23207 HIGHWAY 99 (3).PDF11111111111111
14053
23207 HWY 99
ell
ADDRESS: <7:5-S
TAX ACCOUNTfPARCEL NUMBER:
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS: DETERMINATION: 0 Conditional Waiver E] Study Required 0 Waiver
DISCRETIONARY PEP -MIT ff'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: —
PERMITS (OTHER):
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED. Y I LY z �w
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:
SEWER LID FEE $: LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: /7/9-5
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: 7. 7,?,Y,,5r -7
U116
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
LATEMP\DS'Ps\Fbmis\Street File Checklist.doc
z
0
LT.
z
z
DATE: PLAN CHK#: D 7-
NAME.OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: pa pa
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ADB FILE #: OR DATE WAIVED: + (.0
PLANS MATCH APPROVED PLAN: —
SUBDIVISION:
LOT AGGREGATION REQUIRED?:
REDUCED SITE PLAN (8.5X11) PROVIDED FOR STREET FILE?
OTHER:
Plan Review By: C21 1101 C,,C CtA'6LI
L,,o -T F--k
r,
I
1:\Iibrary\^plandat—NewCoi-nin.doc
UE
rz
0
T�
-!et_ —
PLANNING DATA -
New Commercial / Mulffamily Proiects
SITE ADDRESS: itWY 619 —ZONING: C/e7
USE(S) PROPOSED: C/
ALLOWED?:
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE- DETERMINATI ONISSUED (Y/N)
CUP.Fil�:' To Allow' What Uses?:
ADB FILE#:
PARKING:
Use:
X
Use:
X
Use:
X
Use:
X
Total Required:
SETBACKS:
No. Spaces Required:
(floor area, # employees, etc.) =
No. Spaces Required:
(floor area, employees, etc.) =
No. Spaces Required:
(floor area, # employees, etc.) =
No. Spaces Required:
(floor area, # employees, etc.) =
Actual Provided:
I
Required Setbacks:
Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear:
Actual Setbacks:
Front: Left Side: Right S ide: Rear:
Street map checked for additional setback req6ired? (Yes/No)
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA:
Maximum Allowed: Actual:
BUILDING HEIGHT:
Maximum Allowed: Actual Height:
Modulation Allowed?: Modulation Height:
Datum Point: Datum Elevation:
Elevator Penthouse > 3 feet over height limit? If so,VAR#
LANDSCAPING:
Matches ADB approved:
Bid Provided? Bond Amount (100% bid):
CRITICAL AREAS #:
SEPA DETERMINATION:
SHORELINE REQUIRED?:
Continued ...
1:\Iibrary\^plandat—NewCoinm.doc
CITY OF EDMONDS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART*
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
FOR INSPECTION CA-LL
775-2525 Ext. 220
11
W 6
Permit
Issue Date ;g'/
PEP -MIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
YIA BALLINGER
1. Address of Construction H h (�ICA Lj# Cl LIFT STATION
2. Property Legal,.De—s-c"ription. (include all �4asements)
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family No. of Units
Commercial
4. Owner and/ox- Builder (��- -4 M -W
11�_ �IZ6�1_1_rzlalv ?T_
5. Contractor & License 'No. IgIV
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No X, Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required.,", 1 Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation)
sement required -
7. Cross other private property: Yes No
attach legal description and county easement r.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year.
C. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (61')
side sewer line.
d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30")
to any structure. 0
e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade, of 2% (1.15
and maximum grade of 100% (450).
. f. No turn in side s8wer greater than 45 0 (1/8,ben,d) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and Wye with removable cap.
g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer 'line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k.. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
A
,�v j 1: 1 V.
DATE: �_z
�A
I'certify that I have read
and shall comply With the above
PERMIT FEE:
DISAPPROVED BY:
Date:
By:
Date:
CONNECTION,;FEE:
APPROVED By: (7
Date:
PERMIT
MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
CITY'OF EDMONDS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTIOT
FOR INSPECTION CALL .10 Permit
Ij 0
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
775-2525 Ext. 220 Issue
Date
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
1. Address tA)a L/ / I?
�VIA BALLINGER
STATIQN r 4�
2. Property Legal Description (include alf easem6nts)
ed
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family Y No. of Units
-7-
Commercial
4. owner and/or Builder
5. Contractor & License No. -2 2-"3
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required - Call Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation).
E-1 7. Cross other private property: Yes No Easement required -
attach legal description and -county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
>4 their property. A licensed side sewer cOactor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public' righ ay.
b. The side sewer contractor assum onsibility for each
E-4 installation for one year.
rA
�4 C. Commercial establishment requires a mifnilu a six inch (6")
P4
side sewer line.
0 d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than Qlrty inches (30")
to any structure.
0
e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade, of 2% (1.15
0 and maximum grade of 100% (450). 0
EH f. No turn in side s8wer greater than-45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and Wye with removable cap.
g. No down spouts, footiftg.drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30 * "-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-waymust be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k. Side sewer -must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City. r"
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
DATE:
I certify'that I have read
and shall comply With the above
PERMIT FEE:
DISAPPROVED BY:
Date:
By:
Date:
CONNECTION
FEE:
APPROVED BY:
Rate_.-,c,,
0
PERMIT MUST
BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
CITY OF EDMONDS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART* FOR INSPECTION CALL Permit
0 0
SIDE SEWER PERMIT 775-2525 Ext. 220 Issue Date
PEP -MIT MUST BE POSTED ON JORSITE
1. Address of Construction Hicihtooq Ycl I YIA BALLINGER
11 1 1 LIVT STATION
2. Property Legal Description (include all easements)
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family X No. of Units 3 9'
Commercial
4. Owner and/or Builder <:5e-4, M
5. Contractor & License No. _Z7T7s C,—,/
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No Yes f Yes Right-of-
ni� 1%
way Construction Permit Require . d - Call Dial r4p-5344) before,
excavation).
7. Cros-s other private property: Yes No "-- Easement r uired -
attach legal description and county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public right-of-way.
. b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year.
c. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
side sewer line.
d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30")
to any structure. 0
e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade. of 2% (1.15
and maximum grade of 100% (450). .' 0
f. No turn in side s8wer greater than 45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and wye with removable cap.-
g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h.- Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30'1-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer 'line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k... Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
DATE:
I certify that I have read
and shall comply With the above:
PERMIT FEE: ()(�) DISAPPROVED BY: Date:
charqe da7MR419,0-0-00
OW I Bv: Date:
CONNECTION FEE:
P4 APPROVED By:
Date:,.,,
PER.KjT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SIT�W(Zj><_
CITY OF EDMONDS
FOR INSPECTION CALL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR*T 0 Permit
775-2525 Ext. 220
SIDE SEWER PERMIT Issue Date 5� i�
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE r
77mwAmw 77 W NwAwmk� YIA BALLINGER
1. Address of rr)nsAtruc`7Tio7n7wA � �5 �Q, I r0A1A')r4 0 6,� q I I IrT'LIIPA-ra�-
2. Property Legal Description (include all. leasemefits)
3. Single Family Residence MPX16lli�ly No. of Units
Commercial
4. Owner and/or Builder
5. Contractor & License No.
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required Call Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation).
E-4 7. Cross other private property: Yes No Easement required. -
attach -legal description and county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
>4 their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
M -
construct side sewers in the public' right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year.
C. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
A4
2: side sewer line.
0 d. Side sewers may*not be installed closet than thirty inches ('30")
to any structure.
0
M e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade, of 2% (1.15
0 and maximum grade of 100% (450). 0
f. No turn in side sswer greater than 45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and wye with removable cap.
g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
DATE,:
I certify that I have read
and shall comply with the above
PERMIT FEE: DISAPPROVED BY: Date:
r, By -Da e:
CONNECTION FEE: APPROVED By: e:
P4 Xt 9 - 19 83
0 22W
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB
CITY OF EDMONDS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART 0 T FOR INSPECTION CALL * Permit IV 10, 60
SIDE SEWER PERMIT 775-2525 Ext. 220 Issue Date WIP'l.
J* PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE * q
30r,��AEWAEWAEWAEWA�� A�AWA&
IIA IALLINGER
1. Address of Construction 9 M 1F:T STA ION
2. Property Legal Description (include all easements)
6140 ch ed
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family y No. of Units :3_-*�
Commercial
I &I WE- 12-
4. Owner and/or Builder
5. Contractor & License No. 0/ &&4 -IA111 2-_7S-
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No -' Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required - Call Dial 342-5344) before
excavation).
7. Cro-ss other private property: Yes No Easem&M%guired -
attach legal description and county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWT.NG AND SIGN:
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year..
C. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
side sewer line.
d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30")
to any structure. 0
e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade of 2% (l..15
and maximum grade of 100% (450). 0
f. No turn in side s8wer greater than 45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and wye with removable cap.
g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals -of 1001 along sewer 'line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be*restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k.. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2y"working
days notice required.
DATE: A 64^� M/9113 �1_0
I certify *that I have read
and shall comply with the above
PERMIT FEE: — &,3 0. a o DISAPPROVED BY: Date:
4, LA;1 k (1 ha k C, 0 0� C _5�0_�7
CONNECTION FEE: By: Date:
94 APPROVED By: Date:,-,
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB S I TE
Building "E"
USE
CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE CG
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB
—DRESS
P"MIT
NUMBER
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSIN!z55) 23207 Highway 99
G & M Investment LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECKI SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO.
MAILING ADDRESS S,
z
3: 2367 Eastlake E.
0
CITY
TELEPHONE NUMBER
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
Seattle
324-8780
EXISTING 1") REQUIRED DEDICATION
NAME
Tsao/Kussman & Assoc.
P.S.
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED
ADDRESS
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED I-)
2367 Eastlake E.
0
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
cc
< CITY
TELEPHONE NU MBER
SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
Seattle
324-8780
R E"
x2lowlv 6ry el
NAME
Same as owner
/
a: ADDRESS
-2 0 /6 j
0
METER SIZE
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
FIXTURE UNITS
cr CITY
TELEPHONE NUMBER
z
0
REMARKS
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
CITY LICENSE NUMBER
SIGN AREA
REVIEW
ADB NO.
ALLOWED I PROPOSED
COMPENV.
LETE I EXEMPT
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
(show below or attach four copies)
on plans
[i] N EW
I RESIDENTIAL
PLUMBING
1:1 ADO/ALTER
El
NON-RESIDENTIAL
MECHANICAL
REPAIR
RETAINING WALL
SIGN
DEMOLISH
EXCAVATE
OR FILL
FENCE
E] I— x _FT)
PRE -MOVE INSP.1
COMPLIANCE INSP.
swim
POOL
ElSIDE SEWER
WATER LINE
El
0
NUMBER OF STORIES
3
1UNITS
NUMBEROF
DWELLING
32
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOTPLAN)
New Apartment Building
VARIANCE OR CU LANNING REVIEW BY DATE
st!
YARDS 94.) r
FRONT SIDE kp%� REAR I LOT COVERAGE
BY I TYPE OF CON
HEIGHT
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
REQUIRED GROUP LOAD
I � YES I NO I I I I
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADINGIFILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
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 indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and aaents from any and all claims for damaces of
VALUATION
Cr
(5
Z
z
z
EL
0
z
D
ca
DATE
MEMO TO: Building Division
Planning Department
FROM: Engineering Division
Flu bl i c Wo rk s De pa r twe n t
1(Iyq5rteo
SUBJECT: 2 5z 1 A 03215(13)_ 2-3:ZZ3 (C-) 2 -32 2 q (D)
-2-:�2_07 (E)) 2-32 31 &FFic-c) qCJ
After review of the subject Building Permit application, vie have the following
comments :
Conn ec t i o n to C i ty wa t e r sys tem re(ILI i red
2. Connection to City sanitary sewer system required.
3. Righ-t-of-way-permit required for -any work on City property.
4. Driveway slope not to exceed 147,
5. Backwater valve requi . red i 'I downstairs IflUmbing is bolow 'elevation of
upstream manho e.
6. Wat.er and seaer I i nes to —be -separated by 10 -foot, mi n irnum.
7. Builder/Ownerjf�ponsible for contaiEiM__gjl . �IIMO �a r urloff and era�ii n
— on site and may not filipact—neiqhboring prop
6. 414cal!�2Lcocrtoo P_ M OVED PEV6-:�0C_'"E_Nr_ PZ.A/V,
'P,R�6/82
E
111111 11
1111111 M. MON. MW I
X10WORWOU1, feel
2F
�70:Z gw, qq .5,-
(address) / (date)
Street Right -of -Way Existing.
Z
I -
Access Easements Existing N IEQD
1-4
pe
Utility EaseTent Existing , - I
W
Lot Per Subdivision Plat As s e s sor 14ap N E
W
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy
Z
Underground Wiring Reqd. ViF_5
0
Check Accuracy of Legal Description
Z
Review by Y Date
Existing Water Main Size
Water Main ReTiixed
Service Line Require
Hydrant Size Existing
S:4
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire fCodeE Size_
Detector Check I-Leter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
-
Fire Departumt Conments
:3'
Wa t er Me t er Q�q Reqd.
Review by Date
Septic Tank Design Approved- AIIA Date J-- //-67_3
Septic Tank Permit Reqd. Permit No.
Sanitary Se%,nr Availability Proj.
Drawing No. L.1.1>. to —File No.
Side Sewer Availabilit7y Vep- Aee [>CV. t?L- A
I .
�1,
Sanitary SeweT, �Onnection Fee Reqd. -'tZ-5-0
Review by
14
to
Open Ditch Existing Reqd.
X
Culvert Reqd. 7�)G=s-e Size
ce
Catch Basin Reqd. t ( � I L-1 Indicate on Site Plan
0
Shoulder drainage maintain collection on swale open runoff
(-4
Manhole reqd. Indicate on Site Plan
Soil Conditions 'd Ground Water Field Checked
Review b Date
y
Revised: lvlO-1977
'1%
Building I'D"
USE MIT
CITY OF ED ZONE CG OBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION --
i
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINE55) AUUHt5S 23229 Highway 99
G & M Investment LEGAL DESCRIPT—ION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. D NO.
cc
uj
MAILING ADDRESS
2367 Eastlake E.
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
Seattle 324-8780 EXISTING 10�1 REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSEDL�
NAME
Tsao/Kussman & Assoc. P.S.
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRE�
UU
STREET USE P
ADDRESS ERMIT REQUIRED 1.1
LU
z
2367 Eastlake E.
0
z
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED-
LU
"ICITY
TELEPHONE NUMBER SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
Seattle 324-8780 REMARKS
NAME
Same as owner '24-
ADDRESS
0
METER SIZE BUILDINGAUPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS
U
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
Uj
z
0
REMARKS
STATE LICENSE NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER
SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW ADS NO.
Legal Description of Property - include ail easements ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT
(show below or attach four copies) SHORELINE N
z
2
(L
cc
VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW BY DATE
on plans
L)
0
W
C)
YARDS LOT COVERAGE
LLJ
FRONT SIDE REAR
z
z
REMARKS
10
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
ADDIALTER NON-RESIDENTIAL MECHANICAL
REPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN
EXCAVATE FENCE CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGHT
El
DEMOLISH OR FILL I— x _FT) I I
PRE -MOVE INSP.1 swim SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
COMPLIANCE INSP. POOL REQUIRED GROUP LOAD
IjYES I NO
El REMARKS
SIDE SEWER WATER LINE
z
El F-1
U)
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBERO
D
co
LU
0
DWELLING
3 1UNITS 33
co
0
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
New Apartment Building VALUATION FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADINGIFILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
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 indemnify, defend and hold
'Lou
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
m
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
Cr
4
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
T
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
0
DATE: 57- 11 - f3 -5
MEI-10 I'D Building Division
Planning Department,
FROM: Engineering Divisjoil
Public IvIorks Department
Af4 5reO 41-1�7-
, 6044t-e��y
SUBJECT: 2 5 Z (A) 0 -52 15' (6) 2-37-Z-5 3 1? 2
6
2-�,2-07 (E)� Z32 (orrjc�r) gVVy cl-q
After review of the
comments: . subject Building Permit application, vie have the following
1. Connection to City water system required.
2. Connect.i.on to -City sallitary sevier system required.
3. Right-of-way permit required for any work on City property.
4 Driveway sio e [lot to exceed 147,
5. Backwater valve I�e d if downstairs plumbing is belov� elevation of
require
U 1) s TF�'iF I I —a � F) . ol
6. Wa ter and s evier nes to be s epa ra ted by 10 foot m i n
I mum.
7. Builder/Owne responsi le fO!LLCjatajni
ner
—D-q �111-1:9-111HOLiry j�unoff�and erosion
on site and may not impact nej_ghboring _Prk�tJQ5 in any I way___
A, .
-..L-IIA-- CILI
PLAt,4
BD 6/82
PUBLIC WOWS
�I;BUILDING
0
_z-3�0 dLa qq
(address)' (date)
A
p EQD
Street Rig�ht-of-Way Exist� T
Z
NZF< ?_-3 LAJ, <(J�,
Access Easenents Existing 4-TH REQP
�e
Utility Easenent Existing aeQ C-Ce- WATT-tz!jV-5-M-94 REQI�__
W
Lot Per Subdivision Plat Assessor Map WE'/4-
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy
Z
Underground Wiring Reqd. VIF_5
0
Check Accuracy o)A Legal Description
Z
Review by Date
Existing Water Main Size_g7--�,,.2,
Water Main Required
Service Line Required M cjyl�:]E�
Hydrant Size Existin&
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code —Size-
Detector Check �tter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
Fire Departr-ent Conments
Wa t er Me t er aj�ne Req d. _Z, --,7/ L,!�2 61
Review b Date
Septic Tank Design Approved A//A Date 5- /J-65
Septic Tank Permit Reqd. At 1A Permit No.
Sanitary Sewer Ava i lab i 1 i
,,A
Drawing No. L.I.P- 10 F) —File No.
Side Sewer Availability f; jqfE P_ A PC, V. 12
94
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee Reqd Ova
3t
Review by D� t e
to
P�
Open Ditch Existing_ Reqd.
Culvert Reqd. Size
Catch Basin Reqd. Indicate on Site Plan
0
(4
Shoulder drainage maintain collection on"swale open runoff
�lanhole reqd. Indicate an Site Plan
Soil Conditi - and Ground Water Field Checked
Review b Date 5--
Ptev ised: lvlO-1977
Building "C"
USE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ZONE CG NUMBER
/ q g*,5
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
—&,Zas
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINESS)
cB
ADDRESS 23223 Highway 99
G & M Investment
LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO.
UJ
z
MAILING ADDRESS
X9 k",
3.1
o_
2367 Eastlake E.
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
Seattle 324-8780
NAME
EXISTING /j)6) REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSED
Tsao/Kussman & Assoc. P. S.
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REOUIRED�,
Z
cc
W
LOU
ADDRESS
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED 1-1
U)
z
t
2367 Eastlake E.
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED 3
0
z
W
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
Seattle 324-8780
NAME
REMARKS
)P
/
1 1/11?/1
Same as owner
ADDRESS
y FIT—
11"ti )e 9/��&j /70/R�
42- //t
Ix
2
METER SIZE BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS
cC
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
z
0
REMARKS
STATE LICENSE NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW ADB NO.
ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT
(show below or attach four copies)
SHORELINE#
z
2
I
On Plans
VARIANCE OR cu P�VC REVIEW BY
(n
JDATE
YARDS LOT COVERAGE
Uj
FRONT SIDE
z
z
REMARKS
MV
EX IAI
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
[_� ADDIALTER NON-RESIDENTIAL F1 MECHANICAL
ElREPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN
EXCAVATE FENCE
CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGHT
DEMOLISH OR FILL I- x _FT)
PRE -MOVE INSPJ swim
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
COMPLIANCE INSP. -POOL
REQUIRED GROUP LOAD
SIDE
11YES 1 NO
REMARKS
z
SEWER WATER LINE
El
z
0
ZOINUMBER
Uj
OF STORIES LIM BER OF
a
3 fDWELLING
38
0—
U,
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (AT7ACH PLOTPLAN)
New Apartment Building
VALUATION FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
MECHANICAL
GRADING/FILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) wilt require separate permission.
Termit Application: 180 Day's
0==a
,Permit
Limit: I Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
w
successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
02
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
2
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
Ift
BUILDING PER -UT REVIEW 2,-2---, Hw�j. c7q - 5,-1 / - 6
(address) I TEE e)
Street Rig�t-of-Way Existing. L-5 r e- REQD
Z
Access Easements Existing N �EQ�
cz
Utility Easenent Existing 19
19 REQD
W
Lot Per Subdivision Plat Assessor Map N E
W
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy
Z
thderground Wiring Reqd.
0
Check Accuracy of Legal Description
Z
Review by Date
Existing Water Main Size
Water Main Requixed A4
Service Line Require
Hydrant Size F-xistlzg
ol
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code Size
Detector Check 1-1-ter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
-
Fire Departmant Comnents
Water Met: J
a0-1ar 4RReqd.
Review bv Date_,,�-::�
Septic Tank Design Approved Al /A Date 5- 11-675
Septic Tank Permit Reqd._ N 1A Permit No.
Sanitary Sewer Availability Proj.
Drm,ring No. L.I. P- 105 File No.
Side Sewer Availability )Z VE P- A ep, [>E- V. FL A fq
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee Reqd.
Review b y Date
Open Ditch Existing. eqd.
Culvert Reqd. Size
Catch Basin Reqd. -i'� Indicate an Site Plan
Shoulder drainage maintain collection on-swale open runoff
W
Manhole reqd. OtJI-01ndicate on Site Plan
Soil Conditions d Ground Water Field Checked
Rc-Aew b Date -!a/3-L
Rev:Lsed: lvlO-1977
0
DATE : 5�-- it - 63
MEMO TO: Building Division
Planning Department
FROM: Engineering Division
Publ ic Works Department
SUBJECT: 2 3Z i / (A) 0 -32 15 (13) -32 2 -37 2 -1 (D)
'0--2,2-0-7 (E)) 2-32 31 (O�FFtCC Iq VV CI 9
After review of the subject Building Permit application, vie have the following
comments :
Connection to City water sYstem required.
2, Connection to City sanitjry sc,�-Ier system required.
3. Right-of-way permit required for any work on City property.
4 . Driveway sl ope not to exceed 11,%
5. Backwa-ter-valve required if downstairs plumbing is belovi -elevation of
upstream inanhbT6.
6. Wat.er and sewer' -lines, to be separated by 10 foot minimum.
7. Builder'Oviner responsible for containing all
___ie,,IL) o �cj r Dd erL�
on site - and ma not impact neighboring pr rtie
QQQ S-Ln any way,
0 VE-C�—P—E-- —Vt- —�T�o C M E-N I -A
M PIC oug—N-011 E
BD 6/82
9
ffimlma� USE '99MIT
CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE CG NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION IJOB
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINESS) ADDRESS 23215 Highway 99
G & M Investment LEGAL DESCRIPTI5 BDIVISION NO.
cr
LU MAILING ADDRESS
z
3:
0 2367 Eastlake E.
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
Seattle 324-8780 EXISTING 10b) REQUIRED DEDICATION
— NAME PROPOSED leiC?
Tsao/Kussman & Assoc. P. S. RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIREDA
LOU 7DDRESS STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED I I
t:
2367 Eastlake E.
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED, 57 A, 7,'
ZITY TELEPHONE NUMBER SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
Seattle 324-8780 R EMARK _S
NAME
Same as owner
/e
ADDRESS
0
METER SIZE
CC CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
z
0 REMARKS
L) STATE LICENSE NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER
z
0
Building "B"
� _53
163 r
1A42LLI-211W
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE IFIXTURE UNITS
SIGN AREA
Legal Description of Property - include all easements ALLOWED PR
(show below or attach four copies) I
9:
CC
On Plans
VARIANCE OR CU
YARDS
FRONT SIDE
ENV. REVIEW ADS NO.
COMPLETE i E�
BY DATE
COVERAGE
NEW
RESIDENTIAL
PLUMBING
ADDIALTER
NON-RESIDENTIAL
MECHANICAL
REPAIR
RETAINING WALL
SIGN
DEMOLISH
EXCAVATE
OR FILL
FENCE CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE
x _FT) I I
SIDE SEWER
PRE -MOVE INSPJ
COMPLIANCE INSP.
WATER LINE
=L SPECIAL INSPECTOR OCCUPAN
REQUIRED GROUP
11YES 1 NO 7Y
El REMARKS
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBEROF
3
DWELLING
1 UNITS_ _ _ _
33
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
New Apartment Buildina VALUATION
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADINGIFILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) wilt 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 indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
HEIGHT
OCCUPANT
LOAD
W1
z
a
z
W
CC
0
z
i
z
CL
I mumMev,
E
BUILDING PETMT REVIEW Z5215 , /IKy qq 5-1/-t53
(address) (date)
'Street Right -of -Way Existin�������D
Z
1
I -
Access Easements Existing Vj 5 0 6
#_4
_I;EQD
cd
Utility Easemnt Exis ting__LF D
lot Per Subdivision Plat Assessor Map N E Y4, n,
94
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy,
Z
Underground Wiring Reqd.
0-4
Ve5
0
Check Accuracy of) Legal Description
Z
Review by Date
Existing Water Vain Size
Water Main Required YIA
Service Line Require
Hydrant Size Existing
A�
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code Size
Detector Check I-Leter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
Fire Depar=mt Coments
.4ater Yleter C2.12 Reqd. 651 C
Review by, -Date Z� -7-3
Septic Tank Design Approved )V /A
Septic Tank Permit Reqd.. A/ �A - -Permit No.
Sanitary Sewr Availabili --Proj".
Drawing No. L. I. P. 10(5 —File No.
Side Sewer Availability ve P_ Ape, [>6:V. 12L- 4
Sanitary Se�wer Connection 'Fee R�q�. #2 T-
Review by
�ate
14
Open Ditch Exist
X:
Culvert Reqd.
W
---Size
Catch Basin Reqd. A��Z —Indicate on Site Plan
0
Shoulder drainage maintain collection an swale open runoff
�bnhole reqd. &41d Indicate on* Site Plan
Soil Conditions �Pd Ground Water Field Checked
Raview by_.,��,., Date S3
r.ev.Lsea: MU-1977
DATE: —5�-- If - 63
MEMO TO: Building Division
Planning Department
FROM: Engineering Division
Publ ic Works Department
AM 5 rfe 0 6 1 AO4 toz
SUBJECT: 2 -5z 11 21 iC(3) 2-3ZZ3 (C-) ;?-322q (0)
-Z-�,2-07 (,E)� ?-32 31 (OFFIC-C)" 14VVY CICI
After review of the subject Building Permit application, we have the following
comments:
1. Connection -to C-ity water system required.
2. Connection to
C-ity
sanitary
sewer system
required.
3. Right-of-way
permit
required
for -any work
on City property.
4. Driveway slope not to exceed 14%
5. Backwater valve required if downstairs plumbing is below elevation of
upstream manhole.
6. Water and sewer lines to be separated by 10 foot minimum.
7. Builder/Owner responsible for contai.ning all temporary runoff and -erosion
T
on site and may not impact..neighboring properties in anv.way,
41-L.CoAkneocnoO rc-p-
ZA How— NOT7
-j'BD 6/82
V
- Ab
Building "A"
4f,
M
USE 1 T
CITY OF EDMONDS
ZONE NUMBER
PERMIT APPLICATION
CG
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINESS)
JOB
ADDRESS 23211 Highway 99
-CONSTRUCTION
G & M Investment
LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECKI SUBDIVISION NO. NO.
cc
W
MAILING ADDRESS
ILID
/0
z
0
2367 Eastlake E.
ITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
Seattle 7324-8780
2
EXISTING /2110 REQUIRED DEDICATION
NAME
Lq
PROPOSED /t�24P
Tsao/Kussman & Assoc. P.S.
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED UI
a:
8
ADDRESS
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED 11
z
2367 Eastlake E.
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED,
z
Uj
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
Seattle 324-8780
REMARKS
NAME
Same as owner
V z/
24 W� Z,:, 4e
cc
ADDRESS
0
METER SIZE BUILDING 7UPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS
CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
a:
Uj
z
0
REMARKS
F-
<
3:
STATE LICENSE NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
SIGN AREA LEVIEW ADB NO.
ALLO 0 E E EMPT
W PROPOSED C M X
(show below or attach four copies)
SHORELINE
z
On Plans
VARIANCE OR CU PLAf IEZ
0
0
_j
YARDS LOT COVERAGE
Uj
_j
FRONT SIDE REAR
I____
z
Z
n
REMARKS
FXI 10
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
N
11 El
ADDIALTER NON-RESIDENTIAL MECHANICAL
E] F
REPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN
EXCAVATE FENCE
CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGHT
DEMOLISH OR FILL (—x—FT)
PRE -MOVE INSP.1 swim
E]
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
COMPLIANCE INSP. POOL
REQUIRED GROUP LOAD
r 0 El
(]YES J'NO
REMARKS
z
SIDE SEWER WATER LINE
z
2
�LL—
E I
ca
u)
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBEROF
W
DWELLING
3 38
1
0
UNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
New Apartment Building
VALUATION FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
MECHANICAL
GRADING/FILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) wilt 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 alnd
successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
20
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
I ,
2
tr-..-
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
i
_ _ - - _ - --- . - - __ - . — I —
0
DATE: /1- 6-5
ilding Division
anning Department
J�
FROM: Engineering Division
Publ ic Works Department
AM 5 7-100 6 0 A4 tPY_ A�7�
SUBJECT: 13 ;z -3:z z
3z2q (o)
52
-e2o'-7'(E)� 2_32�� OFF16C)" 14wy CICI
After review of the subject Building Permit application, vie have the following
comments:
I Connection to City water system required.
2. Connection to City sanitary sev,,er system required.
3. Right-of-way permit rpquired for a_ny wor� on City property.
4. Or i v evial s I oPe no t to- ex c.e ed -.14 %
5. Bac_kwater valve required i f downstairs plumbing is below -elevation of
upstream manhole.
6. Wat.er and sevier lines to be separated by 10 foot minimum.
7. Builder/Oviner responsible for containinq all —temporary runoff and erLL_'__Qn
on site and may not impact nei hboring properties in any -way,
84- A
r, T
_LL_!g,5 Z4 fi-
Z
Z
W
0
I r'-I"(AJ q q 5--1 / -
(address)' -Tcla-te)
i��l Street Rig�t-of-Way Existing REQD
Access Easenmts ExiSt ing
Utility Easenent Existing REQD
1,ot Per Subdivision Plat Assessor Yap WE
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy 64--
Underground Wiring Reqd. VC-5
Check Accuracy o Legal Description v&..
Review by Date
Existing Water �lain Si-ze g7 � " 0 .
Water I -lain Required
Service Line Required
,VVAMMW
Hydrant Size Existing, , /
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code 4�IA Size
Detector Check Meter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
Fire Departrmt Comrients
Wa t er Ile t er
Review by
Septic Tank Design Approved Al /A Date J-- /I
Septic Tank Pern-dt Reqd. IV 1A Perrdt No.
Sanitary Sewer Availability I Proj
Drawi�ng No. L.I.P- to F) —File No.
Side Sewer Availability x Vre- Ag
,e r,>c:V. FL 4 tq
14 Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee Req d.
:r Review by A Date
W
Ln
Open Ditch Existing— __Reqd.
X: Culvert Reqd. AJ - Size
C4 Catch Basin Reqd. Indicate on Site Plan
0 Shoulder drainage maintain collection on swale open runoff
�lanhole reqd.v--t-7e) Indicate an Site Plan
Soil Conditions 'd Ground Water Field Checked
R -Aew by lzz::�7 ��// 3 -513
c �0� Date
Revised: lvlO-1977
�.564 ..Qe
Irp '. 1 g C) 13
May 8, 2006
Kim Dunn
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS. WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www6edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
Planning & Zoning Resource Corporation
100 Northeast 5 th Street
Oklahoma City, OK 73104
Fax: (888) 840-2608
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
RE: ZONING CONFIRMATION LETTER FOR PACIFIC PARK APARTMENTS, 23207 To 23231
HIGHWAY 99, EDMONDS WA 98026.
Dear Ms. Dunn:
This letter is in response to your inquiry received on April 24, 2006 regarding the Pacific Park
Apartments located at 23207 through 23231 Highway 99 in Edmonds. Please note that the
address book that we typically use only shows one of the addresses that you mention. This
address is 23207 Highway 99 (see attached). Our street file also includes the addresses of 23211,
232113,23215, 23223, 23229 and 23231 Highway 99 on that same odd -shaped parcel. The
zoning a6d-Comprehenst've Plan designations are based on the parcel addressed 23207 in our
address book. Specific answers to each of your questions follow.
0 What is the current zoning of the property?
The current zoning of the site is CG ("General Commercial") pursuant to Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 16.60. Please refer to the attached copy
of ECDC Chapter 16.60 for information on the allowable uses and applicable
development regulations for the CG zone.
Is the property in any special, restrictive, or overlay district?
The property is located within the "Highway 99 Corridor" Comprehensive Plan
designation, and is also included in the -Corridor Development" ov�rlay. Please refer to
the goals for the Highway 99 corridor in the attached section of the Comprehensive Plan.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
0 .0
0 What are the abutting zoning designations?
Refer to the attached zoning map. The adjacent properties to the south and east are zoned
RS-8 ("Single -Family Residential"). The properties located on the west side of Highway
99 north of the subject property are not located within City of Edmonds limits. All other
immediately surrounding properties are zoned CG ("General Commercial").
* Was this a Planned Unit Development? If so, can we please get a copy of the PUD?
The City of Edmonds has "Planned Residential Developments," but not"Planned Unit
Developments." This property was not a "Planned Residential Development."
Was this property granted any variances, special exceptions, or conditional use permits or
zoning relief of any kind? If so, can we please get a copy of them? If these are not available,
would you briefly outline the conditions of the applicable document?
Upon searching within our permit tracking system, I did not come across any variances or
conditional use permits for the subject property. It is unknown whether any were issued
for past buildings on the property before it was annexed into the City of Edmonds in
1961.
# Are there any legal nonconforming issues?
Yes. Per ECDC 16.60.0 1 O.C. 1, residential uses are prohibited from being located within
the first or second story of any structure within the Highway 99 designation of the
Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the use of apartments alone on the subject property does
not comply with the current zoning code. The Pacific Park Apartments were legally
constructed and will be allowed to be continued, as provided for under ECDC
17.40.010.13, as a legal, nonconforming use (see attached). If the development was
destroyed by fire or other act of nature, it could be rebuilt, provided that reconstruction of
a new or repaired building began within one year of the date the damage occurred, per
ECDC 17.40.0 1 O.G. (see attached).
Was this site developed with Site Plan Approval? If so, can we obtain a copy of it and/or a
copy of the Approval Letter?
The City has approved site plans and building permits for the Pacific Park Apartments on
file. However, we do not issue Approval Letters.
To the best of your knowledge, do your records show any unresolved Zoning and Building
Violations and/or complaints?
The City's Code Enforcement Officer has indicated that there are no current zoning
violations on the subject property that he is aware of. The Building Division has
indicated that the only current building code violation that they are aware of is the need to
reinstall handicap accessible parking signs on the subject property. An order to correct
0 0
this matter was issued on October 17, 2005, and a permit was recently approved to do the
work; however, the work has not yet been completed.
Is this site in compliance with the current Zoning Code?
The site is not in compliance with the current Zoning Code 'in respect to the permitted
uses for the CG zone. However, as discussed above, the current use of residential on the
first and second stories is a legal nonconforming use. Although it is not in compliance
with the current Zoning Code, the use can be continued provided it meets the
requirements of ECDC 17.40 regarding nonconforming uses.
The height of the existing structures on the subject property is unknown. In addition, the
total number of existing parking spaces is unknown. Therefore, it cannot be determined
whether the site is in compliance with the maximum height and minimum required
parking spaces for the CG zone.
I hope this addresses your questions. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (425) 771-0220, extension 1224.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Witzgall, Planner
Development Services Department
CITY OF EDMONDS
Attachments: Address Book Map
ECDC Chapter 16.60 (General Commercial: CG and CG2 Zones)
Comprehensive Plan (Highway 99 Corridor section)
Zoning Vicinity Map
ECDC Chapter 17.40 (Nonconforming Uses, Buildings, Signs and Lots)
0 0
City of Edmonds,
0
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: March 31, 2006
TO: Connie Hutchinson
Pacific Park Apartments
23231 Highway 99
Edmonds, WA 98026
FROM: Ann Bullis, Assistant Building Official
RE: Plan Check: 06-107
Project: Pacific Park Apartments Parking Lot Alteration
Project Address: 23215 Highway 99
Before the proposed parking lot plan can be reviewed by all departments, the following comments
must be addressed. Please make these changes to the plan and submit 3 copies of the revised
parking plan to Joanne Zulauf, Permit Coordinator in a timely manner.
1) Clearly label/note on the plan the location of the originally approved accessible stalls, as well as
the new location (highlighted colors will not microfilm for archive purposes).
2) Dimension the width and length of the proposed accessible parking stalls (see enclosed
example). Each accessible stall must be a minimum of 8 feet wide and 16.5 feet long.
3) A 5'-0" wide access aisle is required between the accessible parking stalls. Show and dimension
the access aisle on the plan (see enclosed example).
4) Show the accessible path of travel from the 5 foot access aisle to the building entrance,
including curb ramp (see enclosed example for curb ramp).
5) Show the location of the required accessible parking sign at the head of each parking stall (see
attached example).
6) The plan submitted shows that the accessible parking stalls are located in two existing 9 foot
wide..stalls, however, with the required center access aisle, the total width needed is 21 feet (8 +
5 + 8 = 2 1). This will require that an additional stall be altered, thereby reducing a stall. So that
the total number of stalls is not reduced, alteration of the original accessible parking stalls would
be required to accommodate the additional stall. These stalls must be a minimum of 8.5 feet
wide, and 16.5 feet long. Please show and dimension this information on the plan.
CUR
7p]
Maximum 1:48 slope In any
direction for parking stall and
access a....
13'.0"
ACCESSIBLE
PARKING STALL
ICC/ANSI Al 17.1 - 1998
Total Parldng
Spaces
Provided
Required Mninium
Number of
Accessible Spaces
1 to 25
1
26 to 50
2
51 to 75
3
76 to 100
4
101 to 150
5
151 to 200
6
201 to 300
7
301 to 400
8
401 to 500
9
See additional requirements in
113C 1106 based on occupancy
�j
5�, -
12"
:0',
. t piplint 9-:�
12" -
i ht
k
s �v
ACCESS AISLE STRIPING OPTIONS
I -]
City of Edmonds
121 5"' AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX(425) 771-0221
Website: www6edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
Plan Review Corrections
Plan Check#: 06-107 Date: April 17, 2006
Project Name/Address: Pacific Park / 23215 Highway 99
Contact Person/Address/Fax: Conni Hutchinson / Pacific Park Apts. 23231 Hwy 99, 98026
Reviewer: Jeanie McConnell Division: Engineering
During review of the subject submittal it was found that the following information, corrections, or
clarifications will need to be addressed:
The minimum dimensions for a standard parking stall are 8.5 feet wide x 16.5 feet in length. The
resubmitted site plan shows 12 parking spaces at 8' wide. The previous site plan shows these stalls to be 9'
wide. I understand some adjustment to the stalls is required in order to accommodate the two accessible
parking spaces, however a minimum width of 8.5 feet must be maintained.
o Please provide a revised site plan, to scale, showing both the standard and accessible parking stalls at
the required dimensions.
Please resubmit 3 copies of the revised plans/documents to a Development Services Coordinator. Please
contact me at 425-771-0220 or by e-mail at mcconnell(iDci.edmonds.wa.us if you have specific questions
regarding these plan corrections.
Dr6MA;1LED 4/17/06
PAGE OF
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.d.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
March 9, 2006
Pacific Park Apartments, LLC
6414 204" St SW, Suite 200
Lynnwood, Washington 98036
Pacific Park Apartments, LLC
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 1201
Everett, Washington 98201
Pacific Park Apartments, LLC
23207 Highway 99
Edmonds, Washington 98026
RE: Order to Correct Violation Notice Dated October 17, 2005
Dear Registered Agent and Property Manager:
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
As a follow-up to City letters and the referenced Order to Correct Violation Notice, permit approval is
required for the alteration of accessible parking spaces at 23215 Highway 99, Building B in Edmonds.
The City utilizes Civil Penalties ordinance #2934 and imposes fines as a last resort to gain code
compliance. Once a Notice of Civil violation is issued (note this is the next step in the code
enforcement process regarding this matter) fines of $100.00 per day are imposed and continue to
accrue at the same per day rate until the City issues a permit and inspects the parking spaces for code
compliance. If fines accrue to the amount of $5,000.00 the City shall utilize our collection agency for
the re-couping of fines, and, pursuant to State RCW Law,. the collection company collects fines at a
rate of 150% of the amount owed plus added administrative costs. The City shall not negotiate
imposed fine amounts once collections is initiated.
We strongly urge you to submit a complete permit application and scaled parking striping plan by
March 23, 2006. This is the last correspondence you. will receive in this matter and failure to submit
by March 23, 2006 shall result in -the issuance of Notice of Civil Violation and fines of $100.00 per
day shall accrue until this matter is resolved to the satisfaction of the City.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 425-771-0220 extension 1226 during City
business hours Monday through Friday.
Sincerely,
Apr
Jeannine L. GrYd
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
0 0
CITY OF EDMONDS
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020
(425) 771-0220
ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION
Location of Violation (Address and Tax Account Parcel No): Pacific Park Apartments & 23215
HighwU 99, Building Edmonds, WA 98026 Tax Account Parcel No. 00576700001411
Issued To: Pacific Park Apartments, LLC
Address Of Person This Order Is Issued To: 6414 204 1h St SW, Suite 200, Lmwood, WA 98036 &
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 1201 Everett, WA 98201
Code Section Violated:. Edmonds Community Development Code Chtapter 18.95 and International
Building Code Section 1106 for accessible parking and signage.
Description of Violation:- Relocation of accessible parking spaces without first obtaining Cily pen -nit
approvals.
Corrective Action Required: Submit a complete pen -nit qpplication for a parking lot re -striping permit,
including all required permit fees.
Correction is Required no later than: 5:00pm (time) November 3, 2005 (date)
If correction is not made by the date and time specified in the Order, a Notice of
Civil Violation shall be issued. The Notice of Civil Violation shall assess fines of
$100.00 per day, or portion of a day, during which the violation continues.
Date Posted: Date Mailed: October 17, 2005 Date Served
Issuing Party
Signature
Title Building Official
it? C. 189,11
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
August 8, 2005
Pacific Park Apartments
Randy, Property Manager
23231 Highway 99
Edmonds, Washington 98026
RE: 23215 Highway 99, Building B
Dear Randy,
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
As a follow-up to City letter dated July 7, 2005 -and our telephone conversations I want to
first thank you for your prompt responses to our inquiries. As you are aware the City
received a citizen's complaint that existing accessible parking stall signs for Building B
were non compliant. In attempting to assist you I provided you a copy of the approved
parking plan for the original building and parking lot construction. In this plan the
designated spaces were located approximately mid building. Although you indicated that
one of your tenants desired that the space(s) be located at one end of the building, the
City is obligated to require you to follow the approved plans on file or request that your
company file for a new parking lot striping permit sh o*wing the spaces in a new location.
If there are circumstances beyond the property owner's control that will prevent either;
reposting of signs (note two accessible parking spaces are required) per the approved plan
or submittal of a parking lot re -striping permit by August 16, 2005, please immediately
notify my office with an alternate date.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any additional questions regarding this
matter. I can be reached at 425-771-0220 extension 1226 during City business hours of
Monday through Friday, 9:00am to noon and 1:00pm to 4:00pm.
Sincerely,
Jeannine L. (Maf
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
01�-
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
117 c. Planning - Building - Engineering
July 7, 2005
Pacific Park Apartments
Property Manager
23231 Highway 99
Edmonds, Washington 98026
RE: 23215 Highway.99, Building B
Dear Property Manager,
The purpose of this letter is to inforrn you that the City has received a citizen's complaint
that existing accessible parking stall signs for Building B have been damaged, removed
and not replaced. We understand that in a large complex such as Pacific Park there are
many daily maintenance issues that arise unfortunately, this issue is regulated by the State
adopted Building Code so I must request that you make repair of the signs in a timely
manner.
For your information I have enclosed a detail of the required signage (sign required for
each space). Please be sure you purchase the correct sign (color, size, etc.) and install per
the specifications as shown on the detail. Also, required striping should be inspected at
this time as it may also need to be re -painted due to weather erosion and fading.
Please have the signs installed (and striping complete if necessary) by July 20, 2005. If
there are circumstances beyond the property owner's control that will prevent completion
of the work by this deadline please immediately notify my office with an alternate date.
If the property owner chooses to re -locate the existing spaces advanced permit approval
by the City is required.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any additional questions regarding the
outlined code issues. I can be reached at 425-771-0220 extension 1226 during City
business hours of Monday through Friday, 9:00am to noon and 1:00pm to 4:00pm.
Sincerely,
6fAOT
Jeannine L. Graf
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. JaDan
Ann Bullis April 10, 2006
Assistant Building Official
City of Edmonds
Dear Ann,
Attached is the plan for the Pacific Park Apartments, 23231 Hiway 99, 98026, for
moving the handicap accessible parking spaces in front of Building "B".
Connie Hutchinson
Community Manager
Pacific Park Apts.
RECEIVED
10 2006
59)IROPMENT SERVICES CTR.
W-Y OF EDMONDS
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
r 1014 k..
ill 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS', WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
Pacific Park Apartments June 21, 2006
Tammy Bryar, Regional Manager
23231 Highway 99
Edmonds, Washington 98026
RE: 23215 Highway 99, Building B
VIA FACSIMILE
Dear Ms. Bryar,
In response to your electronic letter dated June 14, 2006 the City received a citizen's complaint that
existing accessible parking stall signs for Building B were non compliant. In response to City
notification a prior building manager applied for a parking space re-location/striping permit (reference
Building Pen -nit #2006-0409 issued on May 11, 2006).
As of today the following City Departments have approved work under the noted building permit:
• Building, approval date June 1, 2006
• Recycling, (Trash Enclosure) approval date May 31, 2006
Outstanding inspections required are:
Engineering inspection of the stall re -striping and parking plan
Specifically, the accessible parking stall signs are approved, a curb ramp was not required based on the
lot grades, and the Recycling Coordinator approved the compactor area as sufficient for the needs of
the property. Also, the requirements of the Order (reference Order to Correct Violation Notice dated
10/17/05) have been fulfilled (note, the Order required Pacific Park to submit a permit application and
permit fees) and there are no outstanding penalty fines associated with the Order or the issuance of the
permit or the inspections required of the permit. However, the permit is not considered closed pending
the required Engineering inspection.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any additional questions regarding this matter. I can
be reached at 425-771-0220 extension 1226 during City business hours of Monday through Friday,
9:00am to noon and 1:00pm to 4:00pm.
Sincerely,
6;PA*41�
Jeannine L . G91
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
C
. iefor (71hy - Holrin;%n lAn;%n
0 0
Enclosed are the parking plans in front of building B. The yellow shows where there was
city approved parking for the Accessible Parking Stall.
They were located in the center of the parking and hard to get in and out of. At one time
they were changed to the end of the parking spaces, where we have highlighted in green.
These Parking spots have Accessible Parking Signs already and one has the sign painted
in the parking space. We would like permission to leave them in this area, re -paint them
and also repaint the Accessible Parking Sign in the parking spaces. The measurements are
9 feet by 17 1/2 feet for each space. We would also like permission to paint the access aisle
between the spaces. We would have this done by our maintenance technicians and could
be done for $500.00
1 have enclosed a check for $108.00 that I was told should handle the charges.
Hopefully I have enclosed all the information you need. Please let me know if you need
any more.
Thank you so much for all your help with this.
Connie Hutchinson
Pacific Park Apartments
425-771-6921
RECEIVED
MAR 2 2 2006
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
0 0
McConnell, Jeanie
From: Fisher, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:08 AM
To: McConnell, Jeanie; Bullis, Ann; Graf, Jeannine
Subject: RE: Pacific Park Apts - 23215 Hwy 99
I have spoken to Randy McDonald from the property management there and I am familiar with the large enclosure in the
rear of the property where there is a compactor unit. All traces of the former smaller enclosures from years ago are gone.
The compactor and that area around it are sufficient for the needs of the property. Anything else you need from me? Let
me know.
Steve Fisher
City of Edmonds Public Works
----- Original Message -----
From: McConnell, Jeanie
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 1:27 PM
To: Fisher, Steve
Subject: Pacific Park Apts - 23215 Hwy 99
Steve,
Their latest parking lot revision permit showed a trash area specific to the one building, which they now say is not
accurate. Apparently there is a central trash compactor area for all the buildings. They will be contacting you to see if
the central trash compactor area is sufficient.
Please let me and/or Ann know what is decided so our drawings can be updated.
Thanks,
Jeanie WcConneff
Engineering Technician
425-771-0220, &Ut 1338
TAX - 425-771-0221
mcconneff6ciedmonds.wa.us
4/-1? C. 1 B 9'3
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 * FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwo.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
May 25, 2006
Pacific Park Apartments
Connie, Hutchinson Property Manager
23231 Highway 99
Edmonds, Washington 98026
RE: 23215 Highway 99, Building B
Accessible Parking Spaces, Building Permit # 2006-0409
VIA FACSIMILE
Dear Ms. Hutchinson,
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
A City inspection performed on May 23, 2006 revealed that although the required two
accessible parking stalls were striped, the 60 inch wide curb ramp was not provided and
the trash enclosure was not installed (please refer to the approved plans).
If there are circumstances beyond the property owner's control that will prevent
completion of these items by June 16, 2006, please notify my office with an alternate
date.
Please feel free to contact my office if you have any additional questions regarding this
matter. I can be reached at 425-771-0220 extension 1226 during City business hours of
Monday through Friday, 9:00am to noon and 1:00pm to 4:00pm.
Sincerely,
r44w 4 lf-3)
Jeannine L. Grar
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. JaDan
Cl
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221 MAYOR
Planning - Building - Engineering
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
C.
Via Fax and Mail: 425.827.8725
October 10, 2000
Mr. Kenneth H. Davidson
520 Kirkland Way, #200
Kirkland, WA 98083
RE: Right -of -Way dedication and nonconforming building status
Dear Mr. Davidson:
The engineering division and the planning division have both reviewed your letter dated September 20'h,
stating your positions on both right-of-way dedication and redevelopment of a nonconforming building,
and the proposed project to replace an existing nonconforining building. We agree that the proposed
development will not create any new impact over and above the existing development and therefore no
right-of-way dedication will be required with your proposed project.
However, because the project is for a new addition to an existing nonconforming building, it must comply
with ECDC section 17.40.020(D)(2). This would result in the addition be located twenty-five feet from
the south property line to conform with the requirements of ECDC section 18.50.020(A) for
improvements adjacent to the public right-of-way.
Options for dealing with this would include the following:
1. Maintain and repair the existing structure.
2. Petition the City Council to amend the Official Street Map.
3. Request a variance from the required street setback.
Options two and three would be difficult for staff to support, but in and of themselves could get your
client close to what he is requesting. Approval of both would be required to allow your client to construct
the addition he has planned.
Should you have any ftirther questions or would like to meet with staff, please contact me at
425.771.0220.
Duane Bowman fyle Chrisman
Development Services Director Development Services Engineer
attachment. Letter from Mr. Kenneth Davidson
cc: Bruce Lingle
4SteeB4Ak
ullock
Senior Planner
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
Robert T. Czeisler
Kenneth H. Davidson
Leslie A. Drake
Richard W. Hively
Dan W. Kilpatric
G. Michael Zeno, Jr.
Via Mail
Mr. Don Fiene
Acting City Engineer
City of Edmonds
121 - 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
DAVEDSON, CzEisLER,
K]ILPATRic & ZENo, P.s.
LAWYERS (425) 822-2228
A Professional Service Corporation FAX (425) 827-8725
520 KIRKLAND WAY, SUITE 400
P.O. BOX 817
KIRKLAND. WASHINGTON 98083-0817
SEP,2
PLO.
September 20, 2000
Re: File No. ADB-2000-55
Property at - 22327 Highway.99, Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Mr. Fiene:
We represent Bruce Lingle, the owner of the property occupied by Collision Clinic and
Harmon Glass at the above address. As you may know, Mr. Lingle has submitted to the City
of Edmonds a proposal to update a portion of the building on the property which houses some
of the operati o*n of the Collisiow-Clinic.� ' , Plans were prepared and submitted by architect
Dennis Kilpatrick for design review. On June 7, 2000 the City entered its Determination of
Nonsignificance for this project. On July 19, 2000, the Architectural Review Board issued its
approval of the project and found it to "be consistent-With'the Comprehensive Plan and other
adopted City policies, and meets the requirement of the zoning ordinance and satisfies the
criteria in the Edmonds Community Development Code. "
In this review process, we became aware of an internal memo which raised questions
about possible right-of-way dedication and/or infringements. The internal memo may simply
be a discussion between staff and not a "staff decision. " However, we are interested in
obtaining the staff decision on these issues so that we may know the City's position on these
issues and be guided in proceeding with the building pennitapplication.
11 On the issue of dedication of right-of-way, the City's code provides for an appeal of the
staff decision" to a hearing examiner. For reasons discussed, below, we believe this matter
should be resolved without the need for an appeal to the hearing examiner. However, the code
clearly contemplates that a "staff decision" be made on the issue. Thus, we write to request
your ruling on two issues affecting our client's remodeling plans.
1 . Paragraph C of Section 18.50.020 of the Edmonds Community Development
Code governs the dedication of land by an applicant for a building permit or other development
0
DA MSON, CZEISLER, KILPA TRIC & ZENO
September 20, 2000
Page 2
permits for street right-of-way. This section recites that environmental impacts under the
SEPA process and other review procedures may be mitigated by the dedication of a street
right-of-way. This section recognizes the limitation of a requirement of dedication of right-of-
ways in its proviso at the end of subparagraph 1 which states: "...the total of all mitigation
measures shall not exceed the developmental impacts of any development." Subparagraph 2
allows for appeal if the applicant "believes that the dedication requirement is in excess of that
required to mitigate the applicant's actual development impacts ...... Subsection 2 sets forth the
two standards which must be proven in order to require the dedication. First, there must be a
nexus established between the development impacts of the applicant and proposed dedication.
Second, the value of the proposed property for dedication and all other mitigation measures
cannot be "in excess of the impacts created by the development.
In this case, the proposed project will cause no impacts to the road system. Therefore,
should be no requirement of dedication for right-of-way as a result of this project.. Neither the
use nor the square footage of the building on the property will change. The project involves
the removal of a portion of the existing building occupied by Collision Clinic and its
replacement by a structure with an identical footprint. It will continue to be used for the car
repair operations of the Collision Clinic. The purpose of the project is to enhance the safety,
comfort, efficiency and appearance of the building. However, since neither of the use nor the
square footage of the building will change, there should be no measurable impact.on the roads.
The "internal memo between your staff and the Planning Department staff suggests that
the right-of-way dedication may be required. We ask that you review the facts in this case and
make a staff decision as to whether the right-of-way dedication would b ' e required by the City.
We believe that after you have reviewed the facts of this case, you will determine that the
conditions for requirement of the right-of-way dedication are'not met in this case.
2. We also request your determination that Paragraph A of Section 18.50.020 of the
Edmonds Community Development Code does not bar the issuance of a building permit for the
project approved by the Architectural Design Board. The existing building and the partial
replacement of that building approved by the Architectural Design Board are located
approximately 6 feet from the property line. This location places both the existing building and
the reconstructed building within a future right-of-way identified by the official street map.
Paragraph D of Section 17.40.020 of the Edmonds Cornmunity Development Code
clearly permits maintenance, repair and alteration work on a nonconforming buildings which
do not expand in any nonconforming aspect of the building. Under this section our client is
clearly entitled to permits to make seismic upgrades, improvements for heating and energy
efficiency, addition of restrooms and installation of more efficient, safer and comfortable work
areas for employees. Our client also desires to enhance the public appearance of the building.
We submit that 17.40.020 governs in this instance and that our client is clearly entitled to
permits under that section since the scope and intent of this project is to repair and upgrade the
DAVIDSON, CZEISLER, KILPA TRIC & ZENO
September 20, 2000
Page 3
exiting nonconforming use. We suggest that Section 18.50.020A is intended to apply to new
construction or redevelopment of a property where the nonconfonriing buildings are completely
removed.
We point out to the City that our client could accomplish most of his objectives through
a series of repair projects to the existing building. A more efficient and aesthetically pleasing
alternative is to remove that portion of the existing building he seeks to remodel and build a
new section of the building - The City would be the poorer if he proceeded with a -series of
internal repair projects since the exterior would appear unattractive as it does today. The
proposal approved by the Architectural Design Board greatly improves the appearance of this
project from the street. Section 17.40.020 was clearly intended to permit nonconforming
buildings to be maintained in good condition and attractive appearance. We hope that you will
concur with us that this section should allow a building permit to be issued on the project
approved by the Architectural Design Board and that Section 18.50.020A does not apply to
remodel projects such as this one, where the building footprint remains unchanged.
Because of questions raised in the internal memo, we- ask that you address these two
issues and advise us of the City's position. We are glad to meet with you and discuss the
matter with you ftirther. My client wishes to proceed forward in obtaining a building permit
for this project. To make the best use of time of our client's architect and the City's staff, it
would be advisable to address and resolve these questions at the outset. This project has been
under review with the City for several months and we would appreciate your efforts to respond
to these issues by the end of this month. We look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours,
Kenneth H. Davidson
KHD:atr
Enc.
cc: Bruce Lingle
Stephen Bullock
KHD/1978.01/Fiene.let
14
t 0
CITY OF EDMONOB HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
200 DAYTON ST. * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 - (206) 771-3202
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
August 16, 1983
G & M Investments
2367 Eastlake E.
Seattle, Wa.
Dear Mike:
SUBJECT: PUNCH LIST TO BE CORRECTED AT
234TH & HIWAY'9*9 APARTMENT COMPLEX
The following corrections need to be made at the apartment com-
plex:
llawg
91W
Repair broken sidewalk at emergency entrance.
Clean rubble from around catch basin at northwest
corner of property.
,//3.
Run drain line from ponding area at northwest
property line to catch basin on Hiway 99 right-of-
way.
V/4.
Replace unraveling asphalt at beginning of
/5.
acceleration lane.
"no
Post parking" signs along acceleration lane and
mark same on curb.
v�.
Paint merge line in merge lane.
/7.
Secure lid to slab ' on manhole opposite catch basin #8.
v8.
Mud outfall at catch basin #10.
V9.
Mud inlet at catch basin #9.
V/10.
Provide watts double-check valve atpool.
/11.
Recenter water chamber opposite catch basin #8.
v12.
Mud catch basins #8, #6, #5, #3, #2, #1, and #11.
vf3.
Raise and straighten valve chamber just southwest of
catch basin #2.
V/1'4.
Grout valve chamber just north of building "A".
V'11111 5.
Add ten -inch buttons at entrance aisle per plan.
16.
/17.
Raise valve chamber on 234th to grade.
Remove top valve of pipe and smooth channel in sani-
V18.
tary sewer manhole on 234th.
Install
missing catch basin on 234th.
19.
Provide City with as -built drawings.
Please contact this office for reinspection when these items
have been completed.
Sincerely,
S E
Enqinee�r
DS/st
Ban sfi4th
--, �- = I
-5:7
0
e-I F I
I r
I
chnAophcr brown
Pe.
9688 r�inicr avenue 6.
,,TaLLIc waBhinqn
7234567 18
TSAO/KUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
Multi-familZ Residential Project 0 SR 99 & 234th Street S.W.
"r ffig Study
0
December 1982
*4 "/Ib
44j�
'�A-
TSAO�KUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
Multi-familX Residential Project 0 SR 99 & 234th Street S.W.
Table of Contents
Introduction
I
Access
1
Traffic Characteristics
1
Land Use
6
Transit'
6
Trip Generation
6
Trip Distribution
7
Horizon Year Demands
9
Capacity
9
Accidents
9
Adverse Consequences & Mitigating Measures
13
Tables
I
Variation in Traffic Volume by Day of the Week
3
Ii
Variation in Traffic Demand by Hour of the Day,
3
III
Vehicle Classification
4
IV
Trip Generation
6
V
Historical Traffic Demand
7
VI
Accident Characteristics
9
VII
Accident Frequency by Year
13
List of Figures
1.
vicinity Map & 1981 AADT
2
2.
1982 P.M. Peak Hour Demands
5
3.
Project Site Trip Distribution
8
4.
Traffic Assignment
10
5.-
Horizon Year AADT
11
6.
Horizon Year'D.D.H.V.
12
Appendix
Capacity Calculations - SR 99 at Site Entrance
chrikophcr brown PC
'avcn
9688 rainier :f uc a
Ld: 7234567 1-198118
0 1 , D8D(
6calllc wavhinglon
TSA04KUSSMAN-& ASSOCIATES
Multi -family Residential =ect 0 SR 99 & 234th Street S.W.
Table of Content
Introduction
1
Access
1
Traffic Characteristics
I
Land Use
6
Transit
6
Trip Generation
6
Trip Distribution
7
Horizon Year Demands
.9
Capacity
9
Accidents
9
Adverse Consequences & MitigatinglMeasures
13
Tables
Variation in Traffic Volume by Day of the Week
3
Variation in Traffic Demand by Hour of the Day,
3
Vehicle Classification
4
IV
Trip Generation
6
V
Historical Traffic Demand
7
VI
Accident Characteristics
9
Vil
Accident Frequency by Year
13
List of Figures
1. Vicinity Map & 1981 AADT 2
2. 1982 P.M. Peak Hour Demands 5
3. Project Site Trip Distribution 8
4. Traffic Assignment 10
5. Horizon Year AADT 11
.6. Horizon Year D.D.H.V. 12
Appendix
Capacity Calculations - SR 99 at Site Entrance
chriAophcr brown pe.
9688 ridinier avenue (5.
(5
Ainglpn
8qaft1c wa, I
*C' Lcl: 7234567 11�981 18;
TSAOZKUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
Multi -family Residential Project 0 SR 99 & 234th Street S.W.
Traffic Study
Introduction
The. proposed project site is situated in the southeast sector of the city of
Edmonds,, Snohomish County, about three quarters of a mile north of the
junction of Pacific Highway (SR 99) and 244th Street S. W. (SR 104). The site
location is depicted in an approximate configuration on Figure 1.
The" proposed 174 multi -family dwelling unit development will be in five
buildings clustered on a pentagon shaped property. The central portion of the
: :property will include a recreational facility, tennis court and swimming pool.
-Access
Access to the site will be provided by two driveways located on the front of
the site on Pacific Highway. These driveways are separated one from the other
by about 180 feet. Both of these driveways serve a parking and service road
system which generally surrounds the site at the property edge.
Pacific Highway (SR 99) provides a direct linkage to Lynnwood and Everett in
the north and to Seat ' tle in the south. Further, about five blocks south of
the 'site, SR 99 intersects with 244th Street S. W. (SR 104) which serves the
main community of Edmonds on the west and to the east connects with Interstate
Highway 5 (1-5).
Pacific Highway is a principal state highway with signalization at key
intersections. At the site, it has a five lane section providing two lanes
nort.h and south bound and a center two-way, left -turn lane. The level of
service (LOS) on this highway during the peak hours is in the C range at the
project -site, as measured by travel time studies conducted during the early
weeks of December (operating speed better than 35 mph). Site street traffic
entering, this roadway from non -signalized intersections and from driveways,' as
observed during peak hours, has substantial delay.
Traffic Characteristics
Current traffic volumes on the roadway system serving the project site are
also shown on Figure 1. The data are expressed in terms of Annual Average
Daily Traffic (AADT), a statistic that includes the influences'of seasonal
chriAophcr brown pc
9688 r-aner avc-Dwe-8.
_011
8cAlc waAfflAon
1,cl: 7234567
220th St
224th St
238th St S
205th.St W
a)
U)
Q)
�4
0
�4
:j
0:4
FIGURE 1
Vicinity Map & 1981 AADT
4J
212th St Sw
Z
�4
chriAophcr i5ro:,\xln Dpc,.
.9688 raimcf, iNclitic 8.
6qal-[.Ic vm4iin8Lon
)SI 18 D
ld: 7234567 98 118
variation as well'. as -the reduced demands of weekend traffic. The data are
f rom publications of the Washington State Department of Transportation
(Wash.DOT) dated'-1981, field data collection by the consultant on side streets
at the project site collected in December -of 1982, and previous materials
furnished by the city of Edmonds.
The variation in traffic demand by day -of -the -week for the local roads in the
immediate area is described in Table I, below. In this table, the percentage
refers to "percent of total weekly demand". The data is derived from city of
Edmonds, Department of Public Works seven-day machine traffic counts.
TABLE I
Variation,in Traffic Volume by Day of the Week
Day . Percent
.Sunday
9.8
Monday
13.9
Tuesday
15.7
Wednesday
15.9
Thursday
15.5
Friday
17.0
Saturday
12.2
This type of distribution is very typical for main arterials that carry both
commuter traffic as well as shopping and social -recreation traffic in that
Sunday tends to be the lowest day of the week and Friday the highest.
The variation in. traffic demand by hour -of -the -day for the average weekday is
described below in Table II.
-3-
TABLE II
Variation in Traffic Demand by Hour of the Day
Time of Day , Percent of Daily Traffic
7- 8 A.M.
2.0
8- 9
4.5
9-10
4.2
10-11
4.6
11-noon
5.1
12- 1 P.M.
5.2
chriAophcr brown PC
9688 rainier avenLIC
wa, I
1D
1 567 �_98118
d: 72'W'
0 0
Table II, Continuation
Time of Day . Percent of Daily Traffic
1- 2 'P.M.-
5.1
2- 3
5.2
3- 4
6.2
4- 5
7.3
5- 6
7.8
6- 7
7.3
7- 8
5.2
8- 9
4.3
9-10
3.4
The . highest peak hour takes place in the afternoon which is typical. of a
.1,subOrban arterial. The afternoon peak hour turning movements at the key
intersections serving the project site are shown on Figure 2, page 5.
For roadway capacity computational purposes, an estimate of the type of
vehicle on the road system is needed. The classification of vehicle types
.operating in the traffic stream are described in Table III. Since schools are
no longer in session, prior data has been researched for this table.
TABLE III
Vehicle Classificat on
Vehicle Tvoe
Standard auto
Compact auto
Pick-ups/Vans
Trucks, 2-axle
3-axle
4-axle
5-axle
U,
48.9
25.2
22.2
0.9
0.5
0.1
0.4
Buses
0.2
Motorcycles 1.6
For... capacity computation purposes, the truck factor (T) can be taken at 2
percent. -The influence of buses is negligible and, is included in the truck
factor.- I
-4-
chr-161.ophcr r)rown pc
I Iff avcnile (F1
9688 ra'n' D
V(-
6yaLLIc wa6hin Loll
(cl: 7234567 48118
St. SW
0
FIGURE 2,
P.M. Peak,Hour Demands
-5-
234th St. sw
12
I
chrisLoplicr i�rown pe.
P688 rallifer
J11C wa,41161,011
l,)c-T72'54567 98 118
0
Land Use
Generally, land - use in , the immediate vicinity varies from strip commercial
development along SR 99 to single family residential at the back of the site,
to the 'east of the rear property line and south of 234th Street S. W. For
capacity analysis purposes ' however, the area can be considered "fringe" since
there is a wide range in business activity along SR 99 and substantial trips
do not have origins or destinations in the immediate area but tend to "pass
through". Further, while the land use to the rear of the site is residential,
access to the site is only via SR 99 and the land use for traffic purposes is
that associated with the arterial serving the site.
Transit
Both, Metro and *CT transit pass by the site, on SR 99; however, there are no
designated transit stops by the site. Similarly, the lack of safe pedestrian
crossings of SR 99 suggests that transit will not have a ma
jor role in trip
modification for some time or until some demand is established.
.Tri Generation
Trip generation for this project is from the standard traffic engineering text
entitled,. 1= Generation, An Informational RMort, published by the Institute
of Transportation Engineers, Washington D.' C. (1979). The expected trip
generation is based on ITE Land Use Code 221, Suburban Apartments and is
described below in Table IV. I
In this table:
-6-
LkAux-1
TABLE IV V,
Trig Generation
Time
AWDT
A.
M.
Inbound
A.
M.
Outbound
P.
M.
Inbound
P.
M.
Outbound
Trips
1193 v.p.d.
22—vi.-p. h
188 v. �-�
k —V� --
88 v.p.h.
44 v. p. h.
AWDT = Average Weekday Traffic
n
chrlAophcr brown p.c.
C(J& 9688 rainier avenue a
(5
1 LD
0
8qaftle wa8hingLo n
LCI: 7234567 "-'%118
'The data of Table IV is based on ITE Land Use Code 221 which is for the
..."Garden Apartment" type of suburban multi -family* residential development.
Although ITE has a code (230) for condominiums, another type of common
multi -family development in suburban settings, per
se, Land Use Code 221 is
used since it elevates the trip production slightly which is thus a worst case
...scenario.
:"Trip Distribution
Tr ' ip distribution "for the project is based on PSCOG data, as modified by Mr.
Don 'Ding, P.E., of the King County Transportation Planning Division, in
"Ding's .66 Zone Compression" of Control Data 6600, TRANPLAN SYSTEM, Version
3.4.4. - This distributed trips from the area to some 66 zones that extended
.-from Everett in the north to Tacoma in the south.
Fort. -the':project, the general orientation of trips is shown on Figure 3, Trip
Distribution. Note that the orientation -of the 346 trips to the southwest is
generally in' the area by Aurora Village and south along SR 99 as well as to
the-.-Edmon'ds CBD and other local commercial and recreational areas.
Th e h okizon year, or the time when the project is assumed to be completed and
'fully occupied, has been taken at 1983. While this is possibly an early date,
it. may be noted that traffic growth on US 99 has been very limited 'over the
last three years 'and thus the choice of this particular horizon year may not
significantly affect the outcome of any project related traffic demands. In
this regard, Table V shows traffic growth (or demand) at the project site on
.SR 99'for'the last ten yea'rs.
TABLE V
Historical Traffic Dema-n-d - SR__99
1972
19800
1973
19500
1974
18900
1975
20500
1976
22600
1977
24000
1978
26500
1979
29600
1980
29300
1981
29300
4-
chriAophcr brown pc.
9688 rainier avenue &
[(-1: 72)4567 98118
two
rIA,
FIGURE 3
Project Site Trip Distribution
25-1
3-?�w
-7�
5-9
An
11
Data shown is in terms of Average
Weekday Traffic (AWDT) generated
by the site.
chri,st.ophcr i�rown pe.
C
9688 ralillel, MC1111C
---7234567 98118
Average weekday traffic (AWDT), distributed to the roadway network is shown on
Figure 4, Traffic Assignment. The assignment is predicated on Ding's
distribution, as- hoted -earlier, and also based on assumptions of ease of
access; namely, that while there is a two-way left -turn lane in front of the
project, site, the ' peak hour traffic is sufficiently heavy that the fastest
travel times for traffic going south on either SR 99 or 1-5 will be via a
r6ute that has traffic leaving the site and then turns right to. go north to
230th Strdet S. W and then takes 76th Avenue W., south to SR 104 (244th Stteet
S.W or N. 205th Street). The return trip is made via the normal way since
access "into" the'site is not similarly constrained.
Horizon Year Demands
When the project is completed, for analysis purposes at the end of 1983, the
expected AADT and peak' hour demands will be as shown in Figures 5 and 6. Note
that Figure 6 -portrays only a single driveway. This -is a schematic
representation only and is used to give a worst case estimate for capacity
analysis.
Capacity.
Since none of the driveways is signalized at the present time, all capacity
analysis. has been performed in accordance with Transportation 'Research
Circular .212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Unsignalized
Intersections, Transportation Research Board,,Washington D. C. (19807.
Accidents
. Accident data was researched from the files of the
Works., Department of Public
Unfortunately, while the computerized listings were captioned,
."Traffic Accident Report, Year Ending 12/31/81" no data was displayed for any
year after 1977. For the interval 1972 thru 19771 the following
...characteristics were obtained for SR 99 in from 230th to 238th Streets S.W.
TABLE VI
Accident Characteristics
Rear End
Left Turn
-Right Angle
Ran -off Road
Sideswipe
Bike
Parked Car
Head-on
Misc.
10
98
9
8
6
3
3
2
1
6
chriAophcr wown pc
e
9688 rainiff aVCf1LJC 8.
L FaWc wa8h':Dng8Lon
98D
"98118
7234567
H
0 �4
�4
Q)
X
FIGURE 4
Traffic Assignment
S'/
v
W1
riAD own
Ocr brown pa
.9688 r-ainlCr (WC[lue
6calllc wav,11111,40n
I d: 72'A567
2
:3:
3 .1-1
dri6l.oplicr i�rown p.c.
1-dillict, d%iclitic
I.cl: 7234567 (-)";11
-5-
230th St SW
234th St SW
D.D.H.V = Directional Design Hour Volumes.
Data assumes only a single driveway.
chri,4.ophqr i�rown pc.
1"1111,10, �AICIIIIC
wa6hindon
7 �4567 7-)111,
2 U�81 VI
__8C)s
Accident frequency. -by year is shwon in Table VI.
TABLE VII
Accident Freguency by Year
1982 24
1973 23
1974 22
1975. 28
'1976 24
1977 15**
Possibly incomplete data for the year
From the above, accident frequency appears to be constant' from year to year.
The.lack of recent data precludes more in-depth or meaningful analysis.
AdverseConsequences & Mitigating Measures
During the heaviest peak hour, the p.m. peak,' traffic on SR 99 will flow at an
LOS in the C�D range.' At the project, traffic leaving the site and turning
right will have an LOS of D;. traffic proceeding south and turning into the
site will also have an LOS- of D where LOS1 "D" means long delays. Traf fic
turning left from the site will have an LOS of E, or '!very long delaysit 9
probably up to three or four minutes. This has been observed'at the site over
the last few weeks and thus the calculations in the appendix merely confirm an
already known feature. Indeed, it was this fact that suggested the importance
of 76th Avenue W. as a key element in mitigating the adverse circumstances for
southbound vehicles leaving the site. Essentially, to go south from the site
during the peak hours, the best route is one that goes north for a block and
takes advantage of free right turn opportunities.
The principle adverse consequences of the project will be:
1. Excessive delays for vehicles attempting to turn left from the
site.
'2. Long delays for vehicles turning south into the site and t*urning
right from the site.
31. Increased traffic on neighbourhood,streets.
North of the site, there will be substantial, increases in demand on the east
leg.of 230th Street S.W. although this facility has the ability to absorb such
increases. Similarly, the're will be increased demands on 76th Avenue W. from
chriAopher brown pc
9688 rainier aDvenuc 8.
5qaft1c wa8hingLon
11
Lei: 7234567 18
8
230th Street S.W., to SR 104. The intersection of 76th/SR 104 is capable of
handling the extra demands without modification. Nevertheless, Wash DOT will
need to monitor the intersection for possible signal timing adjustments.
As..with the existing apartment units that are already in place- along and
close-by'SR 99 from 234th-Street S.W. south to 244th Street S.W., the subject
development may produce additional pedestrian and/or transit demands. The
lack of safe pedestrian crossings on SR 99'and the lack of sidewalks in the
vicin ' ity of the site implies opportunity for accidents. No pedestrian
accidents have been found from a check of the files from 1972 thru 1982;
however, potential for pedestrian accidents will increase as the resident
,population increases.
Conclusions & Recommendations
The .:proposed multi -family development will generate about twelve hundred
vehicular trips per day and add some 110 vehicles to the - morning- peak hour
tr affic- stream and 132 vehicles to the evening peak hour. The major
destinations 'will be in the immediate vicinity and to the north including
Everett and Lynnwood. * There should be no change in vehicular accident
patterns or frequency as a result of the. project but increasing residential
development will likely lead to increases in transit demands and also to
attendant pedestrian travel. In turn, this will lead to the need for
pedestrian amenities including sidewalks and some form of street crossing
protection across' SR 99. The handling of pedestrian demands may be the most
s . ignificant element of residential development I along the SR 99 corridor.
The levels of service will remain relatively unaffected for SR 99 traffic by
virtue of the project but traffic leaving the site, going south, will need to
divert northerly to 230th Street S.W. Low levels of service will be
experienced by vehicles turning right from the site and also turning across
northbound traffic to enter the site, respectively levels 0 and E.
Signal warants will not be met at the site or at either 234th or 230th Streets
S.W. No changes to the signal at 76th Avenue W. and SR 104 are needed but the
intersection should be monitored for signal timing adjustments.
The present plans call for two driveways with a width of 24 feet. This
requires left and right turning vehicles leaving the site to form single -line
queues. More efficient operations would exist if left and right turn
movements were separated. Accordingly, it is recommended that only a single
access driveway be provided and that it have, two outbound lanes, say 22 feet
in width, and a single entrance lane of width' 12 to 14 feet. Curb returns for
the driveway should be not less than 25 feet.
No other recommendations are suggested, apart from those associated with the
coordination of pedestrian.amenities along and across SR 99 as -noted above.
chriAophcr brown pe.
9688 ramicr avcnuc &
�raftle wa8hingLon
1d: 7234567
TSAO/KUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES
Multi -family Residential PrOject 0 SR 99 & 234th Street S.W.
Traffic Study
APPENDIX
Unsignalized "T" Intersection Capacity Calculation Form
0 ec.
Intersection e-z> 7- Z,77"e-
I Ax'at ion P I an: Counts:
Date
Da) 7-
A B Time
Control
24 Prevailing Speed
Hourly Demand Traffic Volumes from m
Approach
A
8
C —y—
Movement
A r —
A,, -'N
BL
BY —
C1. —'\
C.
Volume
Al-110
x7�
/�
, �*
P >
? � C�
rwh iv, r,hic i
Step I Right Turn from C
C,
Conflicting Flow% M,
16 A,, + A,.
(from Fig. 1)
+
Cfitical Gap from Toble 2 Tv
Sec
Capicity from Fig. 2 =
M,� M,
Shared Lane - See Step 3
No Shared Lane Demand
C.
Available Reserve =
Delay & Level Service
M C
of (Table 3)
F25-1
Step 2 Veft Turn from B
It, f-
Conflicting Flows M,
A,, + Ar
(from Fig. 1)
+
Critical Gap from Table 2 T.
%cc
Capacity from Fig. 2
MV. M2
Demand
Capacity Used
100(BL/Ml)
Impedance Factor from Fig. 3
P,
Avail able Reserve =
M2 — B,
.
Delay & Level of Service (Table 3)
/1-
EM
Step 3 Left Mirn fraim c
C',
Conflicting Flows = M,,
I/iAjt + AT + BL + B
(from Fig. 1)
22 1 a
'Critical Gap firom Table 2 T.
Sec
Capacity from Fig. 2
M'.
Adjust for Impedance
MN. X Pit M3
No Shared Lane Demand
C,
Available Reserve
M3 CL
Delay & Level of Service (Table 3)
PrA
E�]
Shared Lane Demand
CS + C1. Cori.
Shared Lane with Right Tum
Wit + CO
Capacily of Shared La ne
Min (CR/Mi) + fCL/M,)
M13 = -wh
Av I ailablc Reserve
M13 C'M =
..Delay & Level of Service (Table 3)
Ov"I Evaluation
.��) <L-
-2
W
VIM-
F911%
IP"
....... ....... .......
MOM
T
�jj
5;/
-92
12-2 Z.
A
:133rens
wou-4 O.L
61 r)
3-LVC3
SNOLL lNnwwoo 3ouzio-NVINI
Ob
7,
S-7 ./,/A-I"7e el
qL.
ZA 7-1
75�—,
Te
7o-
7
7r,-.. e,4
Ao
6- v -7. 410,0 s A107'
e7l
C:aO
1,06,too
17 �, ,/ 4CI
..... .................... ....
..................... .......... . i� "37
(417)67-5)
'T7
43
Z-573
3 3 cl,
-----------
vl-� `/, e " 7
�7
--------------
x 7,� 2A
IA zA-
4Z-
(Z.:30
Arb /*
0
6�1 C, L'-70- /"-S
0, 2,5
-3 04
Y'd
as 7
11097 cfis
n- >--p
C,40 x c
17
.....................
A-ts C-
3 �?63J-)
3. -SIF
- 7-
7
/ �,-- �.-u a J 7 c- 4
C>7
/.0- (3(7
r4 ,
AJ(7 fA-e-r'llc ec
ro7 . . .................... .
C 0 r649
/,;/,6
Ll.
Zl�
T, /,jr -3 > A-f
rop) %O�ox
-7-T-7
LIQ
43z�9
�127 C/ A-,ez, 6T
0 7/q ?-,w-
0. 96 Y- 6'6
�11-- 6 �il �zo
0,,V
7y
2- -7
-73
4-7 >)
7)rp
"Wei 5- e -
g,
5 IZ"
lytLQ
Wa v,iM
"IN
12
;Tl
oil
4�1
41. 4:15
VAI
7.4
..........
3 S- 7-
216
cl�
a-e,&'e
3
410
�64.0,.V&,p e5eq vr,,2- 0. S"000,
,Q- 71b 4- A� C-1 4:!PV&;aZ-�77)
T—
OCO 1%of
ISW4�)
70
)1�77
11
Is
4J7�
7
73
/TO
Z- Vg e-p
LAI
0,0
a 7c, 6
V5 -------- IT
9 If 70
7 >)
?f7o
TSAO / KUTSM'AN & ASSOCIATE?, P.S.
ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
81EC Ell Y ED
APR 19 'I�W
April 18, 1983
MY OF EDMOND$
Mr. Dan Smith
Department of Public Works
City of Edmonds
Civic Center
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Re: 174-Unit Apartment@ 23301 Pacific Highway,
Edmonds, Washington,
Dear Dan:
In reference to our telephone conversation this da'te, transmitted herewith are
three prints of Sheet C-2 and two prints of Sheet C-4.
Sheet C-2 indicates the addition of two sanitary manholes ( MH A-1) & (MH 3-1),
relocation of 81, gate valve, relocation af one fire hydrant in the southwesterly
portion and change the direction of the steamer port of one hydrant in the
northeasterly portion.
Please let us know if these revised plans are satisfactory to you.
Thank you.
Very Truly Yours,
William S. Tsao
WST: ft
Encl.
2367 Eastlake Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102 U.S.A.
(206).324-8780
V
P R 0 P 0 S A L
174 Unit - Edmonds
SCHEDuL'1E III
Storm Sewer
Unit
Description
Quantity
Unit
Price
Amount
1.
611 Pipe
L.F.
2.
811 PVC Pipe
jo5a.
L.F.
a,nn
A,4F,4-nZ_
3.
1211 Pipe
L.F.
4.
181, —Pipe
L.F.
5.
2411 CMP Pipe
310
L.F.
20.00
6 200.00
6.
3011 CMP pipe
459
L.F.
26.00
11,934.00
7.
Pi p e
L.F.
Pipe
L.F.
9.
Standard Catch Basin
Each
1 n.
Type-l-A Catch Bas'
Each
500-*00
3 000.00
Standard I n 1'e t
Each
L2 .
Type 2 Catch Ba S in M.H. 4al, 2
Each
1200.00
2,400.00
13.
Intake.and Outfall.,Riprap
L4.
Select Backfill*(if needed)
15 .
Type II C.O.(M.H. 5411)
4
Each
1600,00
6,40 0.00
-16.
Type II C.B.(4a,,)
w/restrictor
Eac h
1500.00
1,500.00
17.
Type II C.B.'5411
w/restrictor
Each
1800.00
1,800.00
Storm
Sewer Total
S-41.6,98.
Wash.
St. Sales Jx$'�v
3j2
Schedule III Total
4,1 5,91 . 4 4'
k"
P R 0 P 0 S A L
174 Unit Edmonds
SCHEDULE II
Sanitary Sewers
Unit
P
'Description Quantity Unit rice Amount�
�6 Side -sewer pipe 331 L.F. 11 . 0 0 3,641.
i_�_cluding'::T s , Y s and
.bedding):.
0 0
5.
sewer p i:p e 1075 L.F. '13 0 3 9 7
2.
(t 121 deep)(incl,uding
Tls,Y1s and beddin
9
3. 811 :sewer pipe -0- L . F .
(121 to 151 deep)
.4. Standard M a n h o 1 e a X XdKWE�W 5 Each 1200.00 6 0 0 0 . 0 0
5. Drop Manhole' 150 0.00 1,500.0'0
Each
6. Manhole Extra Depth -0-.
V.F.
7 Break into -Existing M.H. Each 400.00 400.0
8. Road Restoration.�
9. Select agickfill(if needed)
e
10. Connect to.:Bldgs 1.. plac*
`bb"
each b u i 1 d'i n g 5 Each 5 6. 5 Oz'�; 0 13
';VII L
!,SO 6
Sche a 00.?
dule! biii,,l ot '1� .2
W a s h t .,S 61'e' s.... .
I ;W.
0 T A
57-5
Schedule
i�,
U
A
P
R
0
P.
O�
S
A
L
174 Units - Edmonds
SCHEDULE
IV
Water'syst
Unit.
Description
Quantity
Unit
Price Amount
211 Pipe
L.F.-
411- Pipe
L.F.
611 D.I.Cl -52Pipe
120
L.F.
11.00 1�r320.00
81, D.I. C152 P i p a.
1600
L.F.
13.00 20 800.00
- Pipe
L .'F
8 T a p p i n g Valve&sleeve
1
Each
1100.00 1 100.00
811 Gate Valve
2
Each
475.00 950.00
F i r q': Hydrant - Assembly
5
Each
1300.00 ..6'1500.00
Bldw�-Off Valve
Each
10.
C., I Fittings
L.S.
UM.
1500.00 1 50 Od
Single Service 211
5
Each
550 .00 2 7 50.00�,
Double Service
Each
77
IM
."M
Select 'Backfill(if needed)
14.
Connect to Exist.System
Each
12`1 :japping -Si-eeve' &
'a "tapping v a 1-v e
2
Each
15 MIR
�2
Water System-i�sub-Total$.:,37-
Wash St
Schedule,.Y,11
MJRI ne
14
4
VC, 4.
k,
TSAO / KUSSMAN & ASSOCIATES, P.S.
hLARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
May 3, 1983
LANDSCAPE COST ESTIMATE
EDMONDS 174
ITEM
QUANT17Y
UNIT
UNIT PRICE
SUBTOTAL
Pine
150
61- 71
18.40
$2.1760.00
Red Maple
60
101- 141
17.60
1.%056.00
Escallonia Rubra
40
911- 12tt
3.20
128.00
Rhododendrons
25
30tt - 36t?
7.20
180.00
Choista Ternala
100
1 gal
5.20
520.00
Photenia
125
41-51
5.70
712.50
Laurel
125
61- 7t
3.90
487.50
Vine Maple
20
4tt bot
12.20
244.00
Ivy
700
1 gal
.60
420.00
Salal
100
1.20
120.00
PLANT MATERIAL TOTAL 63,628.00
SOD TOTAL 7 J, 500. 00
SUPPLIES., TopsoUl., Fertilizer., Rentals, Bark 6.1372.00
LABOR 1011o500.00
TOTAL $31,000.00
A
2367 Eastlake Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102 U.S.
(206) 324-8780
TSAO WIS 'MAN & ASSOCIATE1, P.S.
ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
May 3, 1983
Mr. Dan Smith
City of Edmonds
Edmonds., Washington 98020
Re: Proposed 174-Unit Apartment at 23301 Pacific
Highway, Edmonds, WA - Mastro
Dear Dan:
in accordance with your request, we are submitting the following
cost estimate for your use:
1 . Water System - complete $40.1877.76
2. Storm Drain System - complete 44.1950.44
3. Improvement to Pacific Highway 5,775.00
4. Landscape
31,000.00
The detail breakdown for water., storm and improvement to Pacific
Highway are hereby enclosed. Thank you.
Yours very truly
William S. Tsao
WST:clk
enclosure
2367 Eastlake Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102 U.S.A.
(206) 324-8780
7iFTSAO / KUTSM'AN & ASSOCIATE1, P.S.
ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
May 3, 1983
174 Unit Apartment, 23301 Pacific Highway, Edmonds, WA - Mastro
COST ESTIMATE
Improvement to Pacific Highway, Drawing C4 of 4, Tsao/Kussman &
Associates., P.S. I Dated April 29, 1983
UNIT
ITEM
QUANTITY
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
1.
Concrete Sidewalk
11450
S. F.
1.50
$2.1175
2.
Asphalt Pavement
70
S.Y.
10.00
700
incl Base
3.
Precast Traffic Curb
300
L. F.
3.00
900
4.
Stripping, Sign, Misc.
1
L. S.
1,000
1,000
5.
Earthwork
1
L. S.
1.1000
1.1000
TOTAL $5,775
Note: Landscape Included - On -site
2367 Eastlake Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102 U.S.A.
(206) 324-8780
0
0
CONTINUED AGENDA
ADB-65-82
TIME OIL COMPANY - Review of freestanding sign and landscape modi
tirmc for service station and sto at 22324 Highway 99 (CG)
At the November 15, 1982 meeting the ADB approved the site layout,
lighting, and elevations for this new gas station/convenience store,
but did not approve the sign and landscaping. The applicant was asked
to increase the amount of plantings and to reduce the sign size. The
new sign will be approximatley 22' tall with a 10'x 6' interior lit
sign, located in the corner planter bed. The first proposed sign was
6'x 16'. The allowed sign area is 60 sq. ft. and the now proposed
sign area is 60 sq. ft. All existing signs are to be removed. Mr.
Lewis said this corner location is visible in all directions for up
to 2-3 blocks. This one sign will use the entire allowed sign area,
not allowing the addition of any signs on the site or the building.
Mr. Lewis noted that this type of business has gas signs, window
signs, and other directional signs. It was noted that the Code recommends
that freestanding signs in the CG zone not exceed 25' in height and 64
sq. ft. in area for a single tenant. Chairman LaFon advised the
applicant that if this application were approved he would not be
allowed to have price signs in addition. T ' he applicant responded that
he will not clutter it up with a lot of signs and there will be a
single price sign. MR. HINTZ MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. SELVIDGE, TO
APPROVE ADB-65-82. MOTION CARRIED.
ADB-77-82 G & M INVESTMENT - Review of site, elevations, and landscaping for
174-unit apartment complex at 23301 Highway 99 (CG)
A number of requirements were established by the Board at the last
meeting which have been addressed as follows: A 6' matching fence was
to be installed adjacent to the commercial property to the west. This
has been partially accomplished and will be completed. Trees on
Highway 99 have been changed to 6'- 7' Scotch pines, 15' on center.
Ground cover has been increased to 24" on center, using 4" pots of ivy
and salal. Walkway lighting is the low -scale, mushroom type, low
wattage with an overall height of 2'. The parking lot lighting is
proposed to be 20' cut-off flood light with 250 watt Mercury vapor
lights. Individual storage areas for each unit have been shown, with
floor plans demonstrating accessibility. The storage areas are provided
in each unit near the hot water heater and floor plans have been
provided. The City and the applicant have reached an agreement on the
access into te lot --one access point near the south end of the site.
The driveway will have sufficient width to provide one lane into the
site, plus two exit lanes (left turn only and right turn only).
There also will be a paved, 100' minimum transition lane to provide
safe vehicle merging to the northbound flow onto Highway 99. A sidewalk
extending the entire length of the property along Highway 99 will be
provided with a transit stop and shelter near the north end of the
transition lane. As part of the issuance of the negative declaration
of environmental impact, the applicant will be required to design the
storm drainage system for a 25-year storm, with provisions to mitigate
a 50-year storm because this is a natural collection site. Concerns
expressed by the Planning Department were: (1) An existing billboard
on the site is in violation of the Sign Code regarding off -premise
si ns. (2) Removal of existing lighting on the site should be required.
(3? No vegetation is to be disturbed in the RS-8 areas. (4) When this
site was cleared of the large machinery there was some left or placed
in the RS-8 areas which should be removed. (5) An area in the RS-8
zone has been used for fill over the past years and has been left
exposed. This should be required to be cleaned. The proposed parking
lighting should be reduced. The 6' fence along the north property
line of commercial property should be extended to the west. The
applicant was agreeable to the requirements.
Mark Daviscourt, 7714 234th S.W., recommended that the fence be of
cedar, 6' high, solid so it cannot be seen through, and on a berm. He
said he wants the siding to be cedar and does not want mercury vapor
lights, especially on a high pole. He said he had discussed this with
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Page 2 - April 6, 1983
the Planning Department. Also, he said the trees in the southeast
corner are the most important for a buffer. He understood that the
developers wanted to take out about 30 trees for a parking lot to
accommodate Building B. He said there should not be a problem as to
availability of plants indicated on the plan, but Mr. Tsao had said he
wanted to substitute. His main objection to the buildings was that
they look like cracker boxes and are very inexpensive. He proposed
that the buildings be offset by 6' to bring them more into character
with the neighborhood and provide privacy to the occupants. Also, he
asked that the elevation lines be dropped 4'- 5' which would break up
the line of the building and bring it into more of a residential
context. He said the most important thing he wanted was that the line
and elevation be offset. He said if these requests were not met he
and others would fight this project to the fullest extent. No one
else wished to speak and the hearing was closed.
Chairman LaFon stated that the drawings call for vertical cedar siding
and 2"x 6" vertical trim, and the T-111 is gone. He noted that the
roof will be a sphalt composition shingles and the fence will be l"x 6"
rough sawn cedar. He asked what the traffic study indicated the
impact of traffic will be on 234th. William Tsao responded that it
will not impact 234th because it is hard to make a left turn onto
Highway 99. He said the City Engineer concurred with the traffic
report. Mr. Tsao said he had agreed to a planting strip along the
driveway. Chairman LaFon said the applicants had complied with all of
the Board's requests on the site plan, but he agreed that the wattage
of the lighting or the height of the poles should be reduced. Mr.
Tsao said 20' is a minimum height in the parking lot. Because there
was a question, Mr. Tsao indicated on the drawing the location of the
storage. MR. PEDERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN LaFON, TO APPROVE
ADB-77-82, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: THE FENCE SHOULD BE EXTENDED ON
THE SOUTH SIDE, CONTINUING IT TO THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE OF THE ADJACENT
THUNDERBIRD PAINT BUILDING; REMOVE THE EXISTING BILLBOARD; REMOVE
EXISTING LIGHTING ON THE SITE; IN THE RS-8 AREA CLEAN UP BUT DO
NOT DESTROY OR REMOVE VEGETATION; REMOVE ALL OLD EQUIPMENT; SIDING IS
TO BE CEDAR ONLY; AND FINAL OCCUPANCY TO BE DEPENDENT ON ALL OF THE
ABOVE BEING ACCOMPLISHED. MOTION CARRIED.
AGENDA
ADB-26-83 MARSHALL'S CLEANERS - Review of fascia sign for laundromat at 9804
Edmonds Way ON)
The existing rooftop sign will be removed and the proposed new sign is
to be interior illuminated, with their standard logo colors (red and
white with yellow lettering). The allowed sign area is 40 - 50 sq.
ft., the proposed is 49 sq. ft., and there is an existing window sign
of 8 - 10 sq. ft. It was noted that there has been some concern about
the Marshall's sign on Puget Dr. which is causing glare. The applicant
said with regard to the brightness of the sign that they could reduce
it to 400 ma instead of 800 ma, and they could go to a daylight rather
than a white lamp which would reduce glare. Also, he said a matte
finish on the face would remove the shininess from the plexiglass.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Dr., said he lives across the street from
the sign on Olympic View and he had taken the liberty to measure the
front of the Marshall's building on Edmonds Way. He said they indicate
55' of frontage but he had stepped it off two ways and got 41'- 45' so
the present sign they have is about right on the squre footage requirement,
but he noted that did not include the window sign. He said they were
told on Olympic View that they had used all of the signage but when
the signs went up they put one on the window, and there presently is a
sign on the window. Mr. Lewis said what they are proposing will be
between 5'- 7' over what is allowed. Mr. Hertrich said he did not
feel the application was as straightforward as it should be. He said
they were told about the restriction and did not follow through on the
sign on Olympic. Also, he said the sign on Olympic has a ray effect
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Page 3 - April 6, 1983
"A
2-24-83
MARCH A.D.B. COMMENTS
Memo to Architectual Design Board
From Dan Smith
1. ADB-50-82, G. and M. Investments
The site plan/ circulation system still needs to reflect those
recommendations provided by the traffic study done by Chris Brown
2. ADB-5-83 Olsens Leasing
Engineering has no objection to this action. The siqn should
be placed so as not to constitute a site obstruction-.
3. ADB-12-83 Harbor Square #3
The parking layout appears acceptable.A handicap stall(s) should
be added in the most convienient point of access to the bank.
4 ;--ADB':.13-83,.-,-Ron a I d,;-H a rned
It appears that the parkin:6 can all be facilitated in the
rear lot using the allowed compact stalls and tandem parking.
A second curb cut will not be allowed on the site.
U--,- x1*t6'au
Planning/Engineering Insp.
� I
is
MEMO TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CU-56-83
January 11, 1983
Hearing Examiner
Dan Smith
Planning/Engineering
Inspector
JANUARY 20, 1983 HEARING EXAMINER MEETING
HUMPHREY CONSTRUCTION
Conditional Use permit for fill placement for
culvert installation at 16905 Talbot Road and
7700 Bertola Road (in the vicinity of,the
Lynnwood Sewage Treatment Plant) (RS-12)
'0
The Engineering Department does not object to this action. The culvert
to be extended beneath the fill is required to be the same size as the
existing, i.e. 24". A designed headwall and profile of pipe are required
with building permit. An inspection is required prior to covering the
pipe. Applicant to contact the Engineering Department to set time.
V-17-82 SNOHOMISH COUNTY P.U.D.
Variance to allow overhead wiring at Main Street
between 3rd Avenue and Sunset Avenues.
Engineering has no comment on the aesthetic aspects of this application.
However, if approved, any new poles should be placed so as to not
constitute a site hazard.
ST-7-82 G & M INVESTMENT
Amendment to the Official Street Map to remove a
proposed street in the vicinity of 78th Avenue West
and 234th Street S.W.
Engineering is not opposed if no lots are denied legal access/egress for
vehicles and/or legal access to utility systems.
CU-1-83
No comment.
DS/mt
WAYNE CALLECOD
Conditional Use permit to park commercial vehicle over
10,000 pounds licensed gross vehicle w6ight at
8127 220th Street S.W. (RS-8)
0
FILE #
CITY OF EDMONDS D A T E 2
APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT FEE. $100.00 RECT#..3 35D
to
OFFICIAL STREET MAP
ENV.ASSESSMENT FEE $35.00
ENV.CHECKLIST RECVD
HEARING DATE //:W42
PROCEDURE: Applications are sent to the Hearing Examiner for hearing. The
Hearing Examiner will accept, reject, or revise the proposal contained in the
application. The Hearing Examiner will forward to the City Council his findings and
recommendation. Should the Council reject or modify the recommendation of the
Hearing Examiner, they will set a public hearing date for the final disposition of
the case.
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
G & M Investment PHONE: 324-8780
2367 Eastlake Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102
DESCRIBE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP:
SEE ATTACHED (A
REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT: SEE ATTACHED (e
REQUIRED SUBMITTALS:
(Must be submitted at time of application)
1. A drawing or map of the area involved.
2. Environmental Checklist, completed, with the 135.00 fee.
3. Names and Street Addresses of all owners of Property.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The signatures of local residents supporting this application
may be attached to this form on a separate page.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
City of Edmonds
Application for Amendment page 2
(A) To remove the proposed public right of way extending northward
from 234th Street Southwest for a distance of approximately 600 feet,
with a 50 feet wide east -west extension on the east side of said
projected right-of-way for a distance of approximately 250 feet and thence in a
southerly direction approximately 130 feet in distance and 50 feet in
width, as set forth in Design IICII on file in Planning Commission
File No. ST-2-70, and by this reference the same is incorporated
herein as if set forth in full.
(B) The proposed right-of-way does not appear to improve the general
safety, welfare and health of the public since the traffic generated by the
affected land is encouraged to ingress and egress onto Pacific Highway
(U.S. 99). As indicated on the attached map, the area affected by the proposed
removal is mostly under the applicant's pwnership. Upon removal of this
proposed right-of-way, no land will be without ingress and egress,
under Ordinance No. 1543 dated April 6, 1971.
\1
27
LLJ
C-i
M
-:7-
7
P I �,, F. N J F c� T - 2 - 7 0,
0 .4
I
Memo to Architectural Design Board I*
Page 2 --December 28, 1982
ADB-76-82 MR. AND MRS. ROKKE (Planning/Engineering Staff -Review co&ed)
c) A 14% maximum slope,per code,is allowed on ingress/egres?�14
drives. A plan/profile for the north drive is required
prior to issuance of the building permit.
d) Underground wiring required to new building.
e) An approved development plan must be obtained prior to
building permit issuance. This shall include drainage,
road/radii improvements on Seamont, water line size and
location, sanitary sewer line size and location and the
profile of the north access road.
f) A performance bond shall be required for all public
improvements and the drainage system prior to issuance
of the building permit.
,ADB-11-82 G & M INVESTMENTS
Review of site, elevations and landscaping for a 174 unit
apartment complex at 23301 Highway 99. (CG)
The requirements are as follows:
a) Parking - The general circulation plan appears acceptable.
Three of the parking lots show. as all compact,and this
plus several substandard aisle widths will need to be
discussed/modified prior to issuances of building permits.
b) Water - See attached memo dated 12/23/82 from Water/Sewer
Division.
c) Sewer - There is presently sufficient capacity in the
sanitary sewers to accommodate the 174 units from this
property.
d) An approved development plan is required prior to the
issuance of the building permits.
e) Performance bond(s) will be required per the City Code,
based upon the approved development plan, prior to issuance
of building permits.
ADB-78-82 AL MCLENAGHAN
Review of site, elevations and landscaping for two triplex
buildings at 624 Daley Street, (RM-1.5)
a ) Alley - The City will require that the alley be paved from
6th Avenue South, east to the east property line to 15 feet
in width.
b). Note that per code only 50% of a prODerty frontage may be
on a curb cut. Therefore, the width of the cuts on Daley Street
must be reduced.
0 4
CITY OF EDMONDS
2W DAYTON ST-EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98M-(206) 775-2525
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
December 23, 1982
TO WHOM IT. MAY CONCERN:
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
The proposed aDartment house complex near Highway 99
and 234th Street S.ti.- will obtain water supply from the
City's 12" transmission main from Seattle. This will cause
a large demand on the system resulting in a large Demand
0 -
Charge from the City of Seattle.
C)
Our inability to control this transmission main flow
and usage in the Ballinger Area is already causing a summer
0
peak -time demand on the system with resultin.q Demand Charges
imposed on us of $13,000 in 1981 and $18,000 in 1982.
Sincerely,
"XRCHIE BRENA
Water/Sewer Div. Supervisor
AB : rri
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
NEW
ADDITION
EIRETIREMENT
s4%ft- ASSET NO.
NO.
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION DEPT. NO.
232)t lk�dy 4 6 q,::5
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
!�� 6c) 2 ),
*PROJECT NUMBER 446(, -
f /
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE hl,�l
COST
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
kvp)
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
I
54 NEW
0 ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
d /Z v
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION 4� DEPT. NO.
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
PROJECT N U M BE I
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE E131 j jP3
COST 2-
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. y& - o q p - c -3
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
51 DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESS66'/
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
ttnp
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
v
NEW
ADDITION
EIRETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION E PC NO.
LY s;e o
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
*PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. ale('- 3Y,6 -00 , (0-3
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY , DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
19 DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
j
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
kvp)
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
v-
NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
/Z u
ERIAL NO.
LOCATION DEPT. NO.
ly 6, V/ C�- 0
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
S
UZ*PROJECT N
PROJECT COMPLET11 �t)AYAm, 31IS3
COST
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO. 11-1-7
INITIAL
b1p)
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
V
NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
ERIAL NO.
LOCATION DEPT. NO.
2-3 9z- e, c- 1 6 C,.- o
"PURCHASE ORDER NO.
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
0
Cosi
.5.- 3 o 1. c,
*PROJECT NUMBER I!
PROJECT COMPLET107TE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY
DATE
APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
1�i DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
0 G.L. ENTRY REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
(tnp
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
-2 t$l A 70414-
I" R
4trNO.
LOCATION
2 3 z- 3 6, c,
DEPT. NO.
6 C,-
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
,V// - oc, c,
20
:5-4- 3 a (o 0 -31
PROJECT N U M BE R 7
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST b-
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
ttnp
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
DESCRIPTION
LOCATION
W NEW
F-1 ADDITION
EIRETIREMENT
2- 3 2--z 5
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
19
ASSET NO. 00-
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
SERIAL NO.
DEPT. NO.
All -
*PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST 6-3 5'
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. q /,( - PC, 0 1 V :3 -54
ESTIMATED LIFE 2-0
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
DEPRECIATE VERIFIED BY
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT PROCESSED
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT BATCH N(?�
G.L. ENTRY REFERENCE DATE
INITIAL
�yp)
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
NEW ASSET NO.
ADDITION ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
RETIREMENT
DESCRIPTION
ERIAL NO.
LOCATION NO.
3 Z z � e/ C)
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
- cl
*PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST 14 2F
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. c-- o c> - a 3 5K 15- - clo
ESTIMATED LIFE 215
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
IN DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
FD,
PROCESSEI�.
BATCH NO
t�np
INITIAL
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
E� NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET NO. 620,;5 �, �,�
ADDITION TO ASSET NO
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION
DEPT. ZO.
to It 1919 8 ja 6, /f
910
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
(94� :5 �- 3 0., ro
�6i f
*PROJECT NUMBE 00'
PROJECT COMPLETION D TE
F
COST
C3 0
Li (o
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. do - 6 --?
ESTIMATED LIFE 2 0'
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
EaDEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO.
INITIAI.
Up)
DEPARTMENT FILE
--- T
CITY OF EDMONDS
c
NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
DESCRIPTION
AAT INFORMATION SHEET
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
49
NO.
ILOCATION DEPT. NO.
a -3-z o /4-1 'y Rz- ))e- A--- I lcqo I
"PURCHASE ORDER NO. -
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
—5 j— 3
PROJECT N U M BE R
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST s—
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. rF C> 0 — 6/l/ — 3
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT -
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED m ,
Re. a�
BATCH NO.
INITIAL
itnp
DEPARTMENT FILE
MEMO TO: Hearing Examiner
FROM: Dan Smith
Planning/Engineering
Inspector
SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 3, 1983 HEARING
ST-7-82 G & M INVESTMENT
January 26, 1983
k.
9A,
4,4
Amendment to the Official Street Map to remove a proposed
street in the vicinity of 78th Avenue West and 234th Street
S.W. and to add a new 30' street connecting 232nd Street S.W.
and 234th Street S.W. (,RS-8/CG)
Engineering does not object to this action as long as it does not preclude
any of the adjacent properties from access to utlities or the public road.
CU-3-83 HOVDE/BESELIN
Conditional Use Permit for fill and grading of approximately
12,000 cubic yards at 180 Dayton Street (Dayton Street between
SR 104 and Railroad Avenue) (CG)
Engineering does not object to this request. The requirements are:
a) An approved route;
b) No tandem trucks allowed; and
c) The contractor is responsible for keeping the public
streets clean and free of mud and debris.
V-1-83 HUMMEL HOMES
Variance to improve non -conforming structure more than 25%
of the valuation at 729 Main Street. (RS-6)
No comment.
DS/mt
FILE #
-/ - ?7—
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT
DATE
FEE. $100.00 RECT# 3 356)
to ENV.ASSESSMENT FEE $35.00
OFFICIAL STREET MAP- ENV.CHECKLIST RECVD
HEARING DATE
PROCEDURE: Applications are sent to the Hearing Examiner for hearing. The
Hearing Examiner will accept, reject, or revise the proposal contained in the
application. The Hearing Examiner will forward to the City Council his findings and
recommendation. Should the Council reject or modify the recommendation of the
Hearing Examiner, they will set a public hearing date for the final disposition of
the case.
APPL I CANT: G & M Investment
PHONE : 324-8780
ADDRESS: 2367 Eastlake Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102
DESCRIBE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP:
SEE ATTACHED (A
REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT: SEE ATTACHED (B
REQUIRED SUBMITTALS:
(Must be submitted at time of application)
1. A drawing or map of the area involved.
2. Environmental Checklist, completed, with the $35.00 fee.
3. Names and Street Addresses of all owners of Property.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The signatures of local residents supporting this application
may be attached to this form on a separate page.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
0
City of Edmonds
Application for Amendment
page 2
(A) To remove the proposed public right of way extending northward
from 234th Street Southwest for a distance of approximately 600 feet,
with a 50 feet wide east -west extension on the east side of said
projected right-of-way for a distance of approximately 250 Feet and thence in a
southerly direction approximately 130 feet in distance and 50 Feet in
width, as set forth in Design IICII on file in Planning Commission
File No. ST-2-70, and by this- reference the same is incorporated'
herein as if set forth in full. To add 301 right-of-way as shown in
attached exhibit.
(B) The proposed ri ght-of -way. does not appear to improve the general.
safety, welfare and health of the public since the traffic generated by the
affected land is encouraged to ingress and egress onto Pacific Highway
(U.S.99). As indicated on the attached map, the area affected by the proposed
removal is mostly under the applicant's pwnership. Upon removal of this
proposed right-of-way, and add a 301 right-of-way, no land will be wLthout
ingress and egress under Ordin*ance'No. 1543 dated April 6, 1971.
a
i
L.Li
>1
<
IT-
30
1410�P Z /I TI A- :114
Ld 0 Ir C A 5' TA? i
R& v1f &1) jA
to .1
T,
LA
er
-7 1 --'7 1-
7
LLJ
ol
ci
M
;',) E'F F P T 0 P t. '. P,'? - I NIC. f', F P A P i N, F N-I �: i �. J: �;T - 2 - 7 ()
ENVIRONME14TAL CHECKLIST
Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of
1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local
governmental agencies to consider environmental values
both for their own actions and when licensing private
proposals. The Act also requires that an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared'for all major actions
significantly affecting the quality of the environment.
The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies
involved dete=ine whether or not a proposal is such a
major action.
Please answer the following questions as completely as
you can with the information available to you. Where
explanations of your answers are required, or where you
believe an expl-anation would be helpful to government
decision makers, include your explanation in the space
provided, or use additional pages. You should include
references to any reports or studies of which you are
aware and which are relevant to the answers you provide.
Complete answers to those questions now will help all
agencies involved undertake the required environmental
review without unnecessary delay.
The following questions apply to your total proposal,
not just to the pe=it for which you are currently
applying or the proposal for which approval is sought.
Your answers should include the impacts that will be
caused by your proposal when it is completed, even
though completion may not occur until sometime in the
future. This will allow all agencies involved to complete
their environmental review now, without duplicating
paperwork in the future.
NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state
and local agencies in the State of Washington for various
types of proposals. Man' of the questions may not appl%
y
to your proposal. If a question does not apply, just
answer it "not applicable" (N/A) and continue on to the
next question.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGRDUND
I . Name of Proponent 6Y 114
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent
7
3. Date Checklist Submitted
4. Agency Requiring Checklist A-V,-,;, 111�-e,
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable
6. Nature and Brief Description of Proposal (including but not limited to
its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an
accurate understanding of its scope and nature:
6' 8 7
7- Y C)4 f),
r
7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as
well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im-
pacts, including any other information needed to give an ac(urate under-
standing of the environmental setting of the proposal):
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal Ke��, (�A4,� 211�i- 'q_�
9. List of all Permits, Licenses, or Government Approvals Required for all
Proposal (federal, state, and local — including rezones):
/* 7- >r
If
10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further
activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
A"r,
I I . Do you know of any pl ans by others whi ch may a f f ect the property covered
by your proposal? If yes, explain.
/V'o
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the
proposal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at
some future date, describe the nature of such application form:
A,
. % I
B.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes"
and "maybe" answers
are required).
YES MAYBE
NO
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions.or in changes
in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacen*nts, compaction
or overcovering of the soil?
c.. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modifica-
tion of any unique geologic or physical
features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion
of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of
beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify
the channel or a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or
lake?
Explanation:
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
Y_
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture
or temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
IZI
Explanation:
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of sur-
face water runoff?
-2-
77 -1.
YES MAYBE NO
.c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters ?
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in
any alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?.
f. Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Deterioration in ground water quality,
either through direct injection, or through
the seepage of leachate, phosphates, deter-
gents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or
other substances into the ground waters?
i. Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Explanation:
4. Flora. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of flora (in-
cluding trees, shrubs, grass, crops,'
microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of flora?
c. Introduction of new species of
flora into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of exist-
ing species?
d. Recution in acreage of any agri-
cultural crop?
Explanation:
-I-
A.
M
YES BE
N 0
5. Fauna*. WIll the proposal result in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of fauna (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or
microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of fauna?
c. Introduction of new species of
fauna into an area, or result in a
barrier to the migration or movement
of fauna?
>(
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Explanation:
6.
Noise. Will the proposal increase
existing noise levels?
Explanation:
7.
Light and'Glare. Will the proposal
produce new light or.glare?
Expl ana t ion:
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result
in the alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Explanation:
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
.resuTt—in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resource?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
Explanation:
-4-
N-
30
YES MAYBE NO
10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve
a risk of an explosion or release of hazard-
ous substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, Pesticides, chemicals or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset condi-
tions?
Explanation:
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area?
Explanation:
12.* Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
sing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
Explanation:
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the pro-
posal result 'in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and/or
goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Explanation:
PA 777-6:��-
7-
-5-
i
YES NO
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have
�n 'effect upon, or result in a need for
new or altered -governmental services in -
any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational'
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
Explanation:
15. ��ro Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy., or require the development
of new sources of energy?
Explanation:
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems or alterations to
the following utilities.
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Explanation:
IM
YES MAYBE NO
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result
in the creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)? X,
Explanation:
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Explanation.:
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result
in an impact upon the quality or quan-
tity of existing recreational oppor-
tunities?
Explanation:
20. Archeological/Historical.. Will the
proposal result in an alteration of
a significant archeological or his-
torical site, structure, object or
building?
Explanation:
C. SIGNATURE
1, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is
true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration
or non -significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there
be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
PROPONENT:
-7-
ENVIRONME14TAL CHECKLIST
Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act
1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and 1
governmental agencies to consider environmental value
both for their own actions and when licensing private
proposals. The Act also requires that an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared for all major actions
significantly affecting the quality of the.environment.
The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies
involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a
major action.
Please answer the following questions as completely as
you can with the information available to you. Where
explanations of your answers are required, or where you
believe an explanation would be helpful to government
decision makers, include your explanation in the space
provided, or use additional pages. You should include
references to any reports or studies of which you are
aware and which are relevant to the answers you provide.
Complete answers to those questions now will help all
agencies involved undertake the required environmental
review without unnecessary delay.
The following questions apply to your total proposal,
not just to the permit for which you are currently
applying or the proposal for which approval is sought.
Your answers should include the impacts that will be
caused by your proposal when it is completed, even
though. completion may not occur until sometime in the
future. This will allow all agencies involved to complete
their environmental review now, without duplicating
paperwork in the future.
NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state
and'local agencies in the State of Washington for various
types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply
to your proposal. If a question does not apply, Just
answer it "not applicable" (N/A) and continue on to the
next question..
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent Tsao, Kussman & Associates P. S.
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 2367 Eastlake Avenue East
. Seattle, Washington 98102 324-8780
3. Date Checklist Submitted -December 15, 1982
4. Agency Requiring Checklist City of Edmonds
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable
6. Nature and Brief Description of Proposal (including but not limited to
its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an
accurate understanding of its scope and nature:
174 Units of apartment in five buildings. Three story
in height of wood frame construction and wood siding.
7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as
well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im-
pacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate under-
standing of the environmental setting of the proposal):
23301 Pacific Highway, Edmonds
Approximately 6 acres, 600 feet north of 234th st. s.w.
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal December 1983
9. List of all Permits, Licenses, or Government Approvals Required for all
Proposal (federal, state, and local — including rezones):
Building Permit & State Permit for access to
Pacific Highway
10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further
activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No
11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered
by your proposal? If yes, explain.
as
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed,regarding the
proposal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at
some*future date, describe the nature of such application form:
rh
4-0 ft
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required).
YES MAYBE
NO
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes
in geologic substructures?
X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction
or overcovering of the soil? x
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or modifica-
tion of any unique geologic or physical
features?
x
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion
of soils, either on or off the site?
X_
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of
beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify
the channel or a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or
lake?
x
Explanation: See Grading Plan - Amount of excavation & fill
will
be balanced. Quantity will be calculated and submitted to
Building Department.
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality? x
b. The creation of objectionable odors? x
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture
or temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
x
Explanation: See attached.
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters? x
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of sur-.
face water runoff? x
-2-
YES MAYBE NO
4.
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
X
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in,any water body?
X
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in
any alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow of ground waters? I .
X
9. Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
X
h. Deterioration in ground water quality
either through direct injection, or throu;h
the seepage of leachate, phosphates, deter-
gents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or
other substances into the ground waters?
i. Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water
supplies?
X
Explanation:. increased runoff will result from an increase in impervious surfaces
The storm drainage plan is designed to retain increased storm runoff on site in
accordance with - City Policy. Oil separators will be used in conjunction with the
storm water drainage system to minimize the impact on water quality discharged
from the site.
Flora. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of flora (in-
cluding trees, shrubs, grass, crops,
microflora and aquatic plants)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of flora? X
c. Introduction of new species of
flora into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of exist-
- ing species? X
d. Recution in acreage of any agri-
cultural crop? X
Explanation:.Landscaping will be completed - as a part of the proposed project. This
landscaping will cause an increase in bird life and will provide a limited h�l �tt
for small mammals. Proposed - landscaping plans indicate the use of plant materia
native to the Pacific Northwest.
-3-
`V -
5 Fauna. WIll th"posal result in: MAYBE NO
a. Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of fauna (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or
microfauna)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of fauna? X
c. Introduction of new species of'
fauna into an area, or result in a
barrier to the migration or movement
of fauna? X
d. Deterioration.to existing fish or
wildlife habitat? X
Explanation: c. Increa sed vegetation may re -introduce animal
to the site- (see 4(a))
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase
existing noise.levels? X
Explanation:— See attached.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal
T-
produce new light or glare? X
Explanation: —Some additional light, but care will be taken to avoid glare.
El
Land Use. Will the proposal result
Tn —the alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Explanation:_
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
X
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resource? X
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource? X
Explanation:
-4-
MAYBE NO
10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve
i risk of an explosion or release of hazard-
ous substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset condi-
tions? x
Explanation:
11. P2R!Ll �tion- Will the proposal alter the
I—ocation, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area? x
Explanation: The project will provide living space for approximately
380 people. However, present zoning allows such
devetopment, therefore will have very MLntmal impact.
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
using, or create a demand for additional
housing? x
Explanation: This proposal will provide much needed low —rent units.
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the pro-
�_osal_ result i—n:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
movement? x
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?, x
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems? x
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and/or
goods? x
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? x
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x
Explanation: Mr. Chris Brown is presentiv conductino a traff in
study and will be submitted to City,
-5-
YES YBE NO
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have
an effect upons or result in a need for
new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
X
b. Police protection?
Z_
c. Schools?
-X-
d. Parks or other recreational
X
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
X
f. Other governmental services?
Z_
See Attached
Explanation:
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
X
b. Demand uponexisting sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?,
X
Explanation:
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems or alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
X
b. Communications systems?
X
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? -X
e. Storm water drainage? X
f. Solid waste and disposal? X
Explanation: in accordance with the Highway 99 Public Facilities Impact Study
of Nov. 1982 by Reid,- Middleton &Assoc. for the City of Edmonds, the
proposed 174 unit apartment has no signifi::ant impact.
-6-
r6%
%
YES MAYBE NO
17. Human Health * Will the proposal result
in the crea—tion of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)? X
Explanation:
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result
in the oEtruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view? X
Explanation:
19. Recreation. Will the'proposal result
in an impact upon the quality or quan-
tity of existing recreational oppor-
tunities? X
Explanation: —Adequate on -site recreational facilities will be provided.
20. Archeological/Historical. Will the
proposal result —in an alteration of
a significant archeological or his-
torical site, structure, object or
building? X
Explanation:
C. SIGNATURE
1. the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is
true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration
or non -significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there
be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
PROPONENT:
-7-
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2. Air
Explanation: a. Short term effects will be from construction traffic
and activity. This will be only a temporary impact and will not result
in air quality standards violations. Long-term effects will be due to
increased auto traffic. This increase will be slight and will not
significantly degrade existing air quality levels. All increases in air
emmissions will meet current and projected State and Federal ambient
air quality standards. b. Objectionable odors may occur during the
paving of the streets and parking lots. This will be of a short-term
nature and will last only during the actual paving process. No
long-term odors will result from the project. Odors can be mitigated through
the use of enclosed trucks and modern paving equipment.
6. Noise
Explanation: Short-term Increases will occur due to construction -oriented
noise. Long-term increase in noise level will be due to increased auto
traffic and residential activity. Maximum short-term noise due to
construction should not exceed 80 dbd at the property line .. Long
term no�se levels will be below 55 dbd at the property line. This level
meets current State standards for residential areas. Short-term noise will
be mitigated through sound suppressed construction equipment and
controlled working hodrs.
14. Public Services
Explanation: a. Fire protection is currently provided by the City of
Edmonds Water pressure is enough to provide adequate fire flows to the
site. Fire hydrants will be installed on -site and all roads will be designed
to accomodate fire -fighting equipment.
c. It is anticipated that the majority of the future occupants of the site
will be singles or couples without children.
d. The site is designed to provide for many recreational opportunities
for the residents. Therefore, the development will have a very limited
impact on existing recreational facilities throughout the region.
e. All roads on -site will be private and, therefore, would not increase
the maintenance requirements.
f. Additional demands may be made on existing health, postal, library
and miscellaneous services. These should be minimal due to the existing
levels of these services, related to the relatively small increase in
total population.
IP C-
. 1 sq,11
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
August 7, 2008
Trevor Breaux
CBR-ElMelody
3501 Jamoree Road, Suite 500
Newport Beach, CA 92660
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
RE: Zoning Confirmation Letter for Pacific Park Apartments, 23231 Highway 99,
Edmonds WA 98026
Dear Mr. Breaux:
This letter is in response to your inquiry received on July 25, 2008 regarding the Pacific
Park Apartments at 2 -3 )2) -3 ) I Highway 99 in Edmonds. The address book that we typically
use lists the address for this property as 23207 Highway 99; however, Our street file for
this property includes the addresses of 23211, 23213, 23215, 23223, 23229 and 23231
Highway 99. The zoning and Comprehensive Plan designations are based on the parcel
addressed 23207 in our address book (see enclosed vicinity map). Specific answers to
your requested information are listed below:
The land which Pacific Park Apartments is constructed is currently zoned CG
("General Commercial") pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC) Chapter 16.60. Please refer to the attached copy of ECDC Chapter 16.60 for
information on the allowable uses and applicable development regulations. The
property is also located within the "Highway 99 Corridor" Comprehensive Plan
designation. Please refer to the goals of the Highway 99 corridor in the attached
section of the Comprehensive Plan.
The project is currently non -conforming in the following respects. Per ECDC
16.60.0 1 O.C. 1, residential uses are prohibited from being located within the first or
second story of any structure within the "'Highway 99 Corridor" designation. Thus,
the use of apartments within the first two stories on the subject property does not
comply with the current zoning code requirements. The Pacific Park Apartments
were legally constructed and will be allowed to be continued pursuant to ECDC
17.40.010, as a legal nonconforming use (see enclosed copy of ECDC 17.40).
ECDC 17.40.0 1 O.G provides the City's current regulations for re-establishing a
T "
nonconforming use. Please note that the City is currently rewriting Chapter 17.40
(Nonconforming Uses, Building, Signs, and Lots). Therefore, the regulations for
continuing and/or re-establishing a nonconforming use may change with the code
rewrite.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
2. The parking requirements for multifamily residential units such as the Pacific Park
Apartments depend on the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit pursuant to ECDC
17.50.020.A. Lb (enclosed). I was not able to determine the number and types of
dwelling units from the information available to calculate the parking spaces required
for the site. Please refer to ECDC 17.50.020 for information on City of Edmonds
parking requirements and to calculate how many spaces are required.
3. The City's Code Enforcement Officer and Building Official have both indicated that
there are no current zoning or building code violations on the subject property that
they are aware of.
The Building Official has requested you submit a Request for Public Records in order to
receive copies of Certificates of Occupancy and building permits for the subject site. A
Request for Public Records is enclosed.
Hopefully this addresses your questions. Feel free to call if you have any more questions,
425-771-0220 ext. 1223.
S�i-ncere I y,
V
ocia e latiner
Development Services
City of Edmonds
Encl: Zoning and Vicinity Map
ECDC Chapter 16.60: General Commercial: CG and CG2 Zones
ECDC Chapter 17.40: Nonconforming Uses, Buildings, Signs and Lots
ECDC Chapter 17.50: Off -Street Parking Regulations
Comprehensive Plan: Highway 99 Corridor section
t ACCESSIBLE
PARKING SIGN
WAL KWAY co E
White
symbol on
blue
background
X
CURB
0 Slope
. :::: 1:10 slo
�O
mayiMilm 019"mum
imio. ism, o. �m
W
U)
AM% NX
Maximum 1:48 slope In any
direction for parking stall and
access aisle
8'-0" 8
13'-0"
ACCESSIBI.
PARKING STAL
ICC/ANSI Al 17.1 - 1998
Total Parldrig
Spaces
Provided
Required Mniryum
Number of
Accessible Spaces
I to25
1
26 to 50
2
51 to 75
3
76 to 100
4
101 to 150
5
151 to 200
6
201 to 300
7
301 to 400
8
401 to 500
9
See additional requirements in
113C 1106 based on occupancy
�7
4
777
12"
Striping
to,be
12'. -
7,
'white"",
ACCESS AISLE STRIPING OPTIONS
STREET FILE
ORDINANCE NO.15-1�5
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTONI
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP ADOPTED BY
SECTION 12.03.080 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, AS
AMENDED, BY PROPOSING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
EXTENDING NORTHWARD FROM 234TH STREET SOUTH-
WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF APPROXIMATELY �00 FEET
WITH AN EAST -WEST EXTENSION 50 FEET,IN\WIDTH
FOR A DISTANCE OF A13PROXIMATELY 29n FEET AND
THENCE SOUTHERLY APPROXI14ATELY 1�9� *ETjIN'J
MODIFICATION OF PLANNING COMMISSIO LUTION
N 0. 345.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Planning Commission ResolkdlZon
No. 345, the City Council of the City of Edmonds called a
public hearing regarding a proposed public right-of-way, and,
WHEREAS, after due consideration of existing and
future neighborhood and traffic conditions, and the general
safety, welfare and health of the public, and in modification
of the Planning Commission recommendation, now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Official Street Map adopted by
Section 12.03.080 of the Edmonds City Code, as amended, is
hereby further amended by projecting a public right-of-way
extending northward from 234th Street Southwest for a
distance of approximately 600 feet, with a 50 feet wide
east -west extension on the east side of said:projected
right-of-way for a distance of approximately 250 feet and
thence in.a southerly direction approximately 130 feet in
distance and 50 feet in width, as set forth in Design "C"
on file in Planning Commission File No. ST-2-70, and by this
reference -the same is incorporated herein as if set forth
in full.
Section 2. The City Engineer is hereby directed 11
230
mm-
dibdbft All
to amend Engineerls Drawing No. 1.559 as set forth in said
Design "C" by inserting on said Engineer's Drawing Revision
No.'J, Sheet.No. 17, Section 31.
APPROVED:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: April 6, 1971
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: April 6, 1971
PUBLISHED: April 14, 1971
-2-
NMWQK�41-�.-:1�1��K Iwo
WWI,
4-1
INV M
I h
LAKE
MCALEER
3
F I V E
I .
"ACRE TRACTS
m
S w
7' -7-
6 7
>
'D 3 2
,er c-I
REFER TO FIL ANNING DEPARTMENT FILE ST -2- 1-0
CITY OF EDMONDS
AMENDMENT TO OFFICIAL STR,EET MAP
ORD NO. 1543 DATE APR.6, 1971
APPROVED
MAYOR
ATTEST. -X U,
C I T Y C L E K
70
z
ci
F-
.-f
RUNOFF COMPUTATIONS
� " L
z
0
w
LL
LL h
—
W
0
0 p
z 0
(D —
w
:E
w
W
-Z
0
w
z
0
<
�i a-,
w <<
LL
0
LL L)
0 z
w w
(f)
L<L Z.
z U
w
0- w
-J
LL LL 0
z
U) —
w Q
z
(1.
0
J
Z
f-
a- ' <
>
<
0 >
U
0
J
z
Z' w
D 0
::> () 2
p Z
C
Z
D
0- <
0
Q
0
U)
w
0 (n
w
w
I
of U
0
ff
0
-J
_J
LL z
w
w
V
F`
QP
V P
Line
From
To
Acre
Min.
in./hr.
CFS
Inches
CFS.
FPS
CFS
FPS
%
Feet
/Y!!,/
Ground
Invert
Ground
Invert
0,6
bl-v�
lo
14
o.
CIA 1)
0
ou
0
do
C'
6,
r
0
?)
J
V'd- W!
Storm Frequency
Pioe Coefficient
Name of Project
Calculations By
-7
(�7
Job No. -d t;
� !'�' 7,- Date Sheet of
0
z
0
I
4 �
w
2
I
LL
LL
I
U-J
LL t.-
-J
of
W
z
-J 3: 0
-J 0 P-
z
z 0
0 —
w
I
w
w
z
0
w P
Z.
0
Of
w <<
Of
01 LL 0
Q
0 z
w w
(f)
LL Z.
z 1.11
-L
D :�
I Ob
w
(1 w
— 2
Z) —J
LL LL 0
z
(n
w z
Do
0
z
Cn
-3:
0-
D
.0 >
U
0
-J
0
z <
z w
D 0
0 2
Z C
< z
z
D 4
a-
<
0
-J
Lf)
w
J
)-
0 (f)
W
-J
J w
-J
J
T- 0
0
U P
ff —
Of
0
_J
z
w
w
7�5F
VF
QP
V' P
Li'ne
From
To
AcreE
Min.
n. /hr.
11 /hr.
C FS
CFS
nche4
CFS
FPS
I CFS
FPS
JFeet
Ground
Invert
Ground.
Invert
0.4
0.
M3
60
2'k
0-�
t1i -Y
6
b
/'00
0
(1-5
6.
C'
(O.o
0
C)
/.09
LA
1
Storm Frequency
I
Pipe Coefficient
Name of Project
v 1\41,
Calculations By
job No. Date tjd-fy� Sheet--V--of
I
I]
Ll
:5Z( 4p
7,1
ZZ
Li
III,, g.
71 1".
- (JU
74
6Rt
Ao 1": fif
.1
CL
41.
t, "t IW4
tD
i� re
Of
Off
%
T..
IN&
7A -:"YEA
0.
4
Y
>1L
T3
g J- -
Tf 41�
v 'A
LO
c; C.
,A M,
k-4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
All. A
e 10
r
I 4i
ULN
UL.
uj
711 -
te
"Ile
"Aw
APPROVED BY PLANNING
o (51 D s- 10 (o
N 0 cmi'l (,q 6 1 N A�-
OF
STREET FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
WORK P-k ly-q-- n- 0 / - 4 e,
ADDRESS—T�zi,,� dfjj.� 21
0 *,"V N. rE R
AFPROVED-DATE
ELDG. OFFICIAL r
PERMIT N IJ-ABER
7
2003 EDITION IBC
W/WAC AMMENDMENTS
ITb —10 -7
-2