705 74th Pl,W
2270174th,,:P1 W
22619 741th P1 W
Edmonds Wl� 98026'
Edmonds WA 98026t,-
Edmonds WA 98026
Robert Michlitch Jr...
Vlichele Michlitch Jr.
z
19911 20th Ave NW
Seattle WA 98177
UJI
Lu
C);
U) Ut
Lu
0
uj
:3
U.
M
z
z
Lu Lui
(nI
0
Uj us
Ly
z
uj (n,
z
r
A
Z
LU
LJ
0
LU
r
F-
Lf) LL-
C
L-j
LL-
0
Z F-
L.0
7D
LU
L)
F-
0
z
-u Ln
0
z
0
ES
z
z
ui
2
M
u
0
a
LU
U-
0
2
PC
140
C. Introduction:
The applicant is proposing to develop a new elderly care facility, in an RM zone
district. The facility is proposed with 84 beds for those only needing moderate
assistance, while an additional 20 beds will be for the care of patients with
Alzheimer syndrome. The facility will provide on site staff and a common
dining room.
The proposed use at the subject location requires a conditional use permit.
Therefore, the design of the proposal requires approval of the ADB, while the
use of the proposal requires the approval of the Hearing Examiner. In this case,
the applicant has requested to consolidate the pern-dt applications. Since this
applicant has requested to consolidate the permit applications, the ADB will not
bold a hearing. Rather the ADB will hold a public meeting and will make a
recommendation to the Hearing Examiner.
D. Background:
Zoning: The property is zoned Residential, Multiple -Family, with a density of one
dwelling unit allowed per 1,500 square feet of lot area (RM-1.5).
Environmental Review: The proposal requires a SEPA review. The applicant has
submitted an Environmental Checklist which has been reviewed by the City. The City has
issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignifigance (MDNS).
Issues: Design of the site, and landscaping have all been addressed by the applicant in
their proposal, and the Architectural Design Board must determine the appropriateness of the
proposal.
1.
2.
3.
0
z;�
V4, J,
CU-974
elements which connect to the ground. These elements of the building appear to create a consistent
theme as required by ECDC section 20.10.070. (see Attachment 2).
a) Materials:
Z
<
The applicant has proposed beveled siding for the body of the building with shake siding for the
[U-1
modulated portions of the building below the dormers. The applicant has proposed 2 inch by
10 inch belly bands between the floors, with cedar hand rails for the stairs and white vinyl
<
LU il:
window with wood trim. A 30-year architectural grade composition shingle roof is proposed.
L)
The 30 year shingles provide a greater amount of definition, giving the roof a true shingled
V)
Cn W�
appearance.
UJ xf
-J
M U.1
I I
b) Lighting:
0
The applicant has not proposed any site or building lighting with this application. The applicant
ug,
has stated that if lighting is chosen for this application, that information will be presented to the
Board at the time of the ADB meeting.
U.
U) =)I
c) Colors:
The applicant has proposed dark beige for the body of the building with white trim and a black
roof. The shake siding will be painted as the body of the building, while the belly bands and
Z
0
stair hand rails will be painted to match the trim.
Z I--
LU Uj�
d) Signing:
�' :� �
No signing is proposed.
0
2. Site Design:
LU UJ
a) Access / Parking:
P-
The applicant has proposed two parking areas. One circular parking area is proposed in the
� U. 0,
L- 0
southwest portion of the site in between the building and 76th Avenue West. The other parking
Z
area will be located under the northern portion of the building. This parking area will access
Lii Cn!
from the northwest comer of the lot. The circular parking area will primarily be used for
0
visitors and short term parking, while tenants, staff and delivery parking will be accommodated
Z
in the underground parking area (see Attachment 2).
b) Landscaping:
The site contains a water course which has been evaluated and determined to be a man made
drainage ditch, and not a stream. Ile applicant is proposing a landscape plan which would
enhance this water course to appear as a natural stream. The proposed stream enhancement will
act as a buffer to adjacent property owners, as well as providing a park -like setting for the
tenants of the development. Open space with walkways and a gazebo will be included in the
enhanced area. The remaining portions of the site are proposed with adequate landscaping to
meet the minimum standards of landscape ordinance found in ECDC section 20.12 (see
Attachment 2).
3. Technical Review:
a) Engineering Division
A site plan that has been stamped by a Professional Engineer will be required to be
submitted and approved by the City Engineer.
Parking plan will be required to meet the requirements of the ECDC.
• The project must comply with storm water quality and quantity requirements per
Ordinance 3013. Drains in underground parking garages are to be routed to sanitary
sewer system.
* Provisions for power transformer to provide power for elevator must be made. Pole
mounted transformers are not allowed.
• Civil Engineered Drawings must match the architectural drawi ngs.
2
--ar'7
1�
.. ... ..... ..
01".
CU-97.
b) Building Division
Compliance with the ADA requirements must be met.
Civil Engineered Drawings must match the architectural drawings.
d) Public Works Division
Trash and recycling enclosure.
Size: The proposed dimensions show an enclosure s ze of 18 feet wide by
10 feet deep. Maintain depth at 10 foot and increase width to 20 foot (all inside
dimensions).
Structure: Proposed cedar fence on 3 sides is okay. Gate may be chain -link
with inserted vinyl slats. Gates must provide 18 foot miniff ium clear opening
when in the open position. No interior partitions, center po ,is, curbing or
bollards are allowed.
Location: Proposed site for the enclosure is suitable but dictates that collection
containers will be roll -out type. Front load vehicles are the only type that will
access this site. This may lead to higher costs for service if waste volume is
enough to need more than once -weekly pick-up. More efficient service would
be provided if the enclosure were to be located at the end of the service entry
drive in order to be accessible directly by the front of the collection vehicles.
Minimum weekly service most often cuts down on costs.
F., Compliance' with criteria: In order for the ADB to recommend appro I val of this item, the
Board must make the following findings:
1. That the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other opted city policies.
The following are some policies from the Comprehensive plan that dress this type of
development.
Z
uj�
n!
<
LLJ
_J
U
V)
V) LU
LU
En
LU
:31
LL
LW
Z
LU LU
m
(n;
LU LUI
�L- 0!
.. Z!
UJ U)
0
Z
2. That the staff has found that the proposal meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance,
or the city has approved a variance or a modification under the zoning ordinance.
The following table is an analysis of the bulk standard requirements of the zoning ordinance:
Allowed Proposed
Building Height 25' + 5 for a 4:12 roof 25' + 5 for a 4:12 roof
Lot Coverage 45% 26%
Setbacks 15' foot street 15' foot street
10' sides 10' sides
Parkine Stalls 35 39
3. That the proposal as approved or conditionally approved satisfies the criteria and purposes
ECDC section 20.10.070 - ADB Criteria and ECDC section 20.12 - Landscaping.
A. Policies from ECDC 20.10.070 that seem to apply to this project are:
20.10.070 Criteria.
A. Building Design. No one architectural style is required. the building shall be
designed to comply 'with the purposes of this chapter and to avoid conflict with the
existing and planned character of the nearby area. All elements of building design
shallform an integrated development, harmonious in scale, line and mass. The
following are included in building design:
1. All exterior building components, including windows, doors, eaves, and
parapets;
2. Color, which should avoid excessive brilliance or brightness except where that
would enhance the character of the area;
4. Long massive, unbroken, monotonous buildings shall be avoided in order to
comply with the purposes of this chapter to allow light and air to the occupants
of the development and to provide open spacefor landscaping and recreational
facilities.
Summary: The proposed development appears to be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan in that the applicant is proposing a large park -like landscaped buffer
adjacent to the neighboring single family residences, and all traffic will be
routed on 76th Avenue West which is an arterial.
Staff has determined that the proposal meets the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance.
The proposal appears to be consistent with the criteria and purposes ECDC
section 20.10.070 - ADB Criteria by providing a well modulated building
without using excessively brilliant colors, and ECDC section 20.12 -
Landscaping.
G. Recommendation:
As this is a consolidated permit application, the Architectural Design Board will not, make a,
decision on this matter, but rather a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner. Staff'believes
that the ADB can find that the proposal is consistent with the required, findings as illustrated
4
0
CU-97-5-
above. lberefofe, Staff recommends that,the Boardiad opt a motion
recommending app, . roval of
this application.'
z
Attachments�
Lul
I Vicinity Map
2. Applicanfs drawings
LU
u 0!
UJ;
Lu
(n U.
uj 0
0�
M uj�
s M,
5
U)
uEl.
3:
U- 0
z
0
z
_j
�tIlllNllllllll
NOTTICE:NIF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN
15 OTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
Vol
CeR
R!
44 111 1 MR
q
KATHERINE COURT - SOMONOS
NOTICE: IF
CS
wal
10-
1-31 Mr
1111 � MI.-, - I I rl t. 'Irml
4A
<ATHERINE COURT - SOMONDS
71 M
ip,
IF THE
Im
KATHERINE COURT EDMONDS
RE 1 §4
3
F-TTD
FEZ
IFIA
@
tD �
:1
11 ji,
gm
0
'trim 71
<ATHERINS COURT - BOMONDIS
T;
711 own
0 0
KATHERINS COURT EDMONDS
x
im-p-m
-- wm- 'n-
W n"no- - -4%?
:3
m
m
:E
I ri .1
AA
m
NOTICE: IF THE
--nils moug&i
-AD
W-1
LN
0
IF
KATHERINE COURT - SOMONDS
MIDISS
AIALI
SHINCLES
4704V
RIDGE
Oil, rkrl
.1fid
EIGH SIER�1!&
PI -I n i(IL" c \LVIh,tICC ill N1 I IL'. (111JIii.% . Jlh/ /)C'I*/*( W11 1,111tV. it "N I/?L' I( )/)-( )t' 1110-lilk- ill re" i(k.11tial
"I I I I I-" It"'. PIC 1111ILT /I L-;t I 1 11 Ci-VI I I. h I I I I i I IJtC-( I /i/V IT-` hISS CI )11,"11 *1 IC I i( )I I VI).% I/ 11's h )II ---h I s I it Ie
11cmit.% J/0 N1111"AV IY( )ILVIi( )IL .'I C/iStilICIA C 41.1th M littC. C1.0,11M h.% IlSill!' J &OL'Tclll 0 )h u.
I I I I I /L'. d(All � I I I C \ 1 /'J dimcir,,ii )it ( )I* ikpt I I h I I Nt I' PIV I I I iCl "I I i I I'VIL'.
HIGH SIERRAO
OAKWOOD
Cypresswood Ebonywood Oakwood
Barnwood Dtiftwood Bitchwood
=
I
featherwood
Slaleslone.
Birchwood'
I IRI
UA C
0
Notice of Development Application & ADB Public Meeting
DateofNotice: June18,1997
File # CU-97-5
Applicant Informatloi
NameofApplicant:.—, — Fairmont Homes, Inc,
Date of Application: .............. — June 9,1997
Date Application Complete: Preliminary
Permit Information 4
Requested Permits Conditional Use Permit
and Approvals: Recommendation to the Hearing
Examiner
Other Required Unknown
Potiect Location: .....................
22617 76th Ave. W., Edmonds
Permits not yet applied
Project Description:
Conditional Use Permit to allow an assisted
for (if known): . .............
elderly care facility, This is a public
Required Studies Unknown
meeting with a recommendation to the
related
Hearing Examiner.
to the project: ...............
Public Comments due by:,..
July 2, 1997
Related Environmental Critical Areas Checklist & State
City Contact for project: ..........
John Bissell
Docurnents:.. ........... Environmental Policy Act
Public Meeting Information
Date: July 2, 1997
Time:. 7:00 PM
Place: Plaza Meeting Room - 650 Main St., Edmonds
Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Community Services Department,
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020. (425) 771-0220. Public cormnents should also be sent to this address.
The choo an - this dkichipinwit opchcamew .,It be made within 120 days ofthe date ofthe Letter ofcanipletenak u�hh'alhocancvs madefor suni,
additional information requests Note that abilitY to aPpeal a decision 6 contingent upon parvc�auowlhk th uhiah�lprocecs
The rernmal, mutilation, clestrucHon, or concealnuent of this This notice may be removed
Warning! notice before the hearing date is a misdemeanor punishable by after, July 2. 1997
fine and imprisonment
0 32-X 113 25X I
L P Franklin -Edmonds
912 a�v e #240
David Pirzadeh
John Marshall
Ra�6 nga CA
22729 74th,P1 W,
7403 228t1i St SW
91
Edmonds WA, 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Lp Franklin -Edmonds
MCDONALDS CORPORATIO
OIL Homea
Mark Hodgson
1 Mcdonalds Pli
22720 74th Pi W
7428 2'28th St SW,
Oak Brook IL 60521
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98b26
'hristian International
elief International
SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS,
Boo
Nam & Bang Kang Han
716 214th St SE #3
1201 3rd Ave #2200
7416
100th Ave'SW
othell WA 98021
Seattle WA 98101
Tacoma WA 98498
U-SAVE OIL CO,
i p a
Robert Armstronff
9076 Holman Rd NW
ay 99
22717.Highway 99
z
0!
Seattle WA 98117
X&ds
s 98026
Edmonds WA 98026,
Z
Uj
Uj'
Mi
C & Karen smitherman
0
Billy dra Riley
Hung.Quach & Tram Phan
m Angela
2 e W
22815 76th Ave W
22814 75th Ave W
Uj
Zu.
Uj ,
EdUOS 98026L
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
zli
6;
Xi
Frank Marier
Gerard & Julie Scott Jr.
Laurie Carter
0
In
22806 76th Ave W
22902 74th Ave W
22908 74th Ave W
z
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026�
Edmonds WA 98026
Teresa Wippel
Lane Gustafson
Matthew Waldron
James McCoy
1232 121st Ave SE
7413 230th St SW
22907 75th AveW
Lake Stevens WA 98258
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
0
Jonathan & Nada Down
Dean & Helen Shuff
STEPHANIE LIMITED PARTNE
7428 229th St SW
22721 76th Ave W
.2120 N,122nd St
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Seattle WA 98133
ichael & Susan Tschohl
Ja s Julia na Riggs
Mr.�' Gill
503 228th St SW
27 St
.Richard
22706 74th'Pl W
dmonds WA 98026
Duv 19
��Edmonds WA 980,26
Laura Lundberg
Charles Richard
.,Craig Whipkey
22630 74th Pl W
22620 74th P1 W
225715 74th P1,W,
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 98026
Edmonds WA 9'8020,
0
"I'A sy'��
. . . . ....
Margaret Couchee,
Doris.Dewees
Peiter.Davidsen
22705 74th,Pl W
�22701 74th.Pil,w
Pl W
Edmonds WA:98026
�Edmonds' WA 98026�-:�
�:'Edmonds WA 98026
Robert Michlitch.jr:—
Iichele,Michlitch J��
19911 20th Ave. NW."
3eattle WA,.9,8177
U51
Ol
'n L.0
uj
Ln uo-
uj
:c
OR
LU uj
LU L
Ou"
z
z
ID:
V-1-7-71M4 -7,
,
-'ll AN
TT
F-A
0
0
uj
LL
z
" pt��
FILE NO.:CU -97-5;
APIPL airmont
ICANTF
NOTICE OF HEARING
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF WASHINGTON
:,COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
1, John Bissell, first duly swom, on oath, depose and say:
That on the 18th day of June, 1997, the attached Notice of Public Hearin Was posted
9
as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Civic Center and the Library, and
where applicable on or near the subject property.
Signed
Subscribed and. sworn to before me this 6 a ay of 19
Notary Public in and for th4 *te of Waihitigt6h.
Y
Residing at
D"Umend
z t_i
01
�j �-i
LU Lul
2 ni
01
T)
0
0
LU Lul
X 0"
�_ 17- ,
LL 0
z
Uj U)
y
0
z
0
77
IsTiqz or wAsIMCITION,
co=Ty or Monomsm
T
'ARCHITE% A OE I
ARD' 9 Ic
.,AN
0
NAME OC LI H v
E t '' Cz The. undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says
Fit Ek"
PA E D T-60,
ADD $:%
--f-7710,19 IN that she is Principal Clerk of TM HERAW, a daily newspaper
;R E CE RI I printed and published in the City of -Everett, County of Snohomish ,
munaftfv f ."of as
,IT- - '� foral 1.
aPined, vAth . joini . a so and State of Washington; that said newspaper Is a newspaper of
=11CIM10 general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper
AiNa 00 � - djaWn,
cissell
9 IVCOMMd T PERIOD has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior
DOY
Y:
N E OF APP CAR Court of Snohomish County and that the notice ........................................
22 1 , 781 A7�.
',.E
IZInds Architectural Design Board Public Hearine.&
PACT DESCRIPTION: .................................................... . ..................................................... . . . ................
car4flortal Us* PQMII I.
bw a" Asslated Qvin
oars fac% This Is a
0 h Deve o Tit
- , - -*" , ........ ...... ....................................................... I ....... I
PUBLIC JOMMENT PER 0
DUE BY: 12197
PUBLIC HEARING ADB-97_80L
ATIN ......... I ................................................................
0 P COPYLof is L
a printed which, hereunto attached, was published in said
P
'Ile 1 6 newspaper proper and not in supplement foriT4 in the regular and.
P A CWk
entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely L:'L
June 19
.............. ........ .................................. .............. ...........................
......... ... ............... ...........................................................
nd said newspa i r _W_&,ribUted to is SUbSCrib ers
f said :ord.vo"
all 0
. .............. .......................... . ............
............ .............................
C, L
L Prin Pat Clerk
19th'
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ...........................
June
day . ....... 19.97 L
.......... .. . ................ .... ...................... ........
.... ...... . . . .. .... .... ... .....
Notary P blic in a Kri S a1W Washington,
U6�
C I
tr.. . . , 0
Presiding at Everett, Snoho ty.
L%
W1.
V�,
I--
z
U
0
0
uj
U-
0
z
s
NO
REMOTE STATION I.D.
START TIME
DURATIbN
#PAGES
—'COMMENT
11
12063293049
6-16-97 2:,SBPM
1-14-
F�
F-
z
0
a
LU
x
F-
LL
W
z
E
fr
LUI
0!
0;
0
a
LU
LL
0
z
Date:
June 18, 1997
To: Planning Division
From'
Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordir�ator4?4
subject ADD fQr Fairmont HornesJng--aL th Ave.
(ADB-97-xxx)
The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The
Engineering Division will reserve the right to make additional comments and
requirements on forthcoming submittals for this project. The Engineering
Division has the following comments regarding the curre it application:
The parking stalls and drive aisles are not fully di sioned. The applicant
should be aware that there is no designation for "compa " parking in the ECDC
standards. The parking area in the southwest of the site needs to -have wheel
stops provided for all stalls. The diameter needs to be ir creased by a minim of
two feet. A turnaround may need to be provided for the i Aalls on the north side
of the site.
The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits.
The application for the ADB is considered complete at this time.
0
Z �-
ui w
0,
5
0
LU "S
Ll
LL 0
z
w
F-
z
E
uj
F�
F-
z
LU
U
0
a
LU
U-
w
U
I--
0
z
Ir-4
E
El
4
oc-
o
LN2
Recommended Mitigation Measures:
1. The Applicant is required to contribute a traffic mitigation fee of $5,316.08 for the
improvement to the intersection of 76th Avenue west and State Highway 99. prior to the
z
j issuance of an occupancy permit for the proposed building.
LUI
W 21
This recommendation is based on adopted policies of the City as found in the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC), Title 15. Specifically, the following apply:
0!
Policy The City of Edmonds Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan
W LU!
LU
discusses Level Of Service in Chapter 2. Page 32, of Edmonds Transportation
Element states that "Edmonds Arterials will operate at a Level of Service (LOS) of
U) U.
LU 0
D or better."
These directly the
policies support above mentioned mitigation measures and require these
measures in order to fully mitigate the impacts created by the proposal. Should you have any
co
questions concerning the information in this memorandum, please contact me.
X Up
O�
Review by Responsible Official
IC M;
concur:
U
0
do riot concur:
L L
LLI
Comments:
f
Jeffrey S. Wilson Date
0
c
Attachments
Page 2 of 2
CUMEMMOC
OMM
0
!IF MMI III!
-7-T; '77
0
Z I—,
�_ O�
Z �_,
UJ Lu�
0-
3 �-
X V
LL 0
Z
LU U)
T
Z
E
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions
if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to a parts of your proposal, even ff you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of
Ind. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you
submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional informittion reasonably related to determining if
there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklistfor -opqjeetproposds.-
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered 'does not apply.- IN ADDITION,
complete the SUPPLFAMNTAL SBEET FOR NONPROJECr AMONS (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "prcject�" "applican4" and "property or site" should be read as
"proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
2. Name of applicant: t�=trLhAC)A,)_r Kk e:� I AJ C,
I Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
_Z 19 0 *'2— , �s Tq &V e
V_( eil— s GJA -q,5 0 3 r.
,Jar I OM
CHnTM=I-N0V43
MASMSSPEA
.......... . . _ '__7777,
0
7T
4.
5.
6.
7.
Date checklist prepared:
Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds.
Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): e0a ku t LS A e&XQVA (..c
w I ko -r-L- A— --3 P I-j C' lct5 A.)-V-rg=uc--r i At elL
(STAFF COMM
Do you have any plans for future addition$, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this
proposal? N yes, explain.
la N
(STAFF COMMEN
List any environmental information you know shout that has bein prepared, or will be prepared, directly related
to this proposal.
(STAFY COMM
Pap 3 of24
CMMTMOCAI-NOV-93
MASM%SPEA
z I--
0;
Lu Lw
0
LU
z
LLI Cn
0
z
ol
CMMTMWI.NOV43
uumwm
Up
La
0
V) a
LI) U)
LU
-J
0
LU
LL
X
z
z
LU LU
0-
0 �-J
LIJ tul
X L)
F- F-
0
z
Lu cn
L)
z
e.
Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Ind . icate source
of fill.
7
(STAFF COMMENTS)
E Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? 9 so, generally describe.
IIO-'Ste5L.G - KA.J-.-r %c- -A r-
(STA" COMMNTS)
ga About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)i
vr
(STA"COMMNTS)
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
ip e- C- 0 z, 1�- 12'L-n� QIZ J5nA4AJj/)',
JLI,,OA A.0 46 f.4T-,4-0 L�'
t-M el "3
CO tic —
(STAFF COMWNTs)
2. AM
L What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial
wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? N any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities if known.
- &' AA,Q'Q(LIV - I .. — -.; k I
CHnT.DWI-NOV-93
MA=ISPEA
(STAFF COMMNTS)
Par 5 Of24
�ffij
17" 7-
E
E
VJF
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
--fax'Q r'-cr- (S f! 4-0'--T-j5 es. r A tir
Mki Qa— —kkkL-t T,
(STAFF COMNENTS)
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any:
COM, D &dtf U)J=,.� 15tr�Lpj-aC
4"
(STAFF COMMENTS)
3. WATER
8. Surface:
U there any surface water body on or In the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and
seasonal st reams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetla nds)? 9 yes, describe type and provide names. Ir
appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
"b
(STAFF COMAIENTS)
(2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200. feet) the described waters? 9
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
�J S�5� fL,18A,54V 'R-4-Mi .
(STAFF COMMNTS)
(3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed In or removed from surface
water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be aflected. Indicate the source of fill
material.
e-
(STAFF COMVIENTS)
POP 6 Of24
CMT.DM1-NOV-"
MASIMSM
Will,the proposal require surface water, withdrawals or diversiom?- rip
Give general desc tion,
purpose, and approximate quantities 9 known.
KIQ (AJ 1-,I
z
3:
OC
<
Lu
10I
LO
(STLIMCO�]M)
U) Uj;
IIIX
(n
—0
W
(S)
Does the proposal He within a 100-year floodplain? so note location on the site plan.
o
LL <
Z
0:
UJ US;
(STA" COT�MNTSS)
Cr
0
I
Does the proposal involve-iny discharges of Iiiastelmate rials to surface -waters? If so, I deser - ibe the
LU LU�
of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.:':
0 C- �+A
z
0
z
(ST,
4MCOr
----------
b. Ground:
(1) Will ground water be withdrawnt ormill water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities N known.
0
OU L 0/2— IL.C'/'jjA'/LIAG
:3
(STA" COMWNTS)'.
P&V70f24
CHKLTJMI.NOV.93
MASMWRA
...............
z
Uji
Y)
(1) Lui
Lu M
-j I.- ;
C/) LL
..Ol
z
z
D
u
0
a
LU
LL
0
z
Ef-
lil
q
;n ij
V�
.4. Plants
a. C hak or eircle.types, of vegetation.,found on the site:
z
--V66
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other.
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
uj�
shrubs
UJ
_j Ot
gram
L) c3i
LO
Cn X
LU
V) U.
crop or grain
7U o
wetsoilplants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other-.
water plants: water My, eelgrass, milfbil, othe
U)
other types of vegetation:
Z I--
(STAff COMWNTS)
0
LU LUL
0
LU LU
.1
x Ly
01
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?,
rO ft-- AI—E IQ C6 Q
P, A cx;� ei!�-r a-.j, C. —('10 Q
z
(ST"FCOMMNM
0
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
(STA" COMMNM
CHKLTMMI-NOV-93 FSP,9 Of24
UA=%"A
Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the
site, N any:
V P: !� wg' &&X, I :awgr- tj 4 ZA 146
z
g e V T:krA A.) a4f )j 6.
—c-'r,
cc M!
-J U 0;
V)
(STAFF COMNMNTS)
U) LU;
(n U.
0
LU
5. Animals
:31
<
Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on ornear the site or are known to be on
gc'
or near the site: M0,3ge rm��IvZN
U!,
1: �,
. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other.
z 1--�
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other-
z
Uj LU;
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
M
0
(STAFF COMNMNTS)
LU uA
3:
LL 01
ZI
W Lft;
b.'.: List inty threatened or endangered species known to Won ot"neartie- site.
Mot,
orc.-Th
0
z
(STAFF COMMNTS)
C. Is the site part of a migration route? 9 so, explain.
n
(STA"COMMNM
4 �-'r
PSV Ao Of24
CMTjX)OI-NOV-"
MAMRWRA
J
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be,used to meet the completed
projeces energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for beating, manufacturing, etc.
Lk�C�r/2-t C-
0
(ST"F COMMNTS)
Mould your project affect I- the potential, use of. solar energy by adjacent Oroperties? 9, so, 'generally
describe.
LL
0
z
z
LLJ
0
a
LU
U-
0
z
i, �N
(2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -terra or
a long-term basis (for example: traffic, constraction, operation, her)? Cate what h n noi
ot Indi on se
would come from the site.
A C-0 A)
ki
F- L&Ji
cc Mi
LU f v
-J O�
LUj
Cn
UJ
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(n U.
—0
UJ
C2 -J
U. <
(3) Proposed easures to reduce or control noise impacts,, if any:
Ada �-�C- rga2uz t,\JG NO)
z
LIS Lui
0
(STAFF COMUNTS)
UA U1
Land and Shoreline Use
z
LU W;
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
0
ia-& PsAy- C-k PJQ
z
(STAFF COMMNTS)
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? 9 so, describe.
(STAFF COMMNTS)
NP 13 of24
CMTMWI-MV-"
MAOMWEA
R.
v'.
I
z
z
LU
M
u Ln
0 1
a Ei
LU Lu
ID
z
ui cn
0
z
Ell
m
3
CHKLTM=-NOV43
MASTERWRA
Par 16 of24
CHUTMWI-NOV-0
MASMWEA
(STAFF COM3ffNTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
f"j
-5: PI(J6
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Light and Glare
A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
aAfA"A—,Z, C6r Li
-Ix"4
z I--;
�- 0:
z �_;
LLI Uk
5 mi
0
0 ;7-
0 1
UJ Lul
0
z
La Cn
0
z
Pap 19 d24
CHKLT.DOL'\I-NOV-93
MAMRWU
(1) LL
w ol
LL <i
M;
C),
LL?
Z
�- 0
z
LU Lur
u
0
LU
LU
t7
0
z
3
r,-A
z
<
LUI
cc
<
rn
a) UJ
LU
-J
En L4.1
01
W 5'
X
z
z
LU LU:
0
0
LL)
L Li
0
z
N
IV]
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? N known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur.
Ito -ri-=' rzot'-r)
9. Proposed measures to reduce or control. transportation impacts, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for* example: fire protection, police
protection, health care, schools, other)? N so, generally describe.
C� UCI�(-: &(Q 1AA,14Aa
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b.
CHnTMWI-V0V-0-
MASM%M
Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
U) LL
w
LL.
W M
z
�; 0
uj LU
LU Lu
c
uj
0
z
C,
U.
DTICE: IF THE DOCL
m
iF
11i
m
CL
i,
- ------ ---
OK
5WI 14, SEC 29. T. 27N. . R 4E. W. M.
----------
0-
A �R I N G
LU
2 2 6 T H 3 T SW
..................... ...............
RECEIVED
MAR 1 1 1997
PERMIT COUNTEP
"HIM
U) LL
LLJ 0
:3
LL.
LLi
z
z
uj LU
0
a
UJ LU
U- c
uj Cf,
0
z
IT,
Date: May 8, 1997 4
UJ
To:. Planning Division
Ln tOL
F.rom:, Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator
subject: CU--for Fairmont Homes, Inc. at 22617 - 76th Ave. W.
(CU-97-005)
z 1--!
LU W�
The traffic analysis has again been reviewed by the Engineering Division.
The Engineering Division will reserve the right to make additional comments and
0 nj
requirements on forthcoming submittals for this project. The Engineering
OE
Division still disagrees with the traffic analysis as submitted. I have a call placed
LU W
x
to Burt Reanier and have put a hold on the project review until I receive his
0
response. I am still interested in how adequately the parking is for the Everett
21
location and would like a response from Planning as to whether the proposed 37
LU (ni
U !E'i
stalls will be adequate.
R,
z I
Before SEPA is issued, it will be necessary for the applicant to submit a
proposal for traffic mitigation. We will then need to agree, on the appropriateness
of the proposal.
of r .1, I'll I I-.
P
Z
0
a
U
Z
E.
Fk"
BURTON REANIERPE,LS
P.O. Box, 2187, Everet� WA. 9182031,
206 330 8208
4iil 21,
RECRIVEL)
APR e 1997
W John Bissell
P'RM'T COUNTER
Departm6nt of Plannin g
Edmonds, WA
RE: Edmonds Can Center
Submitted herewith is the revised Landscape Plan per the information given to Bob Canaan.
I have changed the plantings under the tree beds to groundcover, added plant sizes
and spacings, an&a
smpling of acceptable groundcover plants.
Note 9 has been added to clarify the groundcover plantings.
Thank you for your guidance and assistance in this matter.
XBurto';;�.
An�',M, LS
LA.
0
T
Z
D
U
0
a
LU
U-
0
z
0
A t IP47-e5—
A 22 GWI 07 6
een ple*-befflei
GGPA
A
8
6 97 88
see Geast
4
Cu -97-16
H.E. Staff Report.
�A
5
P-97-65
SEPA
A
6
Setback Interp,
Create interp based on ECDC and revok 'old Inte
6 rp
St6Ve 1 j2j9j6'
6
A
CU-97-15
ADB meeting
A
7,
Building Permits
Toshis
A
9
ADB meeting status
Shorline Exemption/ ADB hearing
B
1
Design Guldlines
B
2
Ste Dvlp Hand out
Finish Commercial Section (See TO DO
eg- �1�466
C
I
P-96-118
Meeting with county/funds issue
C
2
Eliminate Pending files See TO DO file
'PJ20/96
j
ij
Mike Linn
Page'l
LU
LU;
LL
0
LA. <
:D;
z
z
0
LU LU
z
LU (j)
u
0
z
. . . . . . . . .
. . ... ...
. A EDmoNDs CARE ILITY: TRAFFIC REPORT - GF-NF-Rk-,,)
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION.
The proposed Project is to construct an 84-Bed Assisted Ed6rly Care Living facility on X.XX
'on
Acres of land the East side of 76th Ave West. Additionally, a separate 20-bed Alzhemier
Z
Care facility will be constructed on the site.
Please refer to the Vicinity Map and Site Plan submitted herewith.
cc
The project will include parking, reception area, management offices, on -site kitchen and laundry,
-J 01
U
service facilities, dining areas, as well as social and recreation features.
V)
fn Wi
UJ
On -site parking for 37 vehicles is provided in the project plan.
En U.
LU 0
The proposed uses and areas are:
Total Area 78,274.sf
LL
Cn
Area for Buildings 16,843 s,f
C3
Area for Parking 22,150 sf
Z
Area in Landscaping and Pathways & 39,281 sf
Open Space
UJ LW
Vehicular accesswdil be provided in the Western comer of the site. A pathway for resident recreation is
U1 LU
provided along a portion of the West, South, and East perimeters of the site.
U-
Z
Lu (n,
STATEMENT OF F
2. ONDITIONS.
XSTWG C
The site is presently vacant land.
Z
With regard to traffic, the site is located near the 76ffi Ame'W connection to SR 99, westerly of
the existing K-Mart store.
3. IDENTIFICATION OF PLANNED INTERSECTION OR RIGHI�OF-WAY
IMPROVEMENTS.
The roadway network serving the project is shown on Exhibit A
0
The project traffic will utilize the following intersections along 76th Ave W , SR'99, 205th St
NEand SR 5:
76th Ave W/ SR 99 Stop Only
76th Ave W 205th St NE Fully Signalized
0
205th St NE SR 99 Grade Separation
205th St NE/ SR 5 Full Interchange
SR 99 228th St SW Signalized
SR 99 220th St SW Signalized
0
. .....
0,
4. PROJECT TRIP RATION FOR DAILY, AND PEAK PERIODS,
The Applicant owns and operates a smaller facility in Everett, Wa, (Katherine Court - Lowell).
Thi service format
for the proposed Kirkland facility will be similar to Lowell and the new
facility is expected to result in
traffic patterns similar to Lowell.
The Lowell facility is presently at capacity with 58 residents. We have examined the Lowell
facility traffic and determined that the majority of the traffic derives from the staff and patient
<
service activities.
The facility
weekday traffic over a two- day period was counted and the
Lui
results were were averaged, and are tabulated as follows:
UJ
KATBERINE COURT - LOWELL
_J 01
V) 0;
UJ;
AVERAGE OF 24-HOUR, WEEKDAY (2 DYS -APR 10, 11, 1996)
en
TIME IN
OUT
TOTAL
COMMENT
CO LL
—0
W
6:00 am 14
0
14
All staff - AM Peak Traffic
:3
7:00 2
7
9
Staff, Repairs, Food Delivery
U. <
8:00, 0
6
6
Staff, Delivery, Patient Transport
9:00, 3,
41
.7
Bus. Visitors, Medical P/U, Repairs
Z
10:00 5
3
8
Staff, P. Transport Delivery
UJ LU
3
2
-5
Business Visitor, Repairs
Cal
12:00 p in 11,
5
Staff, Visitor, Repairs
C3
2
3
'Staff
LU Lul
2:00 7
0,
7
Rgpairs, Staff, Patient Transport
LL
3:00 3
6
9
Staff, Medical D/0, Visitor
4:00 0
1
1
Repair
0
z
5:00 2
2
4
Staff, Patient Transport
6:00 0
2
2
Visitor
7:00 2
1
Staff, Visitor
8:00 0
2
2
Visitor
9:00 2
2
Medical D/O
10:00 4
2
6
11:00 0
4
4
Staff
0
12:00 am 0
0
0
1:00 0
0
0
2:00 0
0
0
3:00 0
0
0
4:00 0
'0
0
5:00 2
0
2
Staff
TOTALS 51
51
102
Based on the abm the weekdav ADT is detertnined to be 1 6� e V�s�tqafid,from the
�vehiel hi
facift.
q,
W
Z
W LU;
0
L LU
Z
LLJ 0)
U!E
Z
H
0
NOTE: See Addendum
Peak Hour Tmfflc occurs at 6:00 am - 14 trips. ------- ----------- ----------- — -
r
Notes: Lowell Vehicle Counts
1. Patient transport, medical pickup and dro�off, and deliveries do not.
utilize parking spaces.
2. Staff notations include staff errands where staff members leave and
the facility.
return to
April 23, 1997 Addendum:
The Lowell facility has been in operation two years this month. Many lessons have been learned during
that period, The facility was heavily overstaffed for most of that time, Beginning in February this year, a
Staff Consultant has examined the Lowell facility operations and changes have been made in the staffing
levels. The Staff level is now reduced 40% from the time the above traffic counts were made.
The majority of the Lowell facility traffic were staff trips and this can be expected for the new Edmonds
faciflity. We are projecting staff population based on the reduced Lowell facility staff levels.
Based on the Lowell facility reduced staff� we have developed a projected staffing plan for the Edmonds
Care Center facility and projected the patient related service activities for the planned patient population
The following two tables contain the projected staff levels and the shift times they will be on site, and
then the estimated trips �'hat will be generated from the staff and patient related activities
EDMONDS CARE FACILITY CLASSIFICATION OF TRIP GENERATION SOURCES
PatientPopulation: 104
Staff Pp�ulation Dging Shift Times
CategM No. Persons 7a-3� .'3p 1 ly I In - 7a
Administration 1
Reg. Nurse 2 2
Lic. Nurse 3
Certified Nurse 15 7 7
Assistant (CNA)
Activity Counselor 2 2
dl�
%
Totals 28 19 8
PATIENT - RELATED ACTIVITIES:
Staff Errands* 3 2
Patient Visitors 5V. of POP. 5
(Including Professional)
Z
<
Patient Transport* 5% 5
Lui
Business Deliveries* 1, Vehicles I
x 2i
Uj
Business Visitors I Vehicles I
_j
LU;
Other I Vehicles I
LU
_j
Cn U.
(8 Day -Shift staff will utilized Ride -Share or Public Transportation)
—0
Ui
Parkinp, Stalls Utilized 20 37 Provided) < ------------------- — -----
_j
Indicates No Parking Stall Useage
LL
X Lill
TRIP GENERATION by STAFF POPULAnON AND SHTT- EDMONDS FACILITY
Z
Uj uj�
2 �'
Combined Inbound & Outbound Trins Du
winaShift Times
W
C—ateplory No. Vehicles 7a - 3D 3p - 1112 1 Ip 7a
0
LWU LUI
irz-
Administration 1 2
LL 0!
Z
Reg. Nurse 2 4
CL; Cal
Lie. Nurse 4 2
0
Z
Certified Nurse 15 14 2
Assistant (CNA)
Activity Counselor 2 4
Kitchen 3 6
Dining Room (CNA)
T
Laundry
Shower Aids (CNA)
0
Bldg Maintenance & 1 2
Grounds Maintenance
Totals, Staff 38 1.6 2
In addition, the following trips are generated by support activities and,visitors:
Staff Errands 6 A
Patient Visitors 5% of Pop. 10
(Including Professional)
0
Patient I ranspd@ 10"
5%
Business Deliveries I Vehicles.. 2
Business Visitors 'Vehicles'. 2
Other :1 Vehi I
c es 2
Total Trips - All Sourc�es . ,70 20 2
Z
Gra,ngd Number of All Vehicle EstimatprI A . nT
s 9�
L4 q
L) 0;
The traffic examination of the1owell facility established that the peak traffic dt,6:00
LUj
LU
Projecting trips for the higher ulati' theKirkland facility re I I � occurs an�
POP on, su, ts in the' following projected
_J
V) U_
6:00 am peak traffic:
01
U. M7
AMNA 6 -7am M.. Vehicle ---------
lwi
3:
Z I_;
We draw the f�li owing conclus, ions for Edmonds from the Lowell datd-
UJ Lw
Is M;
C3�
1. The'AM peak -hour vol oc th
un curs m e 6:00 hour. Which is ahead of the localpeak hourtime
of 7:30 am-,
C3
The PM peak -hour traff-lo,'were it to, control, occurs at 3:00 pra hour which is 2 hours ahead
i
1
of the "g home" local 5:
0148 00 pm peak hour traffic.
�L- 01
Z
Ui (n
want to emphasize that the Edmonds Care Center staff is projected at a lower level than the Lowell.."
0
facility. The Lowell data is portrayed only to show the methodology in that there is no catego ry in the
Z
ITE Trip Generation Idanual.
We have examined the parking situation at the Lowell,', and other facili i Thi has resulted in
-s a.
patient bed to parking space relationship of I space per 3. patient bids.
This yields a projected parking space need of 164 /3 34 parking spaces.
37 spaces are provided,
0
U-
0
uj U)
u
z
E
LA
A EDMONDS CARE OMM: TRAFFIC REPORT - GENEK
'I. ,PROJECT DESCRIPTION.
Theproposed project is to construct an 84-Ded Assisted Ederly Care Living facility on Xxx
of land on the East side of 76th Ave West. Additionally, a'separate 20-bed Alzhemier
Z
'Acres
Care facility will be constructed on the site.
U
Please refer to the Vicinity Map and Site Plan submitted herewith.
Ui
The project will include parking, reception area, management offices, on -site kitchen and laundry
q
service facilities, dining areas, as well as social and recreation features.
Lo UJf
UJ X.
On -site parking for 37 vehicles is provided in the project plan.
-J I--
(n LI.
The proposed uses and areas are:
LU 01
Total Area 78,274, sf
Area for Buildings 16,443 sf
W*
Area for Parking -22,150 sf
Z
Area in Landscaping and Pathways & 30,281 sf.
Open Space
Ui Ui
0:
Vehicular access will be provided in the Western comer of the site. A pathway for resident recreation is
LU
provided along a portion of the West, South, and East perimeters of the site.
LJ- 0
0
LU Uy
2. STATEMENT OF EMSTING CONDMONS.
The site is presently vacantland.
Z
Wiffi regard to traffic, the site ocated new 76th Ave W connection to SR 99, westerly of
is I ffieL
the existing K-Mart store..
3. IDENTIFICATTON OF PLANNED IISITERSECTION OR RIGHT-OF-WAY
RvIPROVEMENTS.
The roadway network serving the project is shown on Exhibit A
The project traffic will utilize the following intersections along 76th Ave W, SR 99, 205th St
NEand SR 5:
76th Ave W/ SR 99 stop Only
76th Ave W/ 205th St NE Fully Signalized
0
205th St NE / SR 99 Grade Separation
205th St NE/ SR 5 Full Interchange
SR 99 228th St SW Signalized
SR 99 220ffi St SW Signalized
0
The Applicant owns and operates a smaller facility in Everett, Wa, (Katherine Court - Lowell).
The service format for the proposed Kirkland facility will be similar to Lowell and the new
facility is expected to result in
traffic patterns similar to Lowell.
The Lowell facility is presently at capacity with 58 residents. We have examined the Lowell.
z
facility traffic and determined that the majority of the traffic derives from the staff and patient
service activities. The
facility
weekday traffic over a two- day period was counted and the
results were were averaged, and are tabulated as follows:
cc 2i
L4 U�
KATRERINE Caw
- LOWELL
U)
AVERAGE OF 24-HOUR, WEEKDAY (2 DYS - APR 10, Ill 1996)
fn Uji
WMI
J
TIME
IN
OUT
TOTAL
0
6:00 am
14
0
14 Ali staff - AM Peak Tr�affle
7,:00
71
9 -Staff, Repairs, Food Delivery
=0
U_
Cn
9 :00'
0
6
S tiff, Delivery, Patient Transport
9:00
3
4
'7 Bus. Visitors, Medical P[U, Repairs
Z �-t
O�
10:00
5.
:3
8 Staff, P. Transport, Delivery
Z
LU Uj�
11:00
3
2
5 Business Visitor, Repairs
FJ (ni
12:00pm
1
5
6' Staff, Visitor, Repairs
.00
1
31, Staff
LU
2:10or
7.
.21
0
7, Repairs, Staff, Patient Transport
U. 0
ZI
3:00,�
3
6
Staff, Medical D/0, Visitor
4:00
0
1
1 Repair
Iz
5:00
2
2
A SulffPatient Transport
6:00
0,
2
2 Visitor
7:00
2
1
3 Staff, Visitor
8:00
0
2
2 Visitor
9:00
2
2
4 Staff, Medical DIO
10:00
4
2
6 Staff
11:00
0
4
4 Staff
12:00 am
0
0
'01
1:00
0
0
2:00
0 .0
0
3:00
0
0
0
4:00
0
0
5:00
2
0
2'_� Staff
TOTALS
51
51
102
Based on the above, the wetkda
yADTisdetermin6diobelO2%iehi�liid�Ls,,i6a�d�rom.�iet6�Wilil..
0
i�777777' '"r,
Z
LEI
cc
LJ rl"
-j - ,
(-) 0:
U)
U) LU;
LU
..j
co LLI
01
LU - i
141
E
utnize PWKM spaces.
2. Staff notations include staff errands where staff members leave and
return to the facility.
April 23,1997 Addendum:
Th
e Lowell facility has been in operation two years this month. 1.&ny lessons have been learned during
that period. The facility was heavily overstaffed for most of that time. Beginning in February this year, a
Staff Consultant has examined the Lowell facility operations and changes have been made in the staffmg
levels. The Staff level is now reduced 40% from the time the above traffic counts were made.
0
Totals 28
19 8
PATIENT - RELATED ACTI=S:
Staff Errands*
3 2
Patient Visitors 5% of, Pop.
5
(Fncluding Professional)
Z
Patient Transport* 5%
5
Wi
cc
Business Deliveries* I Vehicles
I
LU rA.
Business Visitors I Vehicles
I
0;
V) W
Other I Vehicles
I
CD
LU X
-j
(8 Day -Shift staff will utilized Ride -Share or Public Transportati6n)
U) U.
—0
Rgdd% Stalls Utilized
20 37 Provided) <—
:31
Indicates No Parking Stall Useage
U.
C11
y STAFF
TRIP GENERATION b OPULATION AND SHIFT- EDMONDS FACILITY
Z
LU W,
Combined Inbound & Outbound
TriM Durin�Shift Times
U L
Categ= No. Vehicles
7a - 3p 3p - I IR Ilp-7a
C3
U4 t-Ul
Administration 1
2,
Z�
Z!
Reg. Nurse 2
4
LU W�
U YC
Lic. Nurse 3
4 2
0
Z
Certified Nurse 15
14 2
Assistant (CNA)
Activity Counselor 2
4
Kitchen 3
6
DinffigRoom
Laundry 1
2
Shower Aids (CNA)
Bldg Maintenance & 1
2
Grounds Maintenance
Totals, Staff
38 16 2
In addition, the following trips are generated by support activities and vis itors.
Staff Errands
4
Patient Visitors 5% of Pop.
10
(Including Professional)
................
0
�7
Gra nd Number of All Vehicle Trips 92 EstimatedADT-'< -------
X 21
U
L) 0!
(n 01
, I I Re traffic examination of the Lowell facility established that the peak traffic occurs at 6:00 am.
(n
UJ :r:
Projecting trips for the higher population, theKirkland facility results in the following projected
(n IL
6:00 am peak traffic:
U.
(n
AMPeak 6 -7am 19 Vehicle Trips < -------- — - — -----
LIP,
Z
We draw the following conclusions for Edmonds from the Lowell data:,
LU LU
1. The AM peak -hour volume occurs in the 6:00 hour which is ahead Of the'localpeak hour, time
of 7:30 am.
OL
2. The PM peak -hour traffic, were it to control, occurs at 3:00 pin hour which is 2 hou rs ahead
LU Uj
of the "going home" local 5:00 pm peak hour traffic.
Z
LU C&
L)
I want to emphasize that the Edmonds Care Center staff is projected at a lower level than the Lowell,
facility. The Lowell data is portrayed only to show the methodology in tha t there is no cat egory in the
Z
NE Trip Generation Manual.
PARKNG
We have examined the parking situation at the Lowell, and other facilities., Jhis has res I ulted in a:
7
patient bed to parking space relationship of I space pe . r 3 Patient beds.'
This yields a projected parking space need of 104 3 34 parking �pac es.
37 spaces are provided.
0
Z
X
LU;
0,
U)
W
(n LL
0
LU
U_
U)
z
�_ 0.
Z �-
LU UJ
0-1 a i--
U1 6
U.
.. z!
LU (Jy
z
N ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
E3 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT
WCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Q HOME OCCUPATION
0 FORMAL SUBDIVISION
0 SHORT SUBDIVISION
E3 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
13 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
13 OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT
STREET VACATION
El REZONE
L3 SHORELINE PERMIT
E3 VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE
EXCEPTION
Q OTHER
clk _C(4-2c,
FILE #_C-tJL-Ci_1-6 —ZONE RN 1--f-
DATE REC'DBY 9V
FEE . -RECEIPT# 'tr
HEARING DATE
C91"HE 0 STAFF L3 PB Qd"ADB 0 CC
ACTION TAKEN:
APPEAL#
IZAIISEAQtZT Womie,_e, Wa - Phone 2AP& 354, Z_+S.V
zRal- juelli, O.V;3t W. -
Property Address or Location 0 1 -76-rt+ fJ -
PropertyOwner *74-114 —Phone- qoVo
Address
Agent —Phone 2a& 02-08
Address. _41�-31_ 12L-Acv_ i5wecsr L-a-trw, 6YeA_,eT-r.LdP_%_ 1712oa
Twp. 2.:? Rng. 4-
Tax Acc #_ �'q "L:7 0 4 5 e> Sec.
Legal Description ?V-
1- 1% C- c- 15 1 TV cA
Details of Projector Proposed Use-- C--v&J$T"c:r
0 C—A" 04_-APrCf_ A.J61W)�
The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the
application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all
damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon
false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents or
, J_ employees.
The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to
enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/
a
a