ADB-11-63 Staff Report with Attachments.pdf4l?C. 10"
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 ® Fax:. 425.771.0221 ® Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ® PLANNING DIVISION
Project: Premier Orthopedic Group Building
File Number: PLN20110063
Date of Report: December 8, 2011
From:
'ennifer Machuga, Associate Planner
Proposal: Application for administrative design review for the new Premier
Orthopedic Group building to be located at 21401 72nd Avenue West,
within the General Commercial (CG2) zone.
The subject application is for administrative design review of a proposed three story,
approximate 82,000 square foot medical office building located at 2140172 d Avenue
West in the General Commercial (CG2) zone. The first two floors of the building consist
of parking garage and the third floor contains approximately 27,500 square feet of
medical office space. The medical office will be an orthopedic clinic, and will include
exam rooms, operating rooms, an MRI, physical therapy area, and associated waiting
areas and offices.
Since the building is to be located within the General Commercial (CG2) zone and is not
proposed to exceed 75 feet in height, the proposal is subject to design review conducted
by staff as a Type I decision. The applicant, First Western Development Services,
submitted various materials in support of the subject application, including a land use
application form, site plan, building elevations, landscape plan, and other supporting
materials which are included as attachments and referenced throughout this report.
The following is staff s analysis of the project and decision.
Page 1 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
II. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Owner: Edmonds Medical Building Associates LLC (Attachment 1)
2. Applicant: First Western Development Services (Attachment 1)
3. Tax Parcel Number: 0058070000220.8
4. Location: 21401 — 72nd Avenue West, Edmonds (Attachment 2)
5. Zoning: General Commercial (CG2) (Attachment 2)
6. Existing Use: The subject site is currently vacant.
7. Proposed Use: An approximate 82,000 square foot, three-story medical office
building, with the first two floors being comprised of parking garage and the third
floor being comprised of an approximate 27,500 square foot orthopedic clinic,
including exam rooms, operating rooms, an MRI, physical therapy area, and
associated waiting areas and offices.
8. Review Process: Pursuant to ECDC 16.60.030, design review for projects that do not
exceed 75 feet in height within the CG2 zone is to be conducted by staff as a Type I
decision. As such, staff will review the design of the proposal and will make the final
decision on whether the proposal is consistent with the design review criteria found in
ECDC 16.60.030 (design standards of the general commercial zone), ECDC 20.12
(district -based design review), ECDC 20.13 (landscaping requirements), and the
Comprehensive Plan.
III. APPLICATION MATERIALS:
The land use application is included as Attachment 1. During the review process, the
applicant revised the project plans a few times in response to staff's comments. The
latest version of the project plans were submitted on December 2, 2011 and are included
as Attachment 3. This plan set includes proposed elevation views, a site plan, floor plans,
and a landscape plan. Staff s review is based on this plan set.
In addition to the project plans, the applicant submitted a few letters and visuals during
the review process in response to staff s requests for additional information. Staff s
initial request for additional information was sent on September 19, 2011 (Attachment 4).
The applicant responded to this request with a letter dated October 10, 2011, which
included photographic examples of the proposed building materials and landscape grasses
as well as information on the rooftop mechanical equipment (Attachment 5). Upon
review of the resubmitted materials, staff sent a request for additional information on
November 9, 2011 (Attachment 6). On November 14, 2011, the applicant submitted a
response letter from First Western Development Services (Attachment 7), a letter from
PacLand regarding the landscaping revisions (Attachment 8), and a photographic example
of existing landscaping at 2191176 th Ave. W, which is similar in style to the landscaping
proposed for the subject site (Attachment 9). The applicant submitted a final response
letter dated November 16, 2011 that included lighting details (Attachment 10).
Page 2 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
IV. SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION:
Review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was required for the subject
application. The City issued a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) on October 11,
2011 (Attachment 11). No comments nor appeals were received; both the City and the
applicant have complied with SEPA requirements.
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Public notice of the SEPA Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) was provided on October
11, 2011 by mailing the DNS to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site based on a
mailing list provided by the applicant (Attachment 12), publishing the determination in the
Herald newspaper, and posting the determination at the subject site, Development Services
Department, Library, and Public Safety building. An affidavit of publication is included as
Attachment 13, and declarations of mailing and posting are included as Attachments 14 and 15
respectively.
As discussed above, no comments nor appeals were received in response to notification of the
SEPA determination.
Administrative design review for projects within the General Commercial (CG2) zone is a Type I
decision subject to the requirements of ECDC 20.12 (District -Based Design Review) and 20.01
(Staff Decision — No Notice Required). Therefore, no public notice was required for the design
review portion of the subject application. The City has not received any comment letters
regarding this proposal.
VI. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE:
This application was reviewed and evaluated by Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 as
well as the City's Building Division, Engineering Division, Public Works Department,
and Parks and Recreation Department.
Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 had no comments on the proposal. Any comments
from the Fire District will be provided as part of their review of the applicable building
permit applications associated with the project (Attachment 16).
The Building Division had no comments on the design review portion of the proposal;
however, the Building Division will do a detailed review for Building Code compliance
with their review of the subsequent building permit applications (Attachment 17).
The Engineering Division provided initial comments on the proposal in the form of a
memorandum dated September 14, 2011 (Attachment 18). Upon receipt of revised plans
from the applicant, the Engineering Division reviewed the resubmittal and provided a
memorandum dated November 8, 2011, which stated that the Engineering Division has
approved the design review portion of the proposal with the conditions that further review
of the proposal for compliance with Engineering codes and construction standards will be
conducted with the building permit application review, approval of the design review
phase does not constitute approval of the improvements as shown on the civil plans that
were submitted with the design review application, and that the applicant is encouraged to
incorporate low impact development techniques into the project design wherever feasible
(Attachment 19). These conditions have been added to the subject design review
decision.
Page 3 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
The Public Works Department initially provided comments related to their review of the
civil plans associated with the design review application (Attachment 20). The
Engineering Division addressed these comments in their initial memorandum dated
September 14, 2011 (Attachment 18). Following review of the revised plans submitted
by the applicant, the Public Works Department determined that all remaining comments
would not impact the design review portion of the proposal and were better suited to be
addressed during their review of the associated building permit application. As such, any
remaining comments that the Public Works Department has on the proposal will be
addressed with their review of the building permit application.
The Parks and Recreation Department had no comments on the proposal (Attachment
21).
As always, a thorough review by all affected divisions/departments will be conducted at
the time of building permit application review.
VII. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT:
1. Topography: The subject site is relatively level.
2. Soils: According to the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, this site
consists of"Urban Land" soils (map unit symbol 78).
3. Critical Areas: A Critical Areas Checklist for the subject site was reviewed under
File No. CRA20110049 (Attachment 22). The subject property does not appear to
contain any critical areas as defined by ECDC 23.40. As a result, a waiver from the
requirement to complete a study was issued.
VIII. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
The subject site and the surrounding properties to the north, east, and south are located
within the General Commercial (CG2) zone, while the property directly west of the
subject site across 72"d Avenue West is located within the Multiple -Family Residential
(RM -1.5) zone. See the zoning and vicinity map for reference (Attachment 2).
Surrounding uses include a mix of commercial and residential uses, such as a roofing
company, rehabilitation facility, assisted living facility, gas station, park and ride, and a
fast food restaurant. The subject site is within close proximity to Swedish Hospital and
Highway 99.
IX. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Highway 99 Corridor, " and the site
is also within the "Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center" and the "Hi -Rise Node. " An
excerpt from the Comprehensive Plan is shown below, and specific criteria can be found
in the "Urban Design: General Objectives" section of the Comprehensive Plan, which is
included for reference in Attachment 23.
1. Design Objectives for Site Design: "The development of parking lots, pedestrian
walkways and landscaping features is an integral part of how a building acts with its
site and its surrounding environment. Good design and site planning improves
access by pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles, minimizes potential negative
impacts to adjacent development, reinforces the character and activities within a
Page 4 of 19
File No. PLAT20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
district and builds a more cohesive physical environment. " (Comprehensive Plan,
page 93)
Fourteen different objectives for site design are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan
(Attachment 23). Not every objective necessarily applies to every project, and some
objectives may be more important than others for a particular project.
a. Vehicular Access: Vehicular access to the building will be via a driveway
directly off of 72nd Avenue West near the northwestern corner of the site. This
driveway will provide ingress/egress into the parking garage portion of the
building. This will be the only curb cut for vehicular access into the parking
garage. Directly north of this curb cut will be an additional curb cut that will be
utilized for garbage/recycling service. This curb cut will only provide access to
the garbage/recycling area located behind a roll -up door at the northwestern corner
of the building. Although both of these curb cuts face the street front, they do not
dominate the street front because they are located near a corner of the building,
and instead the main pedestrian entrance is located near the center of this facade,
which draws one's eye away from the curb cuts and towards the pedestrian
entrance, which is a major design feature of the building.
b. Location and Lavout of Parking: The first two floors of the three-story building
will be parking garage. Since parking will be within the building, this eliminates
the large expanse of surface parking that is typically seen surrounding medical
office buildings. By locating parking within the first two floors of the building,
this enables the building to be constructed very close to the street property line
(while complying with the four -foot street setback requirement), which improves
the project's visibility from the street and causes the main pedestrian entrance to
the building to become the main focal point of the building design.
These design objectives specify that cars should be kept from dominating the
street front. The proposal for the first floor of the parking garage includes open
bays, which could result in cars within the garage being very visible from the
street. The applicant indicated in their letter dated November 14, 2011 that they
wish for these garage bays to remain open so that the feeling that patients get
within the garage is not that of a dark and cold parking garage, but that instead the
garage is light and airy with a "green screen" of plants visible from within the
garage (Attachment 7). This is exemplified in the photo submitted by the
applicant of similar landscaping existing at 2191176 th Ave. W (Attachment 9).
The November 14th letter further states that the grasses that are proposed to be
planted in front of the open bays grow to 4 to 5 feet tall at maturity and that they
are not pruned back in the winter, so these grasses should create a visual barrier
blocking the cars within the garage when viewed from outside the building. In
order to address concerns over the cars within the first floor of the parking garage
dominating the street front, two options have been provided to the applicant
within the conditions of approval for treatment of the western and southern
building fagades. Either the applicant can construct a minimum 3.5 foot high
screening wall within each of the open bays of the lower level of the parking
garage consistent in style with the guardrails provided on the second floor of the
garage while providing landscaping consistent with the sizes and spacing
Page 5 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
specified in the landscape plan, or the proposed grasses in front of the bays must
be planted at a minimum of 3 feet in height and maintained at a minimum of 3.5
feet in height and a temporary 3 foot high black mesh (or other color and material
approved by the Planning Division) screen must be established within the open
bays for the first two years in order to assist with screening the cars and to prevent
pedestrians from cutting through from the parking garage to the sidewalk while
the landscaping matures and grows in thicker to achieve the desired screening.
c. Pedestrian Connections Offsite: Pedestrian access to the building will be via the
main pedestrian entrance, which is located near the center of the western side of
the building. This main pedestrian entry is a prominent design feature to the
building and connects directly to the adjacent sidewalk along 72nd Ave. W. The
building can also be entered directly from the parking garage, so the majority of
the building's visitors will go directly from their car into the building from within
the parking garage.
A bus stop is currently located adjacent to the site, and a park and ride facility is
located across 72nd Ave. W and slightly north of the subject property. The
existence of only one curb cut for vehicular access to the parking garage helps to
reduce vehicular interference with the sidewalk along 72nd Ave. W. Although
there will be an additional curb cut at the northwest corner of the site, this curb cut
is only to provide access to the garbage and recycling area and will, therefore, be
utilized only when the garbage and recycling haulers provide service to the
building.
d. Garage Entry/Door Location: There will be only one vehicular access point to
the parking garage, which will be directly from 72nd Ave. W. Although there is a
second curb cut at the northwest corner of the site, this is only intended for access
to the trash and recycling area and will not be utilized for vehicular entry to and
from the garage. The face of the building at the vehicular access point to the
garage is approximately 10 feet back from the sidewalk, affording drivers with
space to partially pull out of the garage and look for pedestrians before the vehicle
crosses the sidewalk.
e. Building Entry Location: The main pedestrian entrance to the building is located
near the center of the building along the western fagade facing 72nd Ave. W. This
pedestrian entrance has been made the primary design feature of the building by
creating a large glass entry extending the entire height of the building adjacent to a
column of high density stratified timber panels that also extends the height of the
building. The strong design features of this main pedestrian entrance draws one's
eyes towards the entrance of the building and creates an attractive presence along
72nd Ave. W.
L Setbacks: It appears that the proposal meets the required setbacks for the
underlying zone. Compliance with setback requirements will be verified during
the associated building permit application review.
g. Open Space: Although the proposal does not include an open space area large
enough for seating or other activities, the proposal does include attractive
landscaping along the building fagades.
Page 6 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
h. Building/Site Identity: Architectural interest is provided to the building by the
large glass atrium on the western fagade as well as by setting apart the stairwells
from the building by projecting the stairwells out past the footprint of the building
and through the use of various materials and colors. Interest is also provided at
the southwestern and southeastern corners of the building where there is
modulation at these corners of the building.
Although the subject site is located within the Hi -Rise Node overlay of the
Comprehensive Plan and a much taller building could be constructed at this site,
the scale of the proposed three-story building ties in with the scale of surrounding
buildings, as all existing buildings in the immediate vicinity are approximately
one to two story buildings. The proposed building also ties in nicely with the
existing taller buildings in the nearby Swedish Hospital complex.
i. Weather Protection: The main pedestrian entrance to the building is shown as
being covered by a large overhang. This will provide pedestrians with weather
protection when entering and exiting the building. Since the building is being
constructed very close to the four -foot street setback requirement, additional
overhangs along the entire length of the building cannot be provided. However,
since the parking for the site is within the parking garage located on the first two
floors of the building, the majority of visitors to the building will be accessing it
from within the parking garage and will be protected from weather by the garage
itself.
j. Lighting: Very minimal lighting is proposed. Recessed lights are proposed
within the canopy over the main pedestrian entrance shining down on the
sidewalk outside the main entrance. The glass atrium on the western side of the
building will be illuminated from within the building in order to accent this main
architectural feature of the building. The only other exterior lights will be
emergency lighting outside the emergency exits and a few fixtures on the building
as depicted in the lighting detail submitted by the applicant with their letter dated
November 16, 2011 (Attachment 10). The applicant has also discussed the
possibility of some subtle landscape lighting to illuminate the grasses.
k. Signage: The plans indicate wall -mounted signs within the upper band of rib
metal siding as well as a small sign mounted on the overhang over the main
pedestrian entrance along 72nd Ave. W. These signs are simple in design and do
not create a cluttered look to the site. The application does not include sufficient
information to determine if the signage complies with all applicable regulations of
the sign code at this time. As such, the proposed signs will be reviewed for
compliance with the applicable regulations of the sign code (ECDC 20.60) upon
submittal of a complete sign permit application. The applicant is encouraged to
review the sign code prior to submitting a sign permit application to make sure
that the number of signs proposed and the sizes and styles of the proposed signs
are consistent with the applicable requirements of the sign code.
1. Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical: Trash and recycling will be
collected within a designated area of the parking garage at the northwest corner of
the building. This area will be accessed by the trash/recycling haulers off of 72°d
Page 7 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
Ave. W via the curb cut at the northwestern corner of the site. The trash and
recycling area will be screened from view from the street by a roll -up garage door.
Medical waste will be collected internally within the third floor of the building
and will be picked up directly from the third floor by a specialized medical waste
disposal company. An emergency generator will be located at the northeastern
corner of the site outside of the building, and a PUD vault will be located at the
northwestern corner of the site. As indicated on the landscape plan, the generator
and PUD vault will both be screened from view as much as possible by arborvitae
and other landscaping.
The applicant addressed screening of the rooftop mechanical equipment in their
response letter dated October 10, 2011 and attached informational sheets for the
two main air handlers (Attachment 5). The applicant has moved the rooftop
equipment close to the center of the rooftop. This equipment will be screened
from street view by the parapet in addition to the view angle established by
locating the equipment near the center of the building. The informational sheets
for the two main air handlers show that these units are designed to look very
simple from the outside and do not have exposed piping or ductwork. It appears
that with the design of the units and their placement towards the center of the roof
behind the parapet, the rooftop equipment will be screened from street view as
much as feasible.
m. Significant Features: The subject site is relatively level and was previously
covered with a combination of gravel and pavement over the majority of the site.
As such, there are no existing significant features or critical areas on the site.
n. Landscape Buffers: All new landscaping is proposed as shown on the
preliminary landscape plan (Sheet L-1.0 of Attachment 3). A combination of
trees, shrubs, and grasses are proposed along all sides of the building in order to
help buffer the building from surrounding development and to break up the
building fagades. As discussed in Section VIII. Lb above, conditions have been
added to this approval to ensure that cars within the first floor of the parking
garage will be sufficiently screened by the proposed vegetation. Review of the
proposed landscaping is further addressed in Section IX.4 of this report.
2. Design Objectives for Building Form: "Building height and modulation guidelines
are essential to create diversity in building forms, minimize shadows cast by taller
buildings upon the pedestrian areas and to ensure compliance with policies in the
city's Comprehensive Plan. Protecting views from public parks and building entries
as well as street views to the mountains and Puget Sound are an important part of
Edmonds character and urban form." (Comprehensive Plan, page 97)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a. Heigh : Views are local in the vicinity of the subject site. The building is shown
as being below the maximum allowed height for the CG2 zone, which will be
verified through detailed calculations during the associated building permit
application review. The scale of the proposed three-story building ties in with the
scale of surrounding buildings, as all existing buildings in the immediate vicinity
are approximately one to two story buildings. The proposed building also ties in
Page 8 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
nicely with the existing taller buildings in the nearby Swedish Hospital complex.
b. Massing: The vertical banding around the top of the building and the vertical
banding created by the guardrail on the second floor of the parking garage help to
reduce the mass of the building. The open bays of the parking garage and the
numerous windows on the third floor of the building break up the mass of the
concrete walls. Additionally, the overhang over the main pedestrian entrance
helps to give that portion of the building a human scale.
c. Roof Modulation: The proposed roof is flat; however, a parapet will be utilized
to help screen rooftop equipment. Although the roof is flat, modulation of the
roofline is provided by the stairwells/elevator shaft and glass atrium that all
extend up above the top of the parapet. The clerestory at the center of the building
may also provide some modulation; however, due to the clerestory's location at
the center of the building and the existence of the parapet, the clerestory is not
likely to be visible from street view. The overhang over the main pedestrian entry
on the western building fagade provides a human scale to this portion of the
building as well.
d. Wall Modulation: The numerous windows on the third floor of the building and
the open bays of the parking garage help to break up the mass and scale of the
building facades while also letting more light and air into the building. The
projecting stairwells/elevator shaft comprised of different materials and colors
than the building fagades help to break up the walls, and the modulation at the
southwestern and southeastern corners of the building also help to provide interest
instead of it being a perfectly rectangular building. The use of precast concrete
paneling for the majority of the building gives additional interest to the fagades
due to the linear pattern created where the panels join together.
3. Design Objectives for Building Facade: "Building fagade objectives ensure that the
exterior of a building — the portion of a building that defines the character and visual
appearance of a place — is of high quality and demonstrates the strong sense of place
and integrity valued by the residents of the City of Edmonds. " (Comprehensive Plan,
pages 97-98)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a. Building Facade: The proposed building has an individual identity, while
remaining somewhat consistent in style and form with buildings in the
surrounding neighborhood, including those within the Swedish Hospital complex.
b. Window Variety and Articulation: Although they are not technically windows,
the open bays of the first and second floors of the parking garage serve a similar
purpose by letting light and air into the parking garage while breaking up the
building facades. The majority of the third floor of the building has large
windows, which will provide a great amount of light and air into the building,
while also helping to break up the building fayades. The areas where smaller
windows are proposed are generally areas where privacy is necessary, such as the
MRI room and corridor around the surgery suite.
Page 9 of 19
File No. PLAT20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
c. Variation in Facade Materials: The use of various building materials, including
pre -cast concrete, metal siding, timber panels, painted concrete, and glass
paneling provide visual interest to the building fagades. The use of different
materials for the vertical banding around the top of the building and at the
guardrail on the second floor helps to reduce the bulk of the building.
d. Accent Materials/Colors/Trim: The main building color is fairly muted and
subtle, which will blend in nicely with the neighborhood. The use of brighter
colors, including amber and gold, for the stairwells and accent strips provides
visual interest to the building and helps to reduce the visual impact of the larger
building mass. The timber paneling and glass utilized at the main pedestrian
entrance to the building draw one's eyes to this main architectural feature of the
building. Additionally, the band of metal siding around the top of the building
helps to reduce the scale of the building.
4. Design Objectives for Specific Areas — Highway 99: The Comprehensive Plan
provides four additional design objectives specific to the Highway 99 area:
a. General Appearance: Since only one vehicular access point to the parking
garage is proposed, it will be very clear for visitors where to go to enter the
garage. Additionally, for those approaching the building by foot, the main
pedestrian entry will be clearly located due to the use of specific building
materials (timber and glass paneling) for the main entry point to the building.
The PUD vault at the northwestern corner of the site and generator at the
northeastern corner of the site will be screened by vegetation, particularly
arborvitae. The building and site improvements will fit in well with neighboring
sites in terms of scale and style.
b. Sims: Signage is not being reviewed at this time, as it will be reviewed at the
time of the associated sign permit application. However, the applicant has
indicated wall -mounted signs that are very simple in design and appropriate in
scale compared to the scale of the building.
c. Lighting: Very minimal exterior lighting is proposed. Other than recessed lights
under the overhang at the main pedestrian entrance, emergency lighting, and a
few small-scale fixtures on the exterior of the building, the only other lighting
will be from within the glass atrium and parking garage. No lighting is proposed
to be directed out towards the street or surrounding properties.
d. Landscaping: Since the building will take up the majority of the site (the CG2
zone only requires a four foot setback from the western property line and no
setbacks from the other property lines), there is not a lot of space remaining for
landscaping. However, the applicant has fit in as much landscaping as possible
along the building fagades in order to provide visual interest and to provide a
slight buffer between the building and surrounding properties.
In reviewing the proposal against all applicable design objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan as discussed in above, the proposal appears to be consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 10 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
X. APPLICABLE CODES:
1. ECDC 16.60 (CG2 — General Commercial)
a. The proposed medical office use is a permitted primary use within the CG2 zone.
b. The CG2 zone requires a minimum street setback of four feet, which must be fully
landscaped. No side or rear setbacks are required for properties that are not
directly adjacent to residentially -zoned properties. All of the lots directly adjacent
to the subject property are also zoned CG2 (Attachment 2), so no side or rear
setbacks are required in this case. As such, the only setback requirement for the
subject site is the four -foot street setback. Based on the plans submitted with the
subject application (Attachment 3) and the applicant's letter dated November 14,
2011 (Attachment 7), it appears that the project will comply with this requirement.
Compliance with setbacks will be verified during review of the associated building
permit application.
c. The maximum allowed height within the CG2 zone is 75 feet; however, there is no
height limit for structures within the high-rise node on the Comprehensive Plan.
The building elevations indicate that the building will be approximately 50 feet
high. This will be verified during building permit application review. It should be
noted, however, that if during building permit application review, it is found that
the structure will exceed the 75 -foot height limit, then design review by the
Architectural Design Board will be required as specified in ECDC 16.60.030.
d. There is no maximum allowed floor area applicable to the CG2 zone.
e. ECDC 16.60.030 contains design standards applicable to the CG2 zone as related
to screening and buffering, access and parking, site design and layout, and building
design and massing (Attachment 24):
i. Screening and Bufferin: ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.b states that landscape
buffers are not required in land use zones with no required building setback;
however, ECDC 16.60.030.A.11 states that when no setback is otherwise
required, Type III landscaping three feet in width and continuous in length is
required between uses in the same zone. As such, in places where the building
is constructed up to the property line, no landscaping is required, but where
the building is back from the property line (whether due to required setbacks
or desired structure location), then Type III landscaping is required. If the
building is back from the property line by more than three feet, then the Type
III landscaping must be a minimum of three feet in width. Additionally, the
entire width of the four -foot street setback must be landscaped. For the
subject application, the proposed building is located on the property line at the
southeastern corner and at the stairwells on the northern and southern sides of
the building, so landscaping is not required at these locations. In all other
locations where the building is set back from the property line, Type III
landscaping three feet in width and continuous in length is required. The only
location where the Type III landscaping is not required to be three feet in
width is along the northern side of the site where there is only approximately
one foot between the sidewalk and the northern property line. Since no
Page I1 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
setback is required from the northern property line and since a portion of the
structure could have been built up to the northern property line, it is not
logical to require the landscaping to be three feet wide at this point. The Type
III landscaping is only required to be a minimum of three feet in width where
there is at least three feet of space between the building and the property line.
Compliance with the Type III landscaping requirements is discussed in
Section IX.4 of this report.
ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.a, which requires Type IV along street frontages, is not
applicable because the proposal does not include a parking lot abutting the
street. Instead, Type III landscaping as discussed above is required along the
western side of the site. ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.b, however, is applicable to the
subject proposal as it requires all parking located under the building to be
completely screened from the public street by one of four methods. The fourth
option for screening of parking located under the building is that it be screened
by Type III landscaping. This is the method that the applicant selected to
utilize for the subject proposal. Compliance with the Type III landscaping
requirements as well as specific conditions related to screening of the cars
within the first floor of the parking garage from street view are discussed in
Section IX.4 of this report.
ii. Access and Parking: Since all parking is contained within a parking garage
beneath the medical office, no parking is located between the building's front
fagade and the primary street, which complies with the requirement of ECDC
16.60.030.13:1. As required by ECDC 16.60.030.13.6, the main pedestrian
entrance (as well as the exterior doors to the two stairwells on the northern and
southern sides of the building) connect directly to the public sidewalk via
walkways on the subject site. The adjacent bus stop can easily be accessed
between the walkways connecting the pedestrian entries/exits and the public
sidewalk in front of the building. The majority of the remaining design
standards of ECDC 16.60.030.13 are not applicable to the subject proposal
because the proposal does not include a surface parking lot nor a drive-
through.
iii. Site Design and Layout: The majority of the design standards of ECDC
16.60.030.0 are not applicable to the subject proposal because the proposal is
for only one building, not for multiple structures. ECDC 16.60.030.C.3,
however, has requirements related to lighting that are applicable to the
proposal. Very minimal exterior lighting is proposed. The proposal is
consistent with the lighting requirements because recessed lights will be
provided within the canopy at the main pedestrian entrance for pedestrian
safety, and the glass atrium at the main pedestrian entrance will also be
illuminated from within. The only other exterior lights will be emergency
lighting outside the emergency exits and a few fixtures on the building as
depicted in the lighting detail submitted by the applicant with their letter dated
November 16, 2011 (Attachment 10). The applicant has also discussed the
possibility of some subtle landscape lighting to illuminate the grasses;
Page 12 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
however, if utilized, this landscape lighting would not be directed towards
adjacent parcels.
iv. Building Design and Massing: As required by ECDC 16.60.030.D.1, the use
of the band of vertical metal siding around the top of the building as well as
the distinct band created at the second floor of the building by the guardrails at
each of the open bays gives the building a visually distinct base and top.
Additionally, the open bays on the first two floors of the building separate out
the lower portion of the building from the upper portion of the building, where
there is a band of windows around the majority of the third floor.
The proposed building has a footprint of over 10,000 square feet (the proposed
footprint is approximately 27,500 square feet), so ECDC 16.60.030.D.2
requires attention to be given to the scale, massing, and fagade design so as to
reduce the effect of a large single building mass. This has been accomplished
with the proposed building through the stairwells and main pedestrian entry
projecting out past the main building fagades as well as up in height above the
top of the parapet and through the use of wall modulation at the southwestern
and southeastern corners of the building. Additionally, the various materials
utilized for the building, including pre -cast concrete panels, vertical metal
siding, timber paneling, and glass paneling provide interest to the building
design, which is further accented through the use of a few different colors.
The requirements of ECDC 16.60.030.D.4 strive to ensure that buildings do
not have blank, unattractive walls abutting streets or visible from residentially
zoned properties. The subject site is surrounded by commercially zoned
properties to the north, east, and south; however, residentially zoned property
is located to the west across 72"d Ave. W. As such, the requirements of
ECDC 16.60.030.D.4 apply to the western building fagade since it both faces
the street as well as residentially zoned properties. Thus, this code section
requires a minimum of four listed elements to be incorporated into the design
of the western fagade. The western facade complies with these requirements
through the use of the following elements: belt courses of a different texture
and color (the band of metal siding at the top of the building and the band
created by the guardrails around the second floor of the parking garage),
projecting metal canopy (over the main pedestrian entrance as well as at the
top of the glass atrium), vertical differentiation (provided by the modulation
on the western fagade, additional height of the column of timber panels and
glass atrium, as well as the seams in the concrete panels), and an architectural
element not listed that meets the intent (the use of various materials along the
western fagade including the high density stratified timber panels and the glass
atrium).
L Based on the above review, it appears as though the applicable zoning
requirements of ECDC 16.60 will be achieved with the subject proposal.
Page 13 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
2. ECDC 17.50 (Parking)
Commercial parking is based upon the square footage of each use within a building as
specified in the parking standards of ECDC 17.50.020. In order to determine the total
parking required for the building, the floor plan for the third floor of the building
(Attachment 3, Sheet A-113) was referred to for determining the uses and
corresponding parking requirements for the third floor (additional parking is not
required for the first two floors since they consist of parking garage only). The third
floor includes medical office, office with on-site customer service, and office not
providing on-site customer service. ECDC 17.50.020.13 requires parking at a rate of
one space per 200 square feet for medical office, one space per 400 square feet for
office with on-site customer service, and one space per 800 square feet for office not
providing on-site customer service.
The gross area of the third floor is stated on the plans cover sheet (Attachment 3) as
being 27,358 gross square feet.
The areas within the three stairwells, two elevators, and atrium add up to 1,210 square
feet. Parking is not required for this portion of the third floor.
The main clinic waiting area as well as the main lobby and physical therapy waiting
area comprise 1,580 square feet of the third floor. These areas are considered office
with on-site customer service and require parking at a rate of one stall per 400 square
feet, for a total of 3.95 stalls required for this area.
Patients and customers will not be seen within the billing and administrative office
area, medical assistant workspace, providers' bullpen, staff lounge, conference room,
two offices, nor the physical therapists' area. The total area for these spaces is 2,930
square feet, and parking is required at a rate of one stall per 800 square feet, for a total
of 3.66 stalls required for this area.
The remaining portion of the third floor is 21,638 square feet. This area includes the
exam rooms, surgery suite, MRI room, casting room, physical therapy area, storage
rooms, restrooms, and corridors. All of this area is considered medical office/clinic
and requires parking at a rate of one stall per 200 square feet, for a total of 108.19
stalls required for this area.
Based on the above calculations, a total of 116 parking stalls are required (rounded up
from 115.8). The plans indicate 54 stalls on the first floor of the parking garage and
63 stalls on the second floor of the parking garage, for a total of 117 parking stalls
provided (Attachment 3, Sheet A-111). Thus, the applicant has shown compliance
with the city's on-site parking requirements of ECDC 17.50. These calculations will
be verified at the time of building permit application review.
3. ECDC 20.12 (District -Based Design Review)
Pursuant to ECDC 20.10.010.13, since the subject site is located within the General
Commercial (CG2) zone as well as the "Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center" and
"Highway 99 Corridor" designations of the Comprehensive Plan, the proposal is
subject to district -based design review under the requirements of ECDC 20.12.
ECDC 16.60.030 requires that such design review be conducted by the Architectural
Design Board (ADB) only if the project includes buildings exceeding 75 feet in the
Page 14 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
CG2 zone and specifies that projects not exceeding this height limit may be reviewed
by staff as a Type I decision. As such, the proposal is subject to administrative
district -based design review since the proposed building will not exceed 75 feet in
height. As part of the design review, staff must find that the proposed development is
consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically,
design standards applicable to the CG2 zone are provided in ECDC 16.60.030.
Compliance with the design criteria of the Comprehensive Plan as well as the Zoning
Ordinance (ECDC 16.60.030) is discussed above. Staff feels that the project, as
conditioned, meets the applicable district -based design review criteria.
4. ECDC 20.13 (Landscaping)
Landscaping requirements are provided within ECDC 20.13. As discussed in Section
X. Le.i above, Type III landscaping a minimum of three feet in width (the four -foot
street setback shall be fully landscaped) is required on all sides of the site except
where the building goes up to the property line. Additionally, the landscaping is not
required to be three feet wide on the portion of the northern side of the site where the
sidewalk is only approximately one foot from the northern property line. The
requirements for Type III landscaping are provided in ECDC 20.13.030.C.
The Type III landscaping requirements specify that evergreen and deciduous trees,
with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, shall be planted at intervals no greater
than 30 feet on center. The trees along the western fagade are proposed at average
intervals of less than 30 feet on center, with a cluster of trees much closer together
between the main pedestrian entrance and the vehicular access to the parking garage.
Additionally, the western side complies with the requirement for no more than 50
percent of the trees being deciduous in that only two Japanese maple trees are
proposed along this fagade. All other trees on the western fagade are evergreens. On
the southern facade, there is limited space for landscaping on the subject site,
particularly due to the location of a line of existing sweetgum on the adjacent site to
the south which are to be retained during construction. As such, there is not enough
space on the southern side of the site for large trees, so the appilcant has proposed
clusters of arborvitae at a minimum of 30 foot intervals. The building is proposed to
be built up to the property line at the southeastern corner of the site, so no landscaping
is possible at this location, but the plans indicate that the seven existing trees on the
adjacent property to the east will be retained and three hogan cedars will be planted at
this location. These trees will help to break up the building fagade. Along the portion
of the eastern fagade where there is approximately twenty feet between the building
and the eastern property line, several new trees will be planted, including a mix of
evergreens and deciduous trees, with the majority of them being evergreens. These
trees are proposed at intervals much closer than 30 feet on center, which more than
complies with the Type III requirements.
Due to the proximity of the building to the northern property line and the location of a
sidewalk for emergency access to/from the building along the majority of the northern
side of the building, leaving only approximately one foot between the sidewalk and
the northern property line, there is little room for landscaping on the northern side of
the site. The landscape architect addressed landscaping in this location in their letter
Page 15 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
submitted on November 14, 2011 (Attachment 8). The applicant has proposed
Oregon grape along the sidewalk on the northern side of the site, which will grow to
approximately five feet high and will work well with the limited space available for
plants in this location. A row of arborvitae is proposed at the northwestern corner of
the site to screen the PUD vault as well as at the northeastern corner of the site. The
arborvitae along the eastern approximate 30 feet of the northern fagade will help to
break up this fagade. Two hogan cedars are'proposed at the northeast corner of the
site to help screen the generator and to provide additional landscaping height.
Although the landscaping along the northern side of the site is not ideal, it is the best
that can be done given the limited space along this side of the site. Additionally,
although the arborvitae and hogan cedars are clustered, there are more trees along this
side of the site than if only one were planted every 30 -foot interval as required by the
Type III requirements. Thus, staff feels that the landscaping along the northern side
of the site meets the intent of the Type III landscaping requirements given the limited
space and the fact that the building could have been constructed up to the property
line since no setback is required from the northern property line.
The Type III landscaping requirements specify that a combination of shrubs and
groundcover must be planted so that the ground is covered within three years and that
shrubs must grow to a minimum of 3.5 feet in height where buffering a building
elevation. Shrubs along the northern elevation are discussed above. For the western,
southern, and eastern building elevations, the applicant has proposed a combination of
shrubs and groundcover to be planted at intervals that more than comply with the
minimum size and maximum spacing requirements of ECDC 20.13.015. The
majority of the shrubs on the western and southern sides of the site are grasses. As
discussed in Section IX. l .b above, of particular concern during review of the proposal
was adequate screening of the cars within the parking garage, particularly on the
western and southern buildign fagades. Staff was concerned that the cars within the
garage would dominate the street front and that people may cut between the parking
garage and the sidewalk through the landscaping causing breaks in the intended
"green screen" to be created by the proposed miscanthus adjacent to the open bays on
the western and southern building fagades. The applicant indicated in their letter
dated November 14, 2011 (Attachment 7) that the proposed miscanthus will grow to
four to five feet tall at maturity and will not be pruned back in the winter. In order to
address concerns over the cars within the first floor of the parking garage dominating
the street front, two options have been provided to the applicant within the conditions
of approval for treatment of the western and southern building fagades. Either the
applicant can construct a minimum 3.5 foot high screening wall within each of the
open bays of the lower level of the parking garage consistent in style with the
guardrails provided on the second floor of the garage while providing landscaping
consistent with the sizes and spacing specified in the landscape plan, or the proposed
grasses in front of the bays must be planted at a minimum of 3 feet in height and
maintained at a minimum of 3.5 feet in height and a temporary 3 foot high black mesh
(or other color and material approved by the Planning Division) screen must be
established within the open bays for the first two years in order to assist with
screening the cars and to prevent pedestrians from cutting through from the parking
Page 16 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
garage to the sidewalk while the landscaping matures and grows in thicker to achieve
the desired screening.
Staff feels that the proposal, as conditioned, complies with the applicable landscaping
requirements of ECDC 20.13 and that landscaping has also been adequately utilized
to screen the PUD vault at the northwestern corner of the site and generator at the
northeastern corner of the site as required by the applicable design standards.
XI. CONCLUSION:
Based on the above analysis of the project proposal, it has been determined that the
proposal is consistent with the urban design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and
the applicable requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC),
particularly the requirements of the General Commercial (CG2) zone, the on-site parking
requirements, the district -based design review process, and the landscaping requirements.
XII. DECISION:
Based on the facts, conclusions, and attachments to this report, staff finds that the design
review for File No. PLN20110063 is APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Screening of the interior of the first floor of the parking garage shall be provided
along the western and southern building fagades in one of the following ways:
a. A minimum three and one half foot high screening wall shall be constructed
within each of the open bays of the lower level of the parking garage on the
western and southern sides of the building consistent in style with the
guardrails provided on the second level of the parking garage. If such
screening wall is constructed, then the applicant shall install landscaping
consistent with the sizes and spacing indicated in the landscape plan
(Attachment 3, Sheet L-1.0) or in any modified landscape plan, as approved by
the Planning Division.
b. Alternatively, all three of the following performance standards shall be met:
i. The row of vegetation planted closest to the building adjacent to the open
bays of the lower level of the parking garage on the western and southern
sides of the building shall be a minimum of three feet in height at the time
of planting and shall be planted at a minimum spacing of three feet on
center.
ii. The row of vegetation planted closest to the building adjacent to the open
bays of the lower level of the parking garage on the western and southern
sides of the building shall be maintained at a minimum height of three and
one half feet and shall be maintained as a continuous "hedge" across the
garage bays in order to screen vehicles parked within the garage. These
grasses shall not be seasonally trimmed lower than three and one half feet.
W. A temporary black mesh (or other color and material approved by the
Planning Division) screen a minimum of three feet in height shall be
established within the open bays of the lower level of the parking garage
on the western and southern sides of the building in order to prevent
Page 17 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
pedestrians from cutting through the landscaped area and to allow the
plants along these fagades to reach full maturity. This temporary
backdrop shall be maintained for a minimum of two years and its removal
will be contingent upon final approval of the Planning Division's two-year
landscape maintenance inspection.
2. Comply with the conditions of design review approval provided by the Engineering
Division on November 8, 2011 (Attachment 19), which include the following:
a. Compliance with Engineering codes and construction standards will be
reviewed with the building permit application for development of the site.
b. Approval of the design review phase of the project does not constitute approval
of the improvements as shown on the submitted plans.
c. The applicant is encouraged, wherever feasible, to incorporate pervious
pavements, rain gardens and/or other low impact development techniques into
the project design.
3. Individual elements of this project are required to meet all applicable city codes, and
it is the responsibility of the applicant to apply for and obtain all necessary permits.
XIII. EXPIRATION:
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing extensions. Any person
wishing to file an extension should contact the Planning Division at 425.771.0220 for further
procedural information.
Expiration — Section 20.12.90 describes the time limits for design review approval.
ECDC 20.12.090.A: Unless the owner submits a fully completed building permit
application necessary to bring about the approved alterations, or, if no building permit
application is required, substantially commences the use allowed within 18 months from
the date of approval, ADB or hearing examiner approval shall expire and be null and
void, unless the owner files a fully completed application for an extension of time prior
to the expiration date.
XIV. PARTIES OF RECORD:
Edmonds Medical Building Associates Scott Shanks and Dale Pinney
8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104 First Western Development Services
Edmonds, WA 98026 8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, WA 98026
City of Edmonds
121 — 5th Ave. N
Edmonds, WA 98020
Page 18 of 19
File No. PLN20110063
Administrative Design Review
Premier Orthopedic Group
XV. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Land Use Application Form
2. Zoning and Vicinity Map
3. Project Plans (including elevation views, site plan, floor plans, landscape plan, etc.)
4. Staff's Request for Additional Information, dated September 19, 2011
5. Applicant's Response Letter, dated October 10, 2011 (including photos and details)
6. Staff's Request for Additional Information, dated November 9, 2011
7. Applicant's Response Letter, dated November 14, 2011 (including setback detail)
8. Letter from PacLand, received November 14, 2011
9. Photo Example of Landscaping
10. Applicant's Response Letter, dated November 16, 2011
11. SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
12. Adjacent Property Owners List
13. Affidavit of Publication
14. Declaration of Mailing
15. Declaration of Posting
16. Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Comment Form
17. Building Division Comment Form
18. Engineering Division Memorandum Dated September 14, 2011
19. Engineering Division Memorandum Dated November 8, 2011
20. Public Works Department Comment Form
21. Parks and Recreation Department Comment Form
22. Critical Areas Checklist (CRA20110049)
23. Comprehensive Plan Excerpt (Urban Design: General Objectives)
24. Edmonds Community Development Code Excerpt (ECDC 16.60.030)
Page 19 of 19
City of Edmonds AUG 03
2091 -
Land Use Application DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
N ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT r
❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # (V W d`063ZONE CG L
❑ HOME OCCUPATION DATE '9131k < REC'D BY C( -6 S
❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION
❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE 1070' `� 0 RECEIPT #
❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE /J A
❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT ❑ HE *AFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB ❑ CC
❑ STREET VACATION
❑ REZONE
❑ SHORELINE PERMIT
❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION
❑ OTHER:
PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION 21401 72nd Ave West
PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) Kruger Orthop/tedic Clinic
PROPERTY OWNER Edmonds Medical Building Associates LLC PHONE # 425-329-0848
ADDRESS 8129 LK Ballinger Way Suite 104 Edmonds WA 98026
E-MAIL Scott@fwdsinc.com or Dale@Rvdsine.com FAX # 425-329-0849
TAX ACCOUNT # 00580700002207 SEC. 29 TWP. 27N RNG. 4E
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) Construction of a 3 story
medical office, 2 floors of parking, 1 floor of office, all above grade. The project includes 54,044 SP of parking garage an
27,022 SF of combined surgical center and clinic space. The project provides 116 off street parking stalls.
DESCRIBE HOW THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) The project
complies with the district -based design review guide lines for this zoning district. The building height, wall mo u ation,
mix of exterior skin treatments and new landscape features all conform with the area guide lines.
APPLICANT First Western Development Services PHONE # 425-329-0848
ADDRESS 8129 LK Ballinger Way Suite 104 Edmonds WA 98026
E-MAIL scoff@fwdsine.com or dale@fwdsinc.com FAX # 425-329-0848
CONTACT PERSON/AGENT Scott Shanks or Dale Pinney PHONE # 425-329-0848
ADDRESS 8129 LK Ballinger Way Suite 104 Edmonds WA 98026
E-MAIL seott@fwdsine.com or dale@fwdsinc.com FAX# 425-329-0849
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to
release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's
fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information
furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and that I am authorized to file this application n the behalf of the owner as listed below. qq
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT —/ DATE G I /Z all
Property Owner's Authorization
I, h/b, certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
Washington that the following is a true and correct statement: I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the
subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the
subject property for the purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER 112 DATE
Questions? Call (425) 771-0220.
Revised on 9/14/10 B - Land Use Application Page I o) I
ATTACHMENT 1
Zoning a V 1, Al VicinityJ;*;p
1 100 200 400
File No. saaiU�Ui�ii�i� �r. Trrrrrrrrrrrrrr;rrrT»»»»»»9
,» i rrrrrarrrrrrrrrrrra ar rr� Feet
rte' 1 :, �<< 111 1 r
NE t
R lN
'59 i R,
-v
%
mR, M 'PHI
n
n
ffli 19
boa H HP;M 'M
. . . . . . ........................ ..
Oi0NIHSVAA'S(IN VT
N 0
. ...... IsoM anUGAV PUZ V�Z
.. ................... . ... .. .
dMAS OKEMOHi8O 2J31IN32Jd 0 m
ra SINBvqnoo(i M31A38 NOIS30
. .... .....
NE t
R lN
'59 i R,
-v
%
mR, M 'PHI
n
n
ffli 19
boa H HP;M 'M
O
a
19
LSA
0
ar
uj
Lu
Z
LD
ui
ro
co
NE t
R lN
'59 i R,
-v
%
mR, M 'PHI
n
n
ffli 19
boa H HP;M 'M
Z
a
19
Z
F
NOIE)NIHSVM'SONOVVla C\j
jsaAA anUGAV PUZL [Ot7 6Z C
. .. ... .......
dmie 0109dOHI2JO 2IIIVO�Jd
SiN:ivqnoo(i M3IA3H NUISAU
F
NOIONIHSVM ',dNnoO HSIWOHONS
SONOW(13 30 ILIO v
-M "3t,'8 `NLZ'I '6Z N0U335 t,/LMN 'tr/13N NI o
dnO(YD O1O3dOH11O &311N3'dd
mj aaA -`
08
NVId ),inlfl (INV 30VNIVb0 'IN3NdOl3A3o 311S ai d
psi
S.
o�-
�- s
H '
¢ F $ A
azG
W.,M Wes o �$ z _o�$x®a$a
-ia a ff�n.
m
I
R 3 F
ISI -
4 y
Q (
= IY vi a
_
g
W rg
d a
VE
fi
cv I .d m� dad I Ing» A3�
C, \\
Z - Z
r T
LL
'i
l
tTll
At
✓' ae <x I �,� �' �� s�„I II *... a ��� ! it x,
I
u �
a - �
t_
3nN3AV PUZZ
qR
g
ti
zee'
w D❑agoii o�.�.tt
d
�SV��
amiggo
—3
Ulm
NOiE)NJHSVM'SGNONO3
0I js9AA anU9AV PuZL L Ot7�Z
dmie 01(13dOHI�10 �JDIN3�fd
SiNEinnoM31A38 NOISM
oo
0 m NMI
NOi9NJHSVM'SCINOINGB
IsaM enueAV puZL :ot? 3
'a'}\2_ dno8E) 01(13dOH180 �131VU�ld
SlMqvinooa MEIA3d NE)IS30
My NOiE)NIHSVM'S(INC
lllcl�l
,wv,IsaAA @nUaAV
E PUZLw.
dno.jp 01(]DdOHIclO �JDNMJd
SIN3nn000 AA3A3H NOISM
whill
�rgsg _ _ NOl`JNIHSbM'SONOW03 zz
3saM anuaAV PuZL W17 LZ o a
df oue OlCAdOHlW ?�IW323d _ o
o a
S1N3Wf1DOa M3U13M N91S30 LL _ <
�sael
M
Clio
NOIE)NIHSVM'SCINOVIC13
IsaM anuaAV PuZL W17LZ
m I
dnoHo 01(AdOHI�AO 8�11N�I_d
m SINE]VqnOOGAA3lA38N9IS3(J
m
T ff
N
4M
n
T,
i Ll G E 11-j- I E- E E E E I Lal U41 -Pi 1- L-1 I J E L 1=1 L!-1
NOIR NIHSVM'SONOV402
z
IsaM anU9AV PUZL 6017 6Z o 0
C\l
dnoHo OIGEMOHI210 2JDIVIM]d<
SIN3iNn00o M31AEI2i NOIS30
w w
C�------
a --
IU
NOIE)NIHSVM'S(INOV4G3
z C\j
IsoM anuaAV PuZL 60t6Z
dnojo 01(]3dOHiclO HEIIN3Hd
SiN3vqnooci M31AMJ NOISTI o < cm
w
fe al @ �,N
A
x
w
zl
0
6
IF
41
,M,
8 2,,Wj�
zlixN
z 1i ffl!E
Fo
84;
z
CL
w
n
0
z
=>
0
Z,
W00 8
z
W W X
> CO
0
To
g
z
E z
0
0
m
wN o
w
w
m
CL
Ell
� I �
59
low
I ----- ---- -
N
jo
,M,
8 2,,Wj�
zlixN
z 1i ffl!E
Fo
84;
z
CL
w
n
0
z
=>
0
Z,
W00 8
z
W W X
> CO
0
To
g
z
E z
0
0
m
wN o
w
w
m
CL
Ell
� I �
L.
low
I ----- ---- -
,M,
8 2,,Wj�
zlixN
z 1i ffl!E
Fo
84;
z
CL
w
n
0
z
=>
0
Z,
W00 8
z
W W X
> CO
0
To
g
z
E z
0
0
m
wN o
w
w
m
CL
Ell
� I �
C. 1890
CITY OF EDMONDS MIKE COOPER
MAYOR
121 5th AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 0 (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www dedmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
September 19, 2011
Mr. Scott Shanks and Mr. Dale Pinney
First Western Development Services
8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, WA 98026
Subject: Request for Additional Information for Your Land Use Application
For Design Review of the New Kruger Clinic Building at. 2140172nd Ave. W
File No. PLN20110063
Dear Mr. Shanks and Mr. Pinney:
The City of Edmonds has reviewed your land use application for administrative design review for the
proposed Kruger Orthopedic Clinic located at 2140172 d Avenue West for completeness pursuant to
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.02.002. Although your application automatically
became complete on August 31, 2011, additional information is needed before review of the application
can continue. Please respond to the following items at your earliest convenience so that staff's review of
your application can continue:
1. Engineering and Public Works Comments: Refer to the enclosed memorandum dated September
14, 2011 from Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager. Please respond to the items
requested in Jeanie's memo. If you have any questions on the requirements of this memo, you
may contact Jeanie at (425) 771-0220.
2. Parking: Please respond to the following regarding the parking calculations for the project:
a. Provide documentation of how you came up with the parking ratios for the project, as the
city's parking regulations (ECDC 17.50) do not contain the specific ratios for the surgery and
physical therapy areas that are stated on your parking calculation sheet. How will these two
areas function? For example, will the doctors who are conducting the surgeries be going
from an office or exam room to the surgery room causing an office or exam room to be
vacant when the surgery is occurring? Will all of the surgery rooms and all of the bed spaces
within the recovery area ever be in use at one given time? Please provide documentation of
how the ratios utilized for the parking calculations are compliant with the parking regulations
of ECDC 17.50 and provide further discussion of how the various spaces of the clinic will
function in order for staff to verify compliance with the parking regulations.
b. Sheet A-111 of your plans states that 8 accessible parking stalls and 107 standard parking
stalls will be provided for a total of 115 stalls. However, based on the number of stalls
indicated on the first and second floor plans (sheets A-111 and A-112), I counted a total of
117 parking stalls, but the number of stalls indicated on these plans add up to 116 parking
stalls. Please correct this discrepancy of the total number of stalls provided.
3. North Elevation: Some of the design elements incorporated on the south, west, and east building
elevations do not appear on the north elevation. In particular, the banding created by the high
density stratified timber panels along the second floor is absent on the north elevation.
Additionally, the exterior of the stairwell on the northern side of the building appears to be
finished with concrete, but the other two stairwells are finished with the timber paneling. Since
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
this stairwell is the one that provides access to the rooftop, it creates a large mass of concrete at
the top of the building. It could be more effective for the stairwell on the southern side of the
building to provide the rooftop access since this stairwell is finished with the timber paneling,
and then the northern stairwell may not be as noticeable being finished with concrete if it is
shorter. Or, is there an alternative material that the northern stairwell could be finished with that
would help to set it apart from the building? Would there be any other ways to further break up
the northern fagade and to incorporate some of the design features from the other sides of the
building on this side too?
4. Parking Garage Screening: ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.b contains requirements for screening of
parking located under a building. Please refer to this code section and revise the plans as
necessary so that this requirement is met (see related comments regarding the landscaping).
Although the timber paneling on the guardrail surrounding the second floor parking assists in
partially screening the cars on the second floor, no permanent screening is provided on the first
floor of the parking garage. Although the landscaping will assist in partially screening the cars,
additional screening is necessary to further screen the cars on the lower floor of the parking
garage. It appears that the best form of screening for the first floor of the parking garage would
be a band of the timber paneling similar to that which surrounds the second floor of the parking
garage of the same or a taller height. Not only would this assist in screening view of cars within
the parking garage, but it would also assist with building security, as it would otherwise be
difficult to secure the building after hours when there are so many openings into the parking
garage. Additionally, the use of a small valence could assist with screening the ceiling of the
first floor of the parking garage.
5. Mechanical Equipment: The rooftop mechanical equipment is required to be screened. Your
cover sheet indicates that this equipment will be screened by distance, location on roof, and
parapet, but this equipment is highly visible in the elevation views, so staff would like to ensure
that this equipment will be adequately screened when the building is constructed. Even if the
equipment will be entirely screened from street view, you may wish to provide additional
screening to help block this equipment from neighboring properties and from inside neighboring
buildings, particularly since the equipment is so large and since future buildings may be
constructed in close proximity to this building. One possibility would be to utilize the same Nu -
Wave corrugated metal siding that is utilized as a band around the top of the building and
incorporate this material on the roof as a screen to help further block the equipment.
6. Generator and Transformer: A generator and transformer are indicated on the eastern side of the
building. How will these be screened from view? Refer to comments regarding landscaping
below. While increasing the landscaping on the eastern side of the building to comply with Type
III landscaping requirements, screening of the generator and transformer might be able to be
incorporated. Or, small fences or enclosures could be utilized to assist with additional screening.
7. Vertical Banding on Parapet: It was noted that two brown vertical bands are shown on the
portion of the parapet treated with the corrugated metal siding on the west elevation and one
brown and four gold bands are shown on the east elevation, but none of these bands are indicated
on the north or south elevations. Are these bands intended to be repeated on the other
elevations? Were they all intended to be of the same color?
8. Lim: Indicate the style and materials of any proposed exterior lighting fixtures.
9. Landscaping: Please respond to the following regarding the landscape plan:
a. Indicate the property lines more clearly on the landscape plan.
b. As indicated in the enclosed comments from Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program
Manager, the three landscape bulbouts projecting into the 72nd Ave. W right-of-way will
need to be removed from the plans due to sight -distance and traffic flow concerns.
Page 2 of 4
c. If the location of the trash enclosure is moved and/or if the driveway access to the trash
enclosure is eliminated, landscaping will be required within the minimum required four -foot
street setback area where the driveway access to the trash enclosure was located.
d. ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.b contains requirements for all parking located under the building to be
completely screened from the public street. One possible method for screening the parking is
with Type III landscaping. The landscaping indicated along the western side of the property
is close to meeting the Type III requirements; however, it does not completely screen the
parking. It appears that the project would be closer in compliance with these requirements if
the following changes were made to the landscaping along the western side of the property:
i. Place an additional tree on the north side of the driveway entrance to the trash
enclosure and an additional tree towards the southern portion of the western side of
the property so that a tree is located at least every 30 feet. Note that the Type III
landscaping requirements specify that no more than 50 percent of the trees may be
deciduous. Also, since clear sight distance is necessary for entering and exiting the
parking garage, the Engineering Division may require that the trees are kept free of
limbs below a certain height.
ii. It was noted that a few of the proposed trees are located in close proximity to the main
pedestrian entry way. Since this is such a strong architectural element for the
building, it might help accentuate the main entry by shifting the trees slightly away
from the entry. Shifting the trees slightly away from the main entry would move the
trees to locations that would provide further screening of the openings to the parking
garage as well.
iii. Incorporating some taller shrubs into the landscaping could help to provide additional
screening of the open bays of the parking garage.
e. Landscaping along the northern, eastern, and southern elevations will need to comply with
the Type III landscaping requirements wherever the building does not go directly up to the
property line. Please revise the landscape plan so that the landscaping along these sides of
the building complies with the Type III requirements. The use of small clusters of tall
hedges within these landscape areas could also be helpful in breaking up the building
fagades, particularly the northern fagade.
f. The landscape plan indicates that the existing trees located directly adjacent to the southern
property line will be removed for construction and then replanted. Please note that during
building permit review, the owner(s) of any adjacent property(ies) that work is proposed on
will need to sign authorization of such work. It appears that the adjacent properties to the
east and south are currently under the same ownership as the subject site, but this should be
noted in case ownership of the adjacent properties changes prior to permitting of the project.
g. It is difficult to tell in the elevation views if some of the trees are not showing up against the
bays of the parking garage or if the majority of the trees are located in front of the fagades.
Would it be possible to locate some of the trees in front of the bays of the parking garage, or
were the trees shifted to not be in front of the bays for a specific purpose?
10. Oversized Vehicles: It was noted that the height of the first floor of the parking garage will be
less than 12 feet. It is suggested that you make sure that this will be adequate height for any
emergency vehicles and/or delivery trucks that would be entering the parking garage. Or, is the
intention that all oversized vehicles will park within the right-of-way?
11. Building Code Compliance: The plans indicate that the southern portion of the eastern side of
the building will be constructed very close to if not directly up to the eastern property line. The
plans indicate four upper windows in this location. It is the Building Official's understanding
that an easement will be provided on the adjacent property to accommodate for the windows in
Page 3 of 4
this location. Please acknowledge that an easement will be necessary in this location for
compliance with applicable Building Code requirements. If an easement is not established, these
windows may need to be removed from the plans and an alternative design feature may be
necessary to further break up this portion of the eastern fagade. Also, please note that the
Building Division did not do a complete review of the project at this time, and additional
comments will be provided by the Building Division at the time of building permit application
review.
12. Easements: Please indicate all existing and proposed easements on the site plan. In particular, it
is understood that an access easement is being proposed adjacent to the southern property line
and that a light and ventilation easement is being proposed adjacent to the southern portion of the
eastern property line. Please indicate these and any other easements on the site plan. Note that
these easements are not required to be established until the building permit review, but it would
be helpful at this time to see where they are proposed.
13. SEPA Review: Please respond to the following regarding SEPA review for the project:
a. Your response to question 4A.8 of the environmental checklist references a phase I
environmental report that was performed on the site. Please provide a copy of this report.
b. Your response to question #13. 14.c was cut off, and no responses were provided to questions
#13. 14.d, f, and g and 913.16.a. Please provide an updated environmental checklist with
complete responses to these questions.
14. Traffic Study: Please note that the traffic impact analysis has been reviewed by Bertrand Hauss,
Transportation Engineer, and all but the mitigation recommendations have been found
acceptable. The traffic mitigation fee calculation does not use the correct trip rate for a medical
office and therefore the proposed impact fee amount is incorrect. As the total impact fee amount
is based upon building square footage, the traffic impact fee will not be adjusted and/or approved
until the building permit phase of the project. Since the final amount of the traffic impact fee
will be determined at the time of building permit review, this item is only being included as an
FYI at this time. Please note, however, that the calculations for the traffic impact fee will need to
be corrected for the building permit application submittal.
Please note that your application will be placed on hold until a response is received regarding the above
items. Pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.02.003.1), you must submit the
above information within 90 days. Thus, your application will expire if the requested information is not
received by December 19, 2011.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 771-0220, extension 1224.
Sincerely,
Development Services Department - Planning Division
Jen Machuga
Associate Planner
Enclosure: Memorandum from Jeanie McConnell dated September 14, 2011
Cc: File No. PLN20110063
Page 4 of 4
-111 V
&
October 10, 2011
Jen Machuga
City of Edmonds
1215th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
PROJECT.'
SUBJECT.•
Dear Jen:
Premier Orthopedic Group Building
21401 72nd Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
Design Review Information
t&
We have prepared additional information as requested in the 9/20/2011 review meeting. Attached with this
letter is the following:
1. Revised building perspectives, Sheet G-001 and G-002 - These perspectives have been updated to
illustrate the proposed colors, materials, landscaping and building signage. The planting material
illustrated has been coordinated with the landscape plan. The plant height and mass is intended to
depict a three year growth.
2. Revised Site Development Plan - Sheet A-101- This plan has been updated to correctly illustrate the
sidewalk curb and landscape strip alignment as agreed to with public works. This plan also clearly
identifies the building setbacks along all four property lines.
3. Revised Sheet A-111- This is the first floor plan revised to illustrate a improved circulation at the main
entry, the four angled stalls will be posted as pick-up and drop off only with a 20 minute time limit. This
layout will minimize any potential back-up at the main entry. This plan also correctly illustrates the
sidewalk planting strip and drive -way locations, as well as the compactor and electrical room locations.
4. Sheet A-112 & A-113 —These plans have no proposed changes.
5. Sheet A-130 —The roof plan has been updated to correctly illustrate the proposed roof mounted
H.V.A.C. equipment. The equipment has been relocated towards the center of the building to limit the
potential for view from adjacent streets. Attached with this re -submittal are catalog cut sheets for the
two main air handlers. The units were designed to minimize or eliminate all exterior piping, ductwork
and other appendages, providing a non -industrial appearance. We believe that additional screening is
unnecessary as this will only create a larger footprint on the roof and not add any improved appearance
from distant views. The units may only be visible from autos traveling on Highway 99, due to the
distance the building is located to the West and the topography.
6. Sheet A-201 & A-202 - The exterior building elevations have been updated to correctly illustrate the
revised materials and building openings.
7. Sheet C-1— The civil plan has been updated to correctly illustrate the curb and landscaping strip as well
as the proposed utility connections.
8129 Lake
Ballinger 10'ATTACHMENT 5
4
8. Sheet L-1—The landscape pian has been revised to correctly depict the proposed planting plan.
Parking Analysis
In addition to the updated and revised plans we were asked to provide additional information to
support the parking ratios provided for this building. Previously provided was a floor plan delineating
the various areas on the third floor associated with general clinic use, ASC (Associated Surgery Center)
physical therapy and administrative offices. As this is a single user building many of the employees and
patients will be moving between the areas during a patient visit. Also many employees will be moving
between the uses. The Edmonds parking requirements are not specific for uses such as ASC or physical
therapy, but does allow for the user to provide data supporting the proposed stall count. After analysis
of the employee count and patient flow the 117 stalls provided will be more than adequate to serve the
building. The Premier Orthopedic Group employee count is as follows:
Photos
Full Time Part Time
A.
General Clinic/MRI
15
3
B.
ASC
3
4
C.
Physical Therapy
3
2
D.
Administrative
8
2
TOTAL
29
11
If every employee arrived at work in a single occupant auto, 40 stalls would be filled leaving 77 stalls for
patients, the clinic has 12 exam rooms, if all rooms were full and there were an additional 12 patients
queued in the waiting area this would be 24 stalls taken leaving, 53 stalls for the physical therapy and
ASC. Should the (3) operating rooms in the ASC be full and there are 8 in the recovery areas, this would
take an additional 11 stalls (usually surgery patients do not drive to and from operations). This would
leave 45 stalls for physical therapy. At most each therapist has two patients at any one time there are 3
full time PT's so that is 6 stalls required leaving a 39 stall margin. The administrative office is not public
so not outside visitors will require stalls. In addition the project is located across the street from a major
transit center providing access alternatives for employees and patients.
Enclosed are photos we presented at the 9/20/11 meeting which illustrates examples of some of the
material proposed for use on this building. The emergency access stair tower most visible on the on the
south end will be architectural concrete finished in a similar manner to that illustrated on the attached
photo of the "Easterline" building. This material is a scored and highly finished architectural concrete.
Other photos include the '2020 building' which illustrates the use of pre -cast architectural concrete.
Also enclosed is a photo of the landscape material with 3 year growth proposed along 72nd Avenue
which is very effective in screening the lower level garage from view.
We hope this additional and updated material addresses the questions raised in the 9/20/11 meeting. Please
review and contact me should you have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
FIRST WESTERN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, INC.
Scott Shanks
SS:nlb
Enc:
110
/
�
d%
+�vrrre�r✓lr,GlK�i %/, �, /,ii
i�lii�t✓kr�ircr 1����ia��a✓i�%� // iii � ��
r X�irrruUi�q✓�ir�fr � /I��// r /i / /iii i// . ,,
/ ��//i ///�� ri� ���// ✓rota;/,e; 1'
rirrr�mtrytvap
rKrhr�yeiarrymrr�uirnru r iirrrF�Ki�I ryt%«r r� '������� ��// % %/ '
,/r��� ��
FORM 150.67-EG1 (811)
Model YCAL Air -Cooled Scroll Compressor Liquid Chillerl-
50 and 60Hz
��za xrAw
15 — 65 TON
53 — 213 kWT
R-41 0A
n u facility are produced t
M facility whose qualily-
management systems are
�ISTED IS09001 certified.
System performance and reliability make Maverick II commercial packaged rooftop systems the
ideal solution for new, retrofit or replacement applications on one to three-story buildings.
Available in capacities from 15 to 70 tons, they combine the lower installation costs and interior
space savings of a roof -mounted system with the operating and maintenance efficiencies of
central heating and cooling systems.
Applications range from offices and schools to libraries and strip malls. Arriving at yourjob site
as a complete package, Maverick II commercial rooftop systems maximize your design and
installed cost savings. They also can add to your building's profit margins year after year with
efficient, reliable performance.
Maverick II rooftop systems are
ideal for 100% make up air
(DORS) applications. Units can
be equipped with modulating hot
gas reheat to increase occupant
comfort and avoid over -cooling.
100° temperature -rise furnaces
are also available for
cold -weather climates.
/1) C. 1890
CITY OF ED C)NDS MIKE COOPER
MAYOR
121 5th AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 ° (425) 771-0220 ° FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
November 9, 2011
Mr. Scott Shanks and Mr. Dale Pinney
First Western Development Services
8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, WA 98026
Subject: Request for Additional Information for Your Land Use Application
For Design Review of the Premier Orthopedic Building at 2140172"d Ave. Vd
File No. PLN20110063
Dear Mr. Shanks and Mr. Pinney:
Staff has reviewed your resubmittal materials for your design review application for the proposed Premier
Orthopedic building located at 2140172 nd Avenue West. Thank you for revising your plans to address most of
our concerns related to the design of the building. There are just a few items remaining that need to be
addressed before design review can be completed. Please respond to the following items at your earliest
convenience so that staff's review of your application can continue:
1. Windows: It was noted that the windows near the center of the eastern facade were made shorter by
placing a narrow concrete panel at the base of these windows. It appears that these windows. are
located within the "prov. bullpen" room. Is there a reason why these windows are smaller causing an
interruption in the solid row of windows along the third floor? If not, it would look more uniform for
all of these windows along the third floor to be of the same height.
2. PUD Vault: An electrical vault is shown at the northwestern corner of the site. Please note that the
vault may not be located within the minimum required four foot street setback from the western
property line if the vault exceeds three feet in height. Is this the only possible location for the vault?
Would it be possible to put the.vault underground or to move it to a less visible location? If the
northwest corner is the only possible location for the vault, could it be moved a few feet further to the
east so that it is as far back from the western property line as possible in order to provide enough
space for screening vegetation?
3. Setbacks: The site plan (sheet A-101) indicates that the main entrance to the building will be 4.04 feet
from the western property line, but this plan shows the gold decorative strip on the northern side of the
wall of windows as well as the building overhang at the main entrance projecting into the minimum
required 4 -foot street setback. Unfortunately, there are no exceptions in the CG site development
standards for any portions of the structure to project into the 4 -foot street setback. This can be added
as a condition of design review approval; however, please note that the plans for the building permit
application will need to be revised so that all portions of the structure will comply with the 4 -foot.
street setback. Additionally, the PUD vault discussed above will also need to be shown to comply
with the street setback requirements.
4. Parapet: It was noted that the parapet on the northern side of the building is taller than the parapets on
the other sides of the building, creating a step in the parapets at the northeastern and northwestern
comers of the building. Is there a particular reason that the tops of the parapets do not line up in these
locations? Would it be possible to raise or lower the heights of the parapets so that they line up at all
comers of the building?
Incorporated August 11, 1890 °
ATTACHMENT 6
0idor C'itn - Holdnan ,Tanan
5. Parking Garage Screening: During our meeting on September 20`', it was indicated that you would
look into the feasibility of providing a low screening wall on the first floor of the parking garage.
Screening of parking is necessary pursuant to ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.b. It is understood that there are
minimum opening requirements for ventilation of the parking garage since this is proposed to be an
open parking garage. However, based on the Building Division's calculations, it appears that there is
more than enough opening area for the first floor of the garage. As such, a screen similar in style to
the guardrail on the second floor of the parking garage could be utilized to assist with screening the
cars on the first floor of the parking garage. Although the landscaping will assist in partially screening
cars on the first floor of the garage, a more permanent method for screening the cars is desired. This
is partially due to the fact that typically grasses must be cut back significantly or even cut to the
ground during the winter, and even if they are not cut back, they will be more sparse in the winter.
This would greatly reduce any screening provided by the landscaping and causes the need for more
permanent screening of the cars. Of particular concern are the western and southern building far�ades,
which can be seen from 72nd Ave. W. Please revise the plans to include" a low screening wall (a
minimum of 3.5 feet tall) on at least the western and southern fagades of the first floor of the parking
garage similar in style to that on the second floor of the garage. In addition to helping bring the
proposal into compliance with ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.b, this will also bring the proposal into
compliance with the landscaping requirements of ECDC 20.13.030.C.3.c by utilizing a combination of
opaque "fences" and shrubs to produce a visual barrier of at least 3.5 feet in height to screen the
parking area.
6. Lighting: Staff s letter sent on September 19, 2011 requested additional information related to
proposed lighting. It does not appear, however, that this item was responded to with your resubmittal.
Please indicate the style and materials of any proposed exterior lighting fixtures.
7. Signage: The elevation views that were part of your resubmittal indicate future signage. Please note
that signage will be reviewed for code compliance at the time of submittal of a sign permit application.
However, I wanted to refer you to our sign code requirements of ECDC 20.60 and to bring a few
items related to the signage indicated on the design review plans to your attention at this time. ECDC
20.60.025.A limits the maximum number of permanent signs to three per site, or three per physically
enclosed business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants. This code section also
limits the total maximum permanent sign area for the site to one square foot per lineal foot of the
building frontage along 72nd Ave. W. Additionally, it should be noted that a freestanding sign located
within the four -foot street setback cannot exceed three feet in height. These comments regarding
signage do not need to be responded to at this time, but please note that they will need to be addressed
as well as any additional applicable sign code requirements of ECDC 20.60 upon submittal of a sign
permit application.
8. Landscaping: Note that the following landscaping comments are based on the landscape plan
submitted on October 12, 2011. Although landscaping is shown on the elevation views, it does not
entirely match what is indicated on the landscape plan. Landscaping is not required to be shown on
the elevation views, so any changes being made to the landscape plan do not need to be reflected on
the elevation views. Please respond to the following regarding the landscape plan:
a. Within the plant schedule, update the minimum sizes at installation as follows in order to reflect
the requirements of ECDC 20.13.015.B: Japanese maple should be minimum of 8 feet in height;
arborvitae should be a minimum of 6 feet in height; photinia and viburnum should both be a
minimum of 18 inches in height.
b. The cross -hatching near the southeastern corner of the site surrounding the existing trees to be
retained is not indicated in the plant schedule. Please indicate what this cross -hatching represents.
c. If it is not possible to put the PUD vault underground or to move it to a less prominent location
(see related comment above), please revise the landscape plan to indicate sufficient screening of
the vault from view from the north, west, and south. It is suggested that the vault be moved to
further the east (it must be a minimum of four feet from the western property line if over three feet
in height) in order to provide sufficient space for screening landscaping. Instead of screening it
Page 2 of 3
with grasses, it is suggested that the vault be screened with taller evergreen shrubs that will grow
to be higher than the height of the vault itself.
d. The landscape plan indicates six fastigiate white pine trees along the western side of the site.
Although this species starts out as a columnar tree, as it ages, it can mature at up to 60 feet tall
and 15 to 20 feet wide. This is of concern on the western side of the site where there is only
approximately 10 feet between the building and the western property line, which could cause the
need for major pruning or even removal of these trees in the future. It is suggested that you
consider a smaller evergreen that is more suitably sized for the western side of the site, such as a
columnar Norway spruce (Picea abies cupressina), which grows to approximately 30 to 40 feet in
height and 8 to 10 feet in width.
e. Landscaping along all four sides of the site is required to comply with the Type III landscaping
requirements. Please describe how each side of the site is in compliance with the Type III
requirements of ECDC 20.13.030.C.
f. During our meeting on September 20t', it was suggested that a combination of a taller species,
such as arborvitae, be utilized in combination with a smaller shrub along the northern side of the
property in order to help break up the northern fagade and to achieve Type III landscaping.
Would it be possible to establish arborvitae or another taller species at a minimum of 30 foot
intervals along the northern side of the site adjacent to the. walkway?
g. It is suggested that evergreen shrubs, such as the compact strawberry tree or Fraser's photinia that
are utilized on the eastern side of the site, be established amongst the grasses on the western and
southern sides of the site in order to add some height to the landscaping adjacent to the open bays
of the parking garage and to provide denser, year-round vegetation in these areas of the site.
h. Please provide written acknowledgement from the property owner that they understand that if the
existing trees that are proposed to be retained near the southeastern corner. of the site and/or the
existing trees that are to be transplanted near the southern side of the site do not survive during the
construction project, a landscape plan revision may be required and new trees may be necessary
near these locations.
9. Engineering Division Review: It should be noted that "the Engineering Division has approved the
subject design review application and issued the attached memo on November 8, 2011. Any
remaining comments from the Engineering Division, including comments on the proposed civil plans,
will be provided during their review of the associated building permit applications.
Please note that your application will be placed on hold until a response is received regarding the above items.
Pursuant to ECDC Section 20.02.003.1), you must submit the above information within 90 days. Thus, your
application will expire if the requested information is not received by February 7, 2012.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 771-0220, extension 1224.
Sincerely,
Development Services Department - Planning Division
",�_ I zl��
Jen Machuga
Associate Planner
Enclosure: Memorandum from Jeanie McConnell dated November 8, 2011
Cc: File No. PLN20110063
Page 3 of 3
November 14, 2011
Jen Machuga
Associate Planner
City of Edmonds
1215 Ih Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
PROJECT:
SUBJECT
Dear Jen:
Premier Orthopedic Group Building
21401 72nd Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
Response to November 9, 2011 Review Letter
0
We have received your November 9, 2011 review letter for the above referenced project and offer the following
responses to questions:
1. Windows
The windows referred to are located in an area of the building where the doctors transcribe information
after patient exams. The elevation of the writing counters and computer area including tack board
space precludes the ability to install lower windows similar to other spaces located along the east wall.
Refer to Sheet A7.9 detail G of the tenant improvement plans for this illustration. The architects have
raised the sill height of all the windows in this area to accommodate the specialized need as requested
by the doctors. As this is a highly specialized building customized for specific medical use, the architects
and designers were tasked with creating spaces to accommodate the needs while at the same time
achieving an attractive building.
P.U.D. Vault
We, along with our electrical consultant have coordinated with Snohomish County P.U.D. on placement
of the electrical vault. We originally had planned to locate the building electrical room and pad
mounted transformer at the NE corner of the site adjacent to the proposed emergency generator.
P.U.D. would not approve this location due to the existing primary service location, and required us to
move it to the NW corner of the site. The primary service they will connect to is located in 72nd Avenue.
We had to relocate the primary building electrical room to accommodate this and it is now located
adjacent to the transformer location.
Our contact at P.U.D. is Lisa Hovnug. She provided us with details as to the location of the transformer
and required setback from the building. The transformer height is slightly greater than 36" so we will
relocate a minimum of 48" from the west property line meeting the City setback requirement. The
minimum setback from the building is 8'-0" we currently have 9'-8" so we can move it at least 1'-6"
further back from the property line and provide additional landscaping along the front.
9129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, 98026
Page 2 of 3
3. Setbacks
Attached to this letter is a plan that more accurately illustrates the proposed setbacks at the entry along
72nd Avenue. All elements of the entry and stair feature will be setback a minimum of 4'-0" from the
property line. Also illustrated on this plan portion is a dashed line illustrating the eve of the roof line
which covers the stair and entry feature. This eve extended into the 4'-0" setback. EMC 21.90.020
allows ever overhangs not to exceed 30".
The Snohomish County P.U.D. vault has been relocated to the east, to maintain the required 4'-0"
setback. We discussed this requirement with Lisa Hevnuag at Snohomish County P.U.D. and she
informed us that to her knowledge there has never been a setback requirement for P.U.D. owner
transformers.
4. Parapet
Due to the proximity of the property line to the building along the north boundary line, the building
code required a minimum parapet height of 30" above the roof surface. The building setback from the
other property lines along with acquired easements do not require the parapet height on the other
elevations. The architects considered raising all of the parapets initially however, we all believed that it
made the building appear too top heavy with the taller parapets around all sides; not to mention the
increased costs for the added height which our contractor estimated to be approximately $38,000.00.
The north elevation of this building will not be visible due to both grades on the adjacent site and
mature trees that will remain. It was decided by the design team that providing the required 30"
parapet only on the north side is ascetically and economically a better solution.
Parking Garage Screening
After our discussion on 9/20/2011 the design team which included Shawn Parsons the project landscape
architect met to review the screening requirement. Our stated objective was twofold; one: to meet or
exceed the zoning requirement of visually shielding the autos from public view through the code
prescribed methods of utilizing either constructed walls or through landscaping, and two: the owners
and architects desire was to create a parking area that was as light and airy as possible. It was not our
desire or intent for a patient's first experience to be a dark cold parking garage. In lieu of creating a built
screening device which would need to be concrete due to potential automobile impact, the design team
promoted the use of landscaping to both screen the autos from 72nd Avenue and also create an interior
`green screen'. The landscaping architect was directed to come up with a planting plan to achieve both
objectives, a light and airy garage that also does not allowing automobile exposure to 72nd Avenue. We
believe we have achieved this with the planting plan. The landscape architect has informed me that the
taller screening grass, Miscanthus, obtaining 4-5' height at maturity, is not winter pruned and retains its
evergreen quality year round. The "blue" oat grass in the foreground is often pruned but its effect on
the parking lot screen is minimal.
Lighting
The only exterior lighting proposed for this project are two recessed can lights located in the marquee at
the main entry (see Sheet A 121 detail A). The other exterior lights are emergency wall packs
illuminating the exit pathway along the north elevation; see Sheet A 202, north elevation for light
locations. In addition there is one wall mounted light over the roll down door accessing the trash area.
Page 3 of
7. Signage
We understand that the proposed exterior signs will need a separate submittal. We have removed the
freestanding sign that was originally proposed at the entry along 72nd Avenue in lieu of a die cut back lit
building identification sign located in the marquee at the main entry as illustrated on the revised
building perspective attached to this letter. We will prepare a sign application and submit for review
and approval.
8. Landscaping
See attached letter from Shawn Parsons, landscape architect.
Sincerely,
FIRST
WESTERN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, INC.
Scott Shanks
SS:nlb
IgT
„9L6
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — _ _
I I
vo
g
W
F
I
s19�
a
z¢1
Jq
u
r--------
--------
---------
---------------------------
L— — — —
— — — — —
— — — —
— — — — — — —
W
F
s19�
21911 76TH AVE. WEST T 425.275.9808
SUITE 208 P 425.275.0272
EDMONDS, WA 98026-7918 WWW.PACLAND.COM
Ms. Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
City of Edmonds
121 5`h Avenue North
Edmonds, Wa. 98020
RE: Land Use Application — Design Review of the Premier Orthopedic Building
File No. PLN20110063
Dear Ms. Machuga;
Let this letter serve as a response to the landscape portion of your November letter requesting
additional information. The numbering refers directly to your letter's structure.
5) Parking Garage Screening:
In regards to the selected plant material, the taller screening grass, Miscanthus, obtaining 4-5'
height at maturity, is not winter pruned and retains its evergreen quality year round. The "blue"
oat grass in the foreground is often pruned but its effect on the parking lot screen is minimal.
8) Landscaping:
a) The size of the selected plant material has been clarified as per code requirements.
b) The "cross -hatching" at the southeast corner of the plan is referenced by a plan note
stating the area is existing vegetation to remain and augmented as necessary with
salal ground cover.
c) The PUD vault has been adjusted in its current location to allow arborvitae screening
on three sides.
d) While it is likely the specified fastigiated white pine will achieve "naturalized"
maturity of 60' height and 20' width in an urban setting, I have elected to substitute
the tree with your suggested columnar Norway spruce to expedite the planning
approval process.
e) The west and east sides of the building explicitly comply with the Type III
landscaping. Along the south side, I have provided (13) additional arborvitae trees to
fulfill the evergreen tree component of the buffer type. The north side is discussed in
detail below.
f) The Landscape plan depicts Oregon grape, 5' height and 3' width along the north
side. While this is not consistent with the Type III landscaping requirements some
other code allowances we assume would prevail. The building code within this zone
allows for zero -net building setback from the property line. The siting of the building
has used a modified allowance of this zero -net setback that precludes the planting of
trees and large shrubs. That said, the specifics of the site topography is that the
adjacent commercial property ranging from 2-6'+ elevated over the subject property
provides a natural buffer. The proposed Oregon grape planting also will provide
some buffering without jeopardizing security and safety of the sidewalk participants
along the north side of the building. We believe that the intent of buffering is met.
g) The use of more woody material is not needed and is not consistent with the design
theme of the ornament grasses. With the density of planting, Miscanthus at 3' on
ATTACHMENT 8
x
Let this letter serve as a response to the landscape portion of your November letter requesting
additional information. The numbering refers directly to your letter's structure.
5) Parking Garage Screening:
In regards to the selected plant material, the taller screening grass, Miscanthus, obtaining 4-5'
height at maturity, is not winter pruned and retains its evergreen quality year round. The "blue"
oat grass in the foreground is often pruned but its effect on the parking lot screen is minimal.
8) Landscaping:
a) The size of the selected plant material has been clarified as per code requirements.
b) The "cross -hatching" at the southeast corner of the plan is referenced by a plan note
stating the area is existing vegetation to remain and augmented as necessary with
salal ground cover.
c) The PUD vault has been adjusted in its current location to allow arborvitae screening
on three sides.
d) While it is likely the specified fastigiated white pine will achieve "naturalized"
maturity of 60' height and 20' width in an urban setting, I have elected to substitute
the tree with your suggested columnar Norway spruce to expedite the planning
approval process.
e) The west and east sides of the building explicitly comply with the Type III
landscaping. Along the south side, I have provided (13) additional arborvitae trees to
fulfill the evergreen tree component of the buffer type. The north side is discussed in
detail below.
f) The Landscape plan depicts Oregon grape, 5' height and 3' width along the north
side. While this is not consistent with the Type III landscaping requirements some
other code allowances we assume would prevail. The building code within this zone
allows for zero -net building setback from the property line. The siting of the building
has used a modified allowance of this zero -net setback that precludes the planting of
trees and large shrubs. That said, the specifics of the site topography is that the
adjacent commercial property ranging from 2-6'+ elevated over the subject property
provides a natural buffer. The proposed Oregon grape planting also will provide
some buffering without jeopardizing security and safety of the sidewalk participants
along the north side of the building. We believe that the intent of buffering is met.
g) The use of more woody material is not needed and is not consistent with the design
theme of the ornament grasses. With the density of planting, Miscanthus at 3' on
ATTACHMENT 8
center, with the proposed Columnar Norway Spruce the area will be adequately
screened.
h) The developer will provide necessary documentation concerning removing of
existing vegetation.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 275-9808.
Since oly,
Shawn Parsons, Principal/Landscape Architect
Cc: Scott Shanks, FWDS
Dale Pinney, FWDS
November 16, 2011
City of Edmonds
Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Response to Request for Additional Information, dated 11-9-11
Design Review File # PLN20110063
Dear Jen,
This response letter is accompanying copies of the revised Design Review drawings submitted for the Premier
Orthopedics Office Building to be located at 2140172 d Ave. W, Edmonds, WA. Based on the document noted above,
corrections have been made to the drawings previously submitted. Changes to the documents since the previous
submittal to the City of Edmonds have been clouded. The responses to your comments are indicated on the drawings
as follows:
Windows
PUD Vault
Setbacks
Parapet
The east facade of the building has been modified. The windows that you refer to require a
higher sill height to accommodate the use of the interior space by the doctors for office
functions integral to their patient care duties. We have modified the windows between Grids
5 and 6 on Sheet A201 to have a consistent sill height of 64 inches above finish floor
elevation.
We have shifted the vault and associated transformer to the east as far as possible without
encroaching into required building separation distances. The vault, which is flush with the
finish grade, may still encroach a few inches, depending on the eventual size of the lid
installed by the PUD. If a vault encroachment should occur, since it will be at grade
elevation, and the taller transformer will be outside of the setback, the vault and transformer
installation will be in compliance with City Ordinance. Reference Sheets A-101 and A-111
for the update vault and transformer location
A plan detail has been added to Sheet A-101 that illustrates our compliance with the CG site
development standards, including the encroachment of the building eave along 72nd Avenue
W. Section 21.90.020 of the design standards allows an encroachment of up to 30 inches,
whereas our encroachment is less than 10 inches. Reference Sheet A-101 for the detailed
setback information.
Per the IBC, the wall at the north end of the building is required to maintain a 1 -Hour rated
parapet wall a minimum of 30 inches in height due to property line proximity. The design
16398 NE 85th St Suite 101 Redmond, WA 98052 Tel: i ATTACHMENT 10
team considered raising the height of the remaining parapets for consistency, but decided that
the nearly 24 inches of additional metal fascia height was detrimental to the overall
appearance of the building. Since our building modeling illustrated that from the ground the
change in height was hardly noticeable, we opted to finalize the design with a step in parapet
height at Grid 1.
Parking Garage Screening
Lighting
Signage
Landscaping
Per the discussion at our meeting on November 14, 2011, the design team feels strongly that
the building will have a better appearance and the cars will be screened more effectively if the
proposed planting of grasses is allowed in lieu of the painted concrete barrier wall. As
discussed, the grasses proposed will achieve a height greater than the 36 inch barrier wall used
on the second floor of the parking garage. The Owner understands that if the grasses at
maturity fail to perform as an adequate screen of the parking, another type of screen will be
installed at that time. Reference the revised Landscape plan for updated information on the
grass plantings.
The project has very limited exterior lighting, relying instead on the interior lighting of the
atrium and the parking garage to accent the building architecture. Reference the attached light
fixture cut sheets for the exterior lighting.
Signage is illustrated for publicity purposes. The Owner and Tenant understand that signage
illustrated on the documents is not included in the permitting process. A separate permit
application process will be started in the near future for the actual signage being requested.
A separate letter from the Landscape Architect which addresses the issues raised in your
November 91h comment letter is attached.
Engineering Division Review
We have received and responded to the permit review comments from Engineering in a
separate response letter.
End of Request for Additional Information Comments Response
Please call me @ 206-571-5612 if you have any questions regarding the above responses.
Sincerely,
Jim Wieben, DDG Architects
508
LARGE SCALE 1
imam=
r-12 -I
26
MC = Mounting Center
A 4" octagonal junction box should be used for installation.
MODEL
508 - Large Scale Classic
LAMP
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
• Large solid aluminum bar fixture is ideal for larger
spaces.
• Solid aluminum bar stock for maximum rigidity and
strength.
• Available in METAL HALIDE.
• Electronic multi -volt (120 to 277V) ballast is standard.
• Meets all ADA requirements.
• Wet location listed.
• Manufactured in the U.S.A.
"W -0
H -, N g H
'� _1 i U M r�l
Single -Bar DC VB WEB DC/2MB DC/2VB 3CB
(Standard)
EXAMPLE: 508-2CF026-8 RZ-VB
FINISH
WHT - White
BLK -Black
SAL -Silver
BRZ - Bronze
PLEASE ADVISE
FINISH
ZZ- F_
2CFQ13 - (2) 13W QUAD TUBE CF (G24Q-1 BASE)
- Double Cross Bar
IBA - Brushed Aluminum
-Vertical Bar
2CF 18 - 2 18W QUAD TUBE CF G24 -2 BASE
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Full Vertical Bars
Consult factor for other finishes.
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Middle Bars
2CF 26- 2 26W UAD TUBE CF G24 -3 BASE
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Vertical Bars
2CFT26 - (2) 26W TRIPLE TUBE CF (GX24Q-3 BASE)
- 3 Lower Cross Bars
2CFT32 - (2) 32W TRIPLE TUBE CF (GX24Q-3 BASE)
2CFT42 - (2) 42W TRIPLE TUBE CF (GX24Q-4 BASE)
2F27-(2)27WLong Twin Tube CF(2G11Base)
PLEASE ADVISE BAR��
1F40-(1)40WLong Twin Tube CF(2G11Base)
CONFIGURATION
2F40 - (2) 40W Long Twin Tube CF (2GI I Base)
1M11150 - (1) 50W Metal Halide Lamp (ED17 Bulb)
1MH70 - (1) 70W Metal Halide Lamp (EDI 7 Bulb)
Consultfactoiyforother av '' '' '
d le s
T i alit; S1
PREMIER ORTHOPEDICS TI
I INDESSA i
508-2CFQ26-XXX-BAR CONFIG.
-7
OPTIONS
BL - Bottom Lens
TC -Top Flat Aluminum Cover
(No up light)
BC -Bottom Flat Aluminum
Cover (No bottom light)
IEM - Integral Emergency Ballast
Lamp - Lamp provided, please specify
color temperature.
Blank - Standard Single -Bar Design
DC
- Double Cross Bar
VB
-Vertical Bar
WEB
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Full Vertical Bars
DC/2MB
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Middle Bars
DC/2VB
- Double Cross Bar w/ 2 Vertical Bars
3CB
- 3 Lower Cross Bars
n(ID
m NOE,
. -"4M% WET LOCATION
prior notice.
Submitted by Pacific
Job Name:
Premier Orthopedics
Contractor: SME (Seattle)
DESCRIPTION
The IMPACT EliteTrapezoid cutoff wall luminaire makes an ideal
complement to site design. Rugged construction and full cutoff classified
optics provide facade and security lighting for light restricted zones
surrounding schools, office complexes, apartments, and recreational
facilities. U.L. and cUL Listed for wet locations in down mount
applications and damp locations in up mounted applications.
SPECIFICATION FEATURES
Construction
Two-piece die-cast aluminum
housing and removable hinged
door frame nests securely for
precise tolerance control and
repeatability. Hinged door frame
inset for clean mating with housing
surface and secured via two [2]
captive stainless steel fasteners.
Optional tamper resistant torx head
fasteners (TR] offer vandal resistant
access to the electrical
compartment. 1/8" clear, heat and
impact resistant tempered flat
glass lens combined with molded
silicone gasket to sea( the
integrated optical assembly while
ensuring peak optical performance.
Electrical
Integral hard mount electrical
components are secured and
grounded within the die-cast
aluminum housing for optimal heat
sinking and extended component
life. Minimum starting
temperatures are -40°C (-40°F) for
DIMENSIONS
HPS and -30°C (-22°F) for MP.
Compact fluorescent luminaires
feature electronic universal 120-
277V high efficiency 50/60Hz ballast
with -18°C (-0°F) minimum starting.
Available in 50-175W HID or 26-
84W CF.
Optical
Premium anodized 95% reflective
aluminum optical assemblies
provide high efficiency Type II
distribution. Optional silk screened
house side flat glass shield
provides decreased wall
brightness. All Impact Elite Wall
Series luminaires classify as IESNA
full cutoff in downlight
applications. Available with 10% or
50% uplight options for
architectural highlighting of
building details.
Mounting
Gasketed and zinc plated rigid steel
mounting attachment fits directly to
4" j -box or wall with the Impact
8 1/2'
(210mm1
�16 1/2' (419.m1 9' 1229mm1--1
00
COOPER Lighting
www.cooperlighting.com
Elite "Hook -N -Lock" system for fast
installation and mounting in both
traditional downlighting [wet
location] or inverted uplighting
[damp location] mounting
positions. Secured via two [2]
captive corrosion resistant allen
head set screws concealed from
view, but accessible from bottom
of fixture.
Finish
Housing and door are protected
with 5 -stage premiumTGIC
polyester powder coat paint.
PremiumTGIC powder coat
finishes withstand extreme climate
changes while providing optimal
color and gloss retention over the
fixture's installed life. Standard
colors include black, bronze, grey,
white, dark platinum and graphite
metallic. RAL and custom color
matches available. Consult
McGraw -Edison Architectural
Colors Brochure for complete
selection.
HOOK -N -LOCK MOUNTING
(Mounting attachment included. J -Box not included.)
w �, o
IST
IMPACT ELITE
TRAPEZOID
50 - 175W
Pulse Start Metal Halide
Metal Halide
High Pressure Sodium
26 - 84W
Compact Fluorescent
FULL CUTOFF
WALL MOUNT LUMINAIRE
�F%Ful
NOTE: In QavM)ght epp4<auo�u aMy.
TECHNICAL DATA
UL1598 Listed, CUL Listed
25°C Maximum AmblentTemperature
External Supply Wiring 90'C Minimum
Down Mounted—Wet Location
Up Mounted—Damp Location
ENERGY DATA
High Reactance Ballast Input Watts
50W HPS HPF (66 Watts)
50W MP HPF (72 Watts)
70W HPS HPF (91 Watts)
70W MP HPF (90 Watts)
10OW HPS HPF (130 Watts)
10OW MP HPF (129 Watts)
15OW HPS HPF (190 Watts)
15OW MP HPF (185 Watts)
Electronic Ballast Input Watts
26W CF HPF (29 Watts)
32W CF HPF (36 Watts)
42W CF HPF (46 Watts)
52W CF HPF (55 Watts)
SHIPPING DATA
Approximate Net Weight:
18 lbs. (8 kgs.)
ea
r f'y l d ADH100166
c`°r"tE 2010-01-2016:07:35
Submitted by Pacific
Name:
PAC= LK*rnM E PremiJober Orthopedics
19, Contractor: SME (Seattle)
PHOTOMETRICS (Complete IES files available at www.cooperlighting.com)
■ENE■
Voltage' Distribution Colors (add as suffix)
Lamp Type
4NONE
MP= Pulse Start
■INME■
F=Single Fuse, Specify Voltage (120, 277, or 347V) °
No
%/■■
'
J►11
D
E
150 -MP / 150-HPS
10' 7.20 2.88
MEN■■
0.72
■NOON
.
'
0.50
150-Watt
14' 3.65 1.46
SO -Watt
0.37
14,000 -Lumen Clear Lamp
ORDERING INFORMATION
Sample Number: IST400.MP120-2S-GM
&ProductFam�ily Lamp Wattage MP
50=50W z
70=70W z
100=100W
150=15oW
100=100W
150=150W
175=175W'
CF
26=11)26W
32=(1) 32W
52=(2) 26W
64=(2) 32W
84=(2) 42W
■_NOON
Voltage' Distribution Colors (add as suffix)
Lamp Type
4�O■E
IN
MP= Pulse Start
■INME■
F=Single Fuse, Specify Voltage (120, 277, or 347V) °
Metal
A B
C
D
E
150 -MP / 150-HPS
10' 7.20 2.88
NOON■
0.72
I
12' 5.00 2.00
'
0.50
150-Watt
14' 3.65 1.46
16,000-Lumen Clear Lamp
NONE
I ■ENE
MENEM
O%/■EHONE■ENE■ENE
t
42 -Watt CF
3,200 -Lumen Lamp
IST IMPACT ELITETRAPEZOID
Footcandle Table
Voltage' Distribution Colors (add as suffix)
Lamp Type
Select mounting height and read across for
footcandle values of each isofootcandie line.
Distance in units of mounting height.
MP= Pulse Start
Mounting Footcandle Values for
Height Isofootcandle Lines
F=Single Fuse, Specify Voltage (120, 277, or 347V) °
Metal
A B
C
D
E
150 -MP / 150-HPS
10' 7.20 2.88
1.44
0.72
0.29
12' 5.00 2.00
1.00
0.50
0,20
14' 3.65 1.46
0.73
0.37
0.07
42 -CF
18' 2.46 1.23
0.62
0.25
0.12
20' 2.00 1.00
0.50
0.20
0.10
25' 1.28 0.64
0.32
0.13
0.06
Notes: i HID lamps are medium base. 175W MH Is available for non -U.S. markets only.
2 Not available with 480V.
3 Products also available in non -US voltages and 50HZ for international markets. Consult your Cooper Representative for evailebilCry
and ordering information.
4 Dual -tap ballast Is 120277V wired 277V. Multi -tap is 1201200/2401277V wired 277V. Triple -tap ballast is 120277/347V Wired 347V.
5 Available with CF Option only. In cold temperatures, compact fluorescent lamps produce lower illumination levels.
6 Must specify voltage.
7 Down lighting position only.
a (1) 120V Lamp, 100W maximum quartz lamp. Utility power may need to cycle to allow HID lamp to cool in warm climates. Not
available with CF Option. Lamp supplied by others.
9 Lea ds out of the back of the unit for auxiliary power.
10 Not available with CF lamps.
11 (1) or 12) 120V Lamps. GU70 base. 50W maximum each. Lamps supplied by others.
72 Not Available with 52, 64, 64 CF Wattages.
13 (1) or (2) 12V bi-pin lamp, socket GU5.3 base, 35W maximum. Power supplied by low voltage OC source (supplied by others). Lamps
supplied by others.
14 Specify 120 ar 277V, 1-16°C) minimum temperature. Not available With UPL10.
15 Specify 120 or 277V, (WC) minimum temperature. Not available with UPL10.
00
COOPER Lighting
www.cooperlighting.com
QMR=Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp
2QMR=Quartz Restrike (2) MR16 Lamps
20MR/SC=Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp and (1)
Emergency Separate Circuit MR16 Lampe. to. tt
EMMR=Emergency Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp with
Time Delay Relay 1a, 11
2EMMR=Emergency Quartz Restrike (2) MR16 Lamps
with Time Delay Relay 10.1t
EM/SC/MR=Emergency Separate Circuit (1)MR16
Lamp "11, tz
2EM/SC/MR=Emergency Separate Circuit (2) MR16
Lamps' 11""
2EMMR/SC=Emergency Quartz Restrike with Time
Delay Relay (1) MR16 and (1) MR16
Emergency Separate Circuit Lamp 9,10, 11
EM/SC/12V=Emergency Separate Circuit 12V Low
Voltage (1) MR16 Lamp 9•13
2EM/SC/12V=Emergency Separate Circuit 12V Low
11-u ,.e I-17 A°n1C I .- 1,11
CFEM-XXX=Emergency CF Power Pack (UL924 Listed) (1) CF
Lamp.0 degrees C/32 degrees F $,Is
NOTE: Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice.
Visit our web site at www.cooperlighting.com ADH100166
Customer First Center 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 770.486.4800 FAX 770.486.4801 2010.01-20 16:07:35
Voltage' Distribution Colors (add as suffix)
Lamp Type
Options
MP= Pulse Start
120=120V 2S Type II AP=Gre
F=Single Fuse, Specify Voltage (120, 277, or 347V) °
Metal
208=208V I Segmented gZ_Bronze
FF=Double Fuse, Specify Voltage (208, 240 or 480V) °
HPS Haigh Pressure
240=240V = ac
P=Button Photocontrol (120, 208, 240 or 277V) °
Sodium
277=277V DP=Dark Platinum
=amp nc u e
_ 'd 1
GM=Graphite Metallic
TR=Tamper Resistant Fasteners
CF=Compac.
347=347 V
WH=White
UPL10=70% Uptight
Fluorescent-
480=480V
HS=House Side Shield Glass s
DT=Dual-Tap 4
PL=Polycarbonate Lens 5'7
MT=Multi-Tap 4
Q=Quartz Restrike (1) T4 Lamp °
TT=Triple-Tap °
EM=Emergency Quartz Restrike (1) T4 Lamp with Time
Et=Electronic
Delay Relay a
...(120-277V)'...'
EM/SC=Emergency Separate Circuit (1) T4 Lamp
to, n
Notes: i HID lamps are medium base. 175W MH Is available for non -U.S. markets only.
2 Not available with 480V.
3 Products also available in non -US voltages and 50HZ for international markets. Consult your Cooper Representative for evailebilCry
and ordering information.
4 Dual -tap ballast Is 120277V wired 277V. Multi -tap is 1201200/2401277V wired 277V. Triple -tap ballast is 120277/347V Wired 347V.
5 Available with CF Option only. In cold temperatures, compact fluorescent lamps produce lower illumination levels.
6 Must specify voltage.
7 Down lighting position only.
a (1) 120V Lamp, 100W maximum quartz lamp. Utility power may need to cycle to allow HID lamp to cool in warm climates. Not
available with CF Option. Lamp supplied by others.
9 Lea ds out of the back of the unit for auxiliary power.
10 Not available with CF lamps.
11 (1) or 12) 120V Lamps. GU70 base. 50W maximum each. Lamps supplied by others.
72 Not Available with 52, 64, 64 CF Wattages.
13 (1) or (2) 12V bi-pin lamp, socket GU5.3 base, 35W maximum. Power supplied by low voltage OC source (supplied by others). Lamps
supplied by others.
14 Specify 120 ar 277V, 1-16°C) minimum temperature. Not available With UPL10.
15 Specify 120 or 277V, (WC) minimum temperature. Not available with UPL10.
00
COOPER Lighting
www.cooperlighting.com
QMR=Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp
2QMR=Quartz Restrike (2) MR16 Lamps
20MR/SC=Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp and (1)
Emergency Separate Circuit MR16 Lampe. to. tt
EMMR=Emergency Quartz Restrike (1) MR16 Lamp with
Time Delay Relay 1a, 11
2EMMR=Emergency Quartz Restrike (2) MR16 Lamps
with Time Delay Relay 10.1t
EM/SC/MR=Emergency Separate Circuit (1)MR16
Lamp "11, tz
2EM/SC/MR=Emergency Separate Circuit (2) MR16
Lamps' 11""
2EMMR/SC=Emergency Quartz Restrike with Time
Delay Relay (1) MR16 and (1) MR16
Emergency Separate Circuit Lamp 9,10, 11
EM/SC/12V=Emergency Separate Circuit 12V Low
Voltage (1) MR16 Lamp 9•13
2EM/SC/12V=Emergency Separate Circuit 12V Low
11-u ,.e I-17 A°n1C I .- 1,11
CFEM-XXX=Emergency CF Power Pack (UL924 Listed) (1) CF
Lamp.0 degrees C/32 degrees F $,Is
NOTE: Specifications and dimensions subject to change without notice.
Visit our web site at www.cooperlighting.com ADH100166
Customer First Center 1121 Highway 74 South Peachtree City, GA 30269 770.486.4800 FAX 770.486.4801 2010.01-20 16:07:35
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220
WAC 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
Description of proposal: File No. PLN20110063. The subject proposal includes construction of a new
approximately 82,000 square foot, three-story medical office building located at 21401 72nd Ave. W. The
first two floors of the building will consist of parking garage containing approximately 125 parking stalls
and the third floor will contain approximately 27,500 square feet of medical office.
The SEPA Checklist and DNS are available at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us through the Permits Online link.
Search for File No. PLN20110063. These materials as well as the project plans are also available for
viewing at the Planning Division, located on the second floor of Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Ave N,
Edmonds, WA 98020.
Proponent: First Western Development Services
Location of proposal, including street address if any: 21401 72nd Ave. W, Edmonds, WA
Tax Parcel No. 00580700002208
Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS
The lead agency has determined that the requirements for environmental analysis and protection have
been adequately addressed in the development regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under
chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, as provided by RCW
43.21C.240 and WAC 197-11-158 and/or mitigating measures have been applied that ensure no
significant adverse impacts will be created.
An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was
made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead
agency. This information is available to the public on request.
There is no comment period for this DNS.
XX This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14
days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by October 25, 2011
Comments must be made in writing to City of Edmonds Planning Division, 121 5th Ave N,
Edmonds, WA 98020 or via email to machuga(c),ci.edmonds.wa.us.
Project Planner: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
Responsible Official: Robert Chave, Planning Division Manager
Phone: (425) 771-0220
Address:, City of Edmonds, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020
Date: October 11, 2011 Signature:'a.- b
XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 121 5th Avenue
North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the
appeal with the required appeal fee, adjacent property owners list and notarized affidavit form
no later than November 1, 2011 . You should be prepared to make specific factual
objections. Contact Rob Chave to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals.
XX Posted on October 11, 2011 , at the Edmonds Public Library and Edmonds Public Safety
Building.
XX Emailed to the Department of Ecology (SEPAunit@ecy.wa.gov) along with a copy of the
SEPA Checklist.
Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT 11
XX Mailed notice of the SEPA determination to property owners within 300 feet and the following
agencies:
XX COMCAST
Outside Plant Engineer, North Region
152575 Ih St SW Ste 200
Everett, WA 98203
XX Washington State Dept. of Transportation
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
SnoKing Developer Services, MS 221
15700 Dayton Ave. N.
PO Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
XX Puget Sound Regional Council
Attn.: S.R.C.
1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98104-1035
XX Snohomish County Planning &
Development Services
3000 Rockefeller
Everett, WA 98201
XX Snohomish County Fire District No. 1
Attn.: Director of Fire Services
12425 Meridian Avenue South
Everett, WA 98208-5728
XX Swedish Hospital
21601 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98026
XX Community Transit
Attn.: Brent Russell
7100 Hardeson Road
Everett, WA 98203
XX Puget Sound Energy
Attn: Elaine Babby
PO Box 97034, M/S EST -11 W
Bellevue, WA 98009-9734
XX Dean Saksena, Senior Manager
Snohomish Co. PUD
PO Box 1107
Everett, WA 98206-1107
XX Design Review Applicant:
Scott Shanks and Dale Pinney
First Western Development Services
8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, WA 98026
Attachments
c: SEPA Notebook
Page 2 of 2
XX Building Permit, Applicant:
XX City of Lynnwood
Jim Wieben
Attn.: Senior Planner
DDG Architects
P.O. Box 5008
16398 NE 85`h St.
Lynnwood, WA 98046
Redmond, WA 98052
XX City of Mountlake Terrace
Principle Planner
XX Owner:
610021 gSt. SW, Suite 200
Edmonds Medical Building Associates LLC
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
8129 Lake Ballinger Way, Suite 104
Edmonds, WA 98026
Attachments
c: SEPA Notebook
Page 2 of 2
ryj� ,1 ,1a ■ �i� ��`r • Z -41
v)
Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list.
On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties
located within 300 feet of the subject property.
Signature of Applicant or Applicants Representative
Subscribed and sworn to before me this�_L day o ,
A
Public irj and for tfA State of Washington
v
Residing q�a�
NANCI LEE BUSBY
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COMMISSION EXPIRES
DECEMBER 31, 2011
Revised on 9122110 P2 -Adjacent Property Owners List
ATTACHMENT 12
00 5807 000 002 02
Park 212 Apt LLC
1140 Parkside Dr E
Seattle, WA 98112-3716
00 5807 000 006 02
Broadus Properties LLC
21300 Highway 99
Edmonds, WA 98026-7747
00 5807 000 022 01
Public Hosp Dist #2
21601 76th Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98026-7507
00 5807 000 022 07
Lynnwood Way LLC
11555 27th Ave NE
Seattle, WA 98125-5341
00 5807 000 023 01
Homes Re LLC
111 W Michigan St
Milwaukee, WI 53203-2903
00 5807 000 003 00
Washington State Dept Of
Transportation
Po Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
00 5807 000 006 03
Broadus Properties LLC
21300 Highway 99
Edmonds, WA 98026-7747
00 5807 000 022 05
Thomas Cherpeski
21431 72nd Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98026-7702
00 5807 000 022 07,
Lynnwood Way LLC
11555 27th Ave NE
Seattle, WA 98125-5341
00 5807 000 005 00
Edmonds Associates
Po Box 511
East Rutherford, NJ 07073-0511
00 5807 000 02101
Fife Property Investments LLC
21515 Highway 99
Lynnwood, WA 98036-7339
00 5807 000 022 06
Lynnwood Way LLC
Po Box 27165
Seattle, WA 98165-1565
00 5807 000 023 00
International Corp Kavatek
21500 72nd Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98026-7707
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH
�r• eny
C r CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF SEPA DETERMINATION OF
NONSIGNIFICANCE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Edmonds has issued
a Determination of Nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340(2) for
the following project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposal includes construction of an approximately 82,000
square foot, medical office building at 21401 72nd Ave. W. The
first two floors of the building will consist of parking garage
containing approximately 125 parking stalls and the third floor
will contain approximately 27,500 square feet of medical office.
(File No. PLN20110063)
PROJECT PROPONENT: First Western Development Services
DATE DNS ISSUED:. October 11, 2011
PROJECT LOCATION: 21401 72nd Ave. W, Edmonds
SEPA COMMENTS DUE:
October 25 2011. Comments may be submitted in writing to
City of Edmonds Planning Division, 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds,
WA 98020 or via email to the contact person below.
APPEAL PERIOD:
You may appeal this determination by filing a written appeal
citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required appeal
fee no later than November 1 2011 by 4:00 PM.
SEPA MATERIALS:
The SEPA Checklist, project plans, and DNS are available for
viewing at the Planning Division; located on the second floor of
Edmonds City Hall, 121 51h Ave N, Edmonds, WA 98020.
CITY CONTACT: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
machug A l edmonds wa.us
425.771-0220
Published: October 11, 2011.
S.S.
The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of
THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of
Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general
circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal
newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice
SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance
First Western Development Services
a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not
in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and
times, namely:
October 11, 2011
and that said newspaper was regularly d
Subscribed and sworn to before me
day of ------Oet6ber, 20
County.
the State of W.
Account Name: City of Edmonds Account Number: 101416
its subscribers during all of said period.
I
Principal Clerk
i z
.r
11114
J 7J,
s
in, res idfn�g ati`Everett Srrohomtsh
�, tr6•. t S�, .e"
, iia..•. ,;.:.
Order Number: 0001753343
ATTACHMENT 13
FILE NO.: PLN20110063
Applicant: FIRST WESTERN
On the 11th day of October, 2011, the attached SEPA Determination was mailed by the City to
property owners within 300 feet of the property that is the subject of the above -referenced
application. The names of which were provided by the applicant.
I, Diane Cunningham, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 11th day of October, 2011 at Edmonds,
Washington.
Signed: A
{BFP747887.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } ATTACHMENT 14
FILE NO.: PLN20110063
Applicant: FIRST WESTERN
On the 11th day of October, 2011, the attached SEPA Determination was posted at the subject
site, Civic Center, Library and Public Safety buildings.
I, Jennifer Machuga, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 1 lth day of October, 2011, at Edmonds,
Washington.
Signed:
{BFP747893.DOC; 1\00006.900000\ } ATTACHMENT 15
Project Number: PLN20110063
Project Name: Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
Property Location: 21401 72nd Ave. VII
Date of Application: 3/3/11 Date Form Routed: 3/9/11
Zoning: General Commercial (6G2)
Project Description: Design review for construction of a new three-story building (first two floors
are parking garage and third floor is medical office). Includes 54,044 sq. ff. of parking garage
with 116 parking stalls and 27,022 sg, ff. of combined surgical center and clinic space.
--
. - • 1 1 .1 - i , _ -
_ - _ • -_b
If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact:
Responsible Staff: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner Ext. 1224
Name of Individual Submitting Comments: f}`P � _ c
Title: F 6
® I have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT
MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no
comments. My department may also
review this project during the building
permit process (if applicable) and
reserves the right to provide additional
comments at that time.
Ed/ have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY
DEPARTMENT, so I have provided
comments or conditions below or
attached.
Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure cor
requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is ne
John J. Westfall
Fire Marshal
jwestiall@firedistricti. org I
I
12425 Meridian Ave.
Everett WA 98208
phone: 425-551-1200
fax: 425-551-1249
ATTACHMENT 16
Project Number: PLN20110063
Project Name: Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
Property Location: 21401 72nd Ave. W
Date of Application: E/3/11 Date Form Routed: 3/9/11
Zoning: General Commercial (6G21
Project Description: Design review for construction of a new three-story building (first two floors
are parking garage and third floor is medical office). Includes 54,044 sq. ft. of parking garage
with 116 parking stalls and 27,022 sq. ft. of combined surgical center and clinic space.
If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact:
Responsible Staff: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner Ext. 1224
Name of Individual Submitting Comments:
Title:
I have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT
MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no
comments. My department may also
review this project during the building
permit process (if applicable) and
reserves the right to provide additional
comments at that time.
® 1 have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY
DEPARTMENT, so I have provided
comments or conditions below or
attached.
menu (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the
requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
Date: C 7 /o
Signature: - - _
Phone/E-mail:
ATTACHMENT 17
Date: September 14, 2011
To: Jen Machuga, Planner
From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Subject: PLN20110063
21401 -72nd Ave W — Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
The comments provided below are based upon review of the application and documents
submitted for the design review for the new Kruger Orthopedic Clinic at 21401 -72nd Ave W.
Additional information and/or clarification is requested from the applicant at this time. Please
ask the applicant to respond to the following.
1) Please remove the landscape bulbouts shown to either side of the driveway approach.
The curb shall be painted yellow to indicate no parking on either side of the driveway
and in the area of the bus stop.
2) The width of the driveway approach should be a minimum of 24 -feet, but could be as
wide as 30 -feet for a commercial property. A radius style driveway approach is
recommended for commercial properties. Please refer to City standard detail E2.27.2.
Please note, the detail shows the installation of truncated domes, which are not
required for this development.
3) Drive aisles for 2 -way traffic shall be a minimum of 24 -feet in width. It appears as
though the entrance to the garage will be less than 24 -feet. Please revise as
appropriate.
4) For the reasons noted below we would like you to explore alternate options for the
location of the trash enclosure.
a. Currently there is access to the enclosure from within the garage as well as
access on the exterior of the building via a roll up "garage" door. The trash
hauler in the area of the subject development is a front -load truck. Regardless
of whether the waste container is wheeled out from the interior of the garage or
via the driveway provided on the exterior, the truck will have to park on 72nd
Ave and will block the main entrance for a short period of time.
b. The additional driveway eliminates potential on street parking, reduces
landscaping and adds impervious surface area.
c. In addition, please see comment number 5 below.
City of Edmonds
ATTACHMENT 1E
5) Along the east side of the building there is a noted that states the trash disposal is to be
relocated. Has the new location for this enclosure been determined? Would it be
possible to locate the trash enclosure for the gas station and the subject development in
close proximity to each other and possibly near the trash enclosure for the McDonalds
site?
6) Please revise the hatching for surface material shown on the east side of the building.
The paved area is shown as landscaping and vice versa.
7) Please clarify the intent of the striped area in the right-of-way as shown near the main
entrance to the building. It appears as though there is a bus stop at this location and
possibly it is related to that? In order to prevent parking in the area of the bus stop the
curb should be painted yellow.
8) The storm system will not be approved as shown on the preliminary plans. All
components of the stormwater management facility, including the control structure,
shall be located on private property. The outfall of the stormwater management
system shall run perpendicular to the property line and connect to a catch basin
installed in the flow line. Due to the utility conflicts along the east side of 72"d Ave W
it does not appear as though the storm main could be installed parallel to the curb and
gutter. Therefore, an additional storm structure may need to be installed to allow
connection to the storm main along the west side of 72"d Ave W. The details of this
do not need to be sorted out at this time; I just wanted to make you aware of our
thoughts based on the current submittal.
9) It is not clear how the existing ponding issue along the frontage of the subject
development will be addressed by the current design. Please confirm that you are
aware of this issue and will work to resolve this through the building permit process.
10) With regards to the drop off zone, as shown on the first floor parking plan, the
following concerns have been noted:
a. Pedestrian safety and convenience with the drop off parking area being located
on the east side of the travel lane. The current garage design indicates one-way
traffic flows which will force all vehicles to drive through the drop off zone.
b. The parallel parking stalls as proposed will be difficult stalls to maneuver a
vehicle in and out of. Typically, parallel parking stalls are 20 -feet in length
with stalls on open ends reduced to a minimum of 18 -feet. With the proposed
radius it would be difficult to fit vehicles in the stalls as proposed. Perhaps
angled parking could work.
Thank you.
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 8, 2011
To: Jen Machuga, Planner
From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Subject: PLN20110063
21401 -72nd Ave W — Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
Engineering has reviewed and approved the subject design review application with the
following comments noted to be noted in the staff report.
1) Compliance with Engineering codes and construction standards will be reviewed with the
building permit application for development of the site.
2) Approval of the design review phase of the project does not constitute approval of the
improvements as shown on the submitted plans.
3) Applicant is encouraged, wherever feasible, to incorporate pervious pavements, rain
gardens and/or other low impact development techniques into the project design.
Thank you.
City of Edmonds
ATTACHMENT 19
Project Number: PLN20110063
Project Name: Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
Property Location: 21401 72nd Ave. W
Date of Application: 3/3/11 Date Form Routed: 8/9/11
Zoning: General Commercial (6G2)
Project Description: Design review for construction of a new three-story building (first two floors
are parking garage and third floor is medical office). Includes 54,044 sq. ft. of parking garage
with 116 parking stalls and 27,022 sq. ff. of combined surgical center and clinic space.
If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact:
Responsible Staff: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner Ext. 1224
Name of Individual Submitting Commen
Title:
® I have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT
MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no
comments. My department may also
review this project during the building
permit process (if applicable) and
reserves the right to provide additional
comments at that time.
® I have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY
DEPARTMENT, so I have provided
comments or conditions below or
attached.
Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
_tea
I' C'J r
Omwo ELF-
The
ELSThe following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the
requirements of Jhis (�Iepartmept-jplea§e attach memo if additional space is needed):
Date: V h i / I
Signature:
Phone/E-mail:
Ll
1
Project Number: PLN20110063
Project Name: Kruger Orthopedic Clinic
Property Location: 21401 72nd Ave. 161
Date of Application: 3/3/11 Date Form Routed: 3/9/11
Zoning: General Commercial (6G2)
Project Description: Design review for construction of a new three-story building (first two floors
are parking garage and third floor is medical office). Includes 54,044 sq. ff. of parking garage
with 116 parking stalls and 27,022 sq. ff. of combined surgical center and clinic space.
If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact:
Responsible Staff: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner Ext. 1224
Name of Individual Submitting Comments: ()
Title: " �2- D f Ie- C- \"-
I
\"
IVI have reviewed this land use proposal
, for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT
MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no
comments. My department may also
review this project during the building
permit process (if applicable) and
reserves the right to provide additional
comments at that time.
® I have reviewed this land use proposal
for my department and have
concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY
DEPARTMENT, so I have provided
comments or conditions below or
attached.
Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the
requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed):
Date:
Signature:
Phone/E-mail:OA y r /e, • i S
OV ED�i ®ty of Edmonds
�� Od 1
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
Inc Ig90 Fax: 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or, soil
surveys).
®ate Received:
City Receipt #:
Critical Areas File #: GR -A O-bi l L2D419
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $155.00
®ate Failed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the informatignand exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to file t is ap lic do n the behalf of the owner as listed below.
l
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT , DATE 6
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land'use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER �QCi DATE
Owner/Applicant:
11 io5l We4ew 1)euz 4btu&� 5e_yyiv r
Name
5r-Zq W is
Street Address
City State Zip
Telephone: /-/Zs-- 30,7®
Email address (optional): Qe g -PWC&CL ow
ApplicantRe��rese%�,tative:
Name
Street Address � , 4 F F
City State�'� �F. ' Zip
Telephone:
Email Address (optional):
Revised on 9/14/10 P20 - Critical Areas Checklist. doc ATTACHMENT 2L
0 Gp-A _)--o 11 C)o 4C,
Critical Areas. Checklist CAFile No:
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1. Site Address/ Location: Z 1`10 % U7Z OW �'- W
2. Property Tax Account Number: 00590 `7 tJCO® Z 7— 0 9
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 3q) 0 43
4. Is this site currently developed? 9 yes; no.
If yes; how is site developed? Cold Cdocv,21e_ &Vg2( Q001 d c, 10-�-
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5 -feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10 -feet over a horizontal
distance of 66 -feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10 -feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66 -feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10 -feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33 -feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: �z% ; Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: 0 ; Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year? `-
8. Site is in the floodway 4/0 floodplain of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
l Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ).
10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow shrubs �-- J mixed
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) 6 1 ev
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: '
--For City Staff Use Only --
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable? CJ Ze. G l 150 pLN Z0 11 00 3% t �' �t Zd I I C2 h a, .
2. Site is Zoned? & Ca ?
3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? 1-7 g A 60 a yl ra Yl 6G
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? 0
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area?
SITE DETERMINATION
STUDY REQUIRED WAIVER
Reviewed by'._.....n0/ GOct Gl/ Date: 0 (0 l l5 ZO1
Revised on 9114/10 P20 - Critical Areas Checklist.doc Page 2 of 2
E. Goal - Cultural. Identify, maintain and develop cultural facilities both public and private
in the areas of drama, dance, theaters, museums, etc. in accordance with the following
policies:
E.l . Encourage compatible land uses surrounding cultural sites.
E.2. Pursue public and private funding to develop and operate such facilities.
E.3. Cultural sites would include, but not be limited to: the Wade James Theater, the
Edmonds Center for the Arts, Anderson Center, Museum, Edmonds Theatre, etc.
F. Goal - Scenic. Identify, maintain and enhance scenic areas throughout the city in
accordance with the following policies:
F.1. Identify and, inventory scenic areas and features within the city which contribute
to the overall enjoyment of the environment for both residents and visitors.
F.2. Incorporate scenic and aesthetic design features into the development of public
proj ects.
F.3. Preserve scenic features whenever possible in the development of public
projects.
FA. Use environmental and urban design review of development projects to avoid or
mitigate impacts to identified scenic features.
A. General. The man-made environment is an expression of human culture and reflects, in
physical form, the social values of the members of the community.
The manner in which the man-made elements are incorporated into the natural
environment creates the special characteristics which identify a community and
contribute to the quality of life in that community.
The beauty and variety of the natural surroundings in Edmonds and the historical
development of the City have combined to create an interesting, and visually attractive
community.
However, unsightly development — of poor quality and design — does exist in the City
and may occur in the future. Aging buildings in some parts of the City, primarily
downtown, also create an aesthetic problem. Removal or poor restoration of older
buildings alters the character of the downtown area. The historical and typical strip
92ATTACHMENT 2`
development along Highway 99 has resulted in economic and aesthetic
underdevelopment of private properties.
Although utility wires are placed underground where new development takes place,
overhead wires still exist in most of the older parts of the City where they interfere with
views and create visual blight.
Commercial signs contribute to the color and variety of community life as well as
providing an important function but they may also create discordant and unsightly
conditions where they are of excessive or poor design.
Street landscaping has been utilized in the past on a limited basis. However, in many
areas, parking lots, access roads, streets and buildings are poorly integrated with the
landscape.
B. Design Objectives. Design objectives are a tool for city staff, the ADB, City Council,
and the Hearing Examiner to direct future development in the city to result in high
quality, well-designed, and sensitive projects that reflect the values of the citizens of
Edmonds. The objectives contained in this section are intended to:
• improve the physical appearance and character of Edmonds,
• improve retail and pedestrian circulation options,
• improve business opportunities,
• protect natural environments,
• protect and enhance the single-family residential character of Edmonds.
C. Design Objectives for Site Design.
.The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscaping features is an
integral part of how a building interacts with its site and its surrounding environment.
Good design and site planning improves access by pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles,
minimizes potential negative impacts to adjacent development, reinforces the character
and activities within a district and builds a more cohesive and coherent physical
environment.
C.1. Design Objectives for Vehicular Access.
C.1.a. Reduce the numbers of driveways (curb cuts) in order to improve
pedestrian, bicycle and auto safety by reducing the number of potential
points of conflict.
C.1. b. Provide safe routes for disabled people.
C.I.c. Improve streetscape character to enhance pedestrian activity in
retail/multi-family/ commercial areas.
Culture & Design 93
C.2. Design Objectives for Location And Layout of Parking
C.2. a. Create adequate parking for each development, but keep the cars from
dominating the streetscape.
C.2, b. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings closer to .
the street and defining the street edge.
C.2. c. Improve the project's visibility from the street by placing parking to side
and rear.
C.2.d. Provide directpedestrian access from street, sidewalk, and parking.
C.2.e. Integrate pedestrian and vehicular access between adjacent..
developments.
C.3. Design Objectives for Pedestrian Connections Offsite.
C.3.a. Design the site access and circulation routes with pedestrians' comfort
and ease of access in mind.
C.3. b. Create parking lots and building service ways that are eff cient and safe
for both automobiles and pedestrians.
C.3.c. Provide direct and safe access along, through and to driveways and
adjacent developments or city streets.
C.3.d. Encourage the use of mass transit by providing easy access to pleasant
waiting areas.
CA. Design Objectives for Garage Entry/Door Location.
C.4.a. Ensure pedestrian safety by allowing cars the space to pull out of a
garage without blocking the sidewalk.
C.4.b. Improve pedestrian safety by reducing points of conflict/curb cuts.
C.4.c. Reduce harsh visual impacts of multiple and/or large garage entries/
doors and access driveways. Reduce the quantity of entries/doors visible
to the street.
C.5. Design Objectives for Building Entry Location.
C.5.a. Create an active, safe and lively street -edge.
C.5. b. Create a pedestrian friendly environment.
C.5.c. Provide outdoor active spaces at entry to retail/commercial uses.
C.5.d. Provide semi public/private seating area at multi family and
commercial entries to increase activity along the street.
C.6. . Design Objectives for Setbacks.
C. 6. a. To create and maintain the landscape and site characteristics of each
neighborhood area.
94 Culture & Design
C. 6. b. To create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie
each site to its neighbor.
C.6.c. To provide enough space for wide, comfortable and safe pedestrian
routes to encourage travel by foot.
C.6.d. To encourage transition areas between public streets and private
building entries where a variety of activities and amenities can occur.
C.7. Design Objectives for Open Space.
C.7. a. To create green spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the
development and encourage outdoor interaction.
C. 7. b. To provide places for residents and visitors to meet and to interact.
C. 7. c. To provide an area for play, seating and other residential activities.
C.B. Design Objectives for Building/Site Identity.
C.8.a. Do not use repetitive, monotonous building forms and massing in large
multi family or commercial projects.
C.8.h. Improve pedestrian access and way -finding by providing variety in
building forms, color, materials and individuality of buildings.
C. 8. c. Retain a connection with the scale and character of the City of Edmonds
through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms, masses or
building elements.
C. 8. d. Encourage new construction to use design elements tied to historic
forms or patterns found in the city.
C.9. Design Objectives for Weather Protection.
C.9.a. Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public
sidewalks in downtown.
C.9. b. Protect shoppers and residents from rain or snow.
C.9. c. Provide a covered waiting area and walkway for pedestrians entering a
building, coming from parking spaces and the public sidewalk in all
areas of the City.
C.10. Design Objectives for Lighting.
CIO.a. Provide adequate illumination in all areas used by automobiles, bicycles
and pedestrians, including building entries, walkways, parking areas,
circulation areas and other open spaces to ensure a feeling of security.
C.10. b. Minimize potential for light to reflect or spill off-site.
C.10. c. Create a sense of welcome and activity.
C.10. d. Provide adequate lighting for signage panels.
C.11. Design Objectives for Signage.
Culture & Design 95
C. 11. a. Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered.
C.IIA Minimize distraction from the overuse of advertisement elements.
C. 11. c. Provide clear signage for each distinct property.
Cll.d. Use graphics/symbols to reduce the need to have large letters.
C.11.e. Minimize potential for view blockage.
C. 11 f. Signs should be related to the circulation element serving the
establishment.
Cll.g. Landscaping should be used in conjunction with pole signs for safety as
well as appearance.
C. 11. h. Where multiple businesses operate from a central location, tenants
should be encouraged to coordinate signing to avoid the proliferation of
signs, each competing with the others.
C.12. Design Objectives for Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical.
C. 12. a. Hide unsightly utility boxes, outdoor storage of equipment, supplies,
garbage, recycling and composting.
C. 12. b. Minimize noise and odor.
C. 12.c. Minimize visual intrusion.
C. 12. d. Minimize need for accesslpaving to utility areas
C.13. Design Objectives for Significant Features.
C. 13. a. Retain significant landscape features and unique landforms such as rock
outcroppings and significant trees.
C. 13. b. Limit potential future negative environmental impacts such as erosion,
runoff, landslides, and removal of vegetation and/or habitats.
C. 13. c. Buffer incompatible uses.
C. 13. d. Integrate buildings into their site by stepping the mass of the building
along steep sloping sites.
C.14. Design Objectives for Landscape Buffers.
C. 14. a. Create a visual barrier between different uses.
C. 14. b. Maintain privacy of single family residential areas.
C. 14. c. Reduce harsh visual impact of parking lots and cars.
C. 14. d. Landscape buffers should reinforce pedestrian circulation routes.
C. 14. e. Landscape buffers should not be designed or located in a manner that
creates an unsafe pedestrian environment.
C.14.f. Minimize heat gain from paved surfaces.
C. 14. g. Provide treatment of runoff from parking lots.
96 Culture & Design
D. Design Objectives for Building Form.
Building height and modulation guidelines are essential to create diversity in building
forms, minimize shadows cast by taller buildings upon the pedestrian areas and to ensure
compliance with policies in the city's Comprehensive Plan. Protecting views from public
parks and building entries as well as street views to the mountains and Puget Sound are
an important part of Edmonds character and urban form.
D.1. Design Objectives for Height.
D. I.a. Preserve views to mountains and Puget Sound to the west.
D.1. b. Maintain the smaller scale and character of historic Edmonds.
D. I.c. Minimize blockage of light and air to adjacent properties or to the
sidewalk area.
D.I.d. Maintain/protect view from public places and streets.
D.2. Design Objectives for Massing.
D.2.a. Encourage human scale elements in building design.
D.2.b. Reduce bulk and mass of buildings.
D.2.c. Masses may be subdivided vertically or horizontally.
D. 2. d. Explore flexible site calculations to eliminate building masses that have
one story on one elevation and four or greater stories on another.
D.3. Design Objectives for Roof Modulation.
D.3. a. To break up the overall massing of the roof.
D. 3. b. Create human scale in the building.
D. 3. c. Use roof forms to idents d ierent programs or functional areas within
the building.
D. 3. d. Provide ways for additional light to. enter the building.
D,4. Design Objectives for Wall Modulation.
D.4.a. To let more light and air into the building.
D.4. b. Break up large building mass and scale of a facade.
D. 4. c. To avoid stark and imposing building facades.
D.4.d. To create a pedestrian scale appropriate to Edmonds.
D. 4. e. To become compatible with the surrounding built environment.
E. Design Objectives for Building Fagade.
Building facade objectives ensure that the exterior of a building — the portion of a
building that defines the character and visual appearance of a place — is of high quality
Culture & Design 97
and demonstrates the strong sense of place and integrity valued by the residents of the
City of Edmonds.
E.1. Design Objectives for Building Fagade.
E. La. Ensure diversity in design.
E.1. b. Reinforce the existing building patterns found in Edmonds.
E. 1. c. Improve visual and physical character and quality of Edmonds.
E. 1. d. Improve pedestrian environment in retail/commercial areas.
E. 1. e. Create individual identity of buildings.
E.2. Design Objectives for Window Variety And Articulation.
Windows help define the scale and character of the building. The organization and
combinations of window types provide variation in a facade as well as provide light and
air to the interior. Small windows are more typically utilitarian in function, such as
bathroom or stairway windows, etc. and can be grouped to provide more articulation in
the facade.
E.3. Design Objectives for Variation in Facade Materials.
The materials that make up the exterior facades of a building also help define the scale
and style of the structure and provide variation in the facade to help reduce the bulk of
larger buildings. From the foundation to the roof eaves, a variety of building materials
can reduce the scale and help define a building's style and allows the design of a
building to respond to its context and client's needs.
EA. Design Objectives for Accent Materials/Colors/Trim.
Applied ornament, various materials and colors applied to a facade as well as various
decorative trim/surrounds provide variation in the scale, style and appearance of every
building facade. The objective is to encourage new development that provides:
® Compatibility with'the surrounding neighborhood.
® Visual interest and variety in building forms.
® Reduces the visual impacts of larger building masses.
® Allows identity and individuality of a project within a neighborhood.
F. Design Objectives for Specific Areas. In addition to the general objectives described
above, design objectives for specific areas or districts within the city are outlined below
(note that design objectives for the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center are contained
in the portion of the Land Use Element dealing specifically with that area).
98 Culture & Design
F.1. Highway 99
F.1. a. General Appearance: Creation of new identity. Development of high
intensity nodes. Better identification of businesses by numbering.
Encouragement of planned business centers and design coordination
among neighbors. Buildingforms compatible with adjacent uses.
Parking areas more clearly defined to eliminate confusion of driveways,
street and parking areas. Unsightly uses and storage screened by
landscaping and fencing.
F. 1. b. Signs: Less conflict and confusion among signs. Visible from a distance
at speeds of 35-45 mph. Pole signs no higher than 20' maximum. height.
Design approval of signing as a condition of approval for highrise
buildings in "nodes".
F. 1. c. Lighting: Oriented away from thoroughfare and residential areas.
F. L d. Landscaping: Use of landscaping berms in and around parking areas
and setbacks to provide a visual screen.
F.2. Neighborhood Shopping Centers
F.2.a. General Appearance: Buildings, similar in scale to single-family
houses, compact arrangement of buildings with safe pedestrian
walkways.
F.2.b. Signs: Use sign conceptfrom downtown.
F.2. c. Lighting: Oriented away from residential areas. Designed for safety
rather than advertisement of uses.
F.2.d. Landscaping: Buffer from street, provide transition from commercial
areas to residential areas.
F.3. Waterfront Building Design
F.3. a. Buildings should be set back from the waterfront to preserve existing
beach areas and provide a buffer area.
F.3. b. Buildings should be oriented to pedestrians by providing visible activity
at the f rst floor level, using awnings; windows, etc. Retail uses are
encouraged in.fzrst floor spaces.
F. 3. c. Covered parking areas shall screen cars parked inside them from public
rights-of-way.
FA. Waterfront Site Design
F.4. a. The site layout should be coordinated with existing buildings and
proposed improvements to provide views of the water, open spaces, and
easy pedestrian access to the beach.
F.4. b. The site design should provide adequate separation of vehicles and
pedestrians to avoid conflicts.
Culture & Design 99
r�111
C. Variance From Separation Require-
ments. Variances may be granted from the sep-
aration requirements in subsection (A) of this
section if the applicant demonstrates that the
following criteria are met:
1. The natural physical features of the
land would result in an effective separation
between the proposed sexually oriented busi-
ness and the protected zone or use in terms of
visibility and access;
2. The proposed sexually oriented busi-
ness complies with the goals and policies of
the community development code;
3. The proposed sexually oriented busi-
ness is otherwise compatible with adjacent and
surrounding land uses;
4. There is a lack of alternative locations
for the proposed sexually oriented business;
and
5. The applicant has proposed condi-
tions which would minimize the adverse sec-
ondary effects of the proposed sexually
oriented business.
D. Application of Separation Requirements
to Existing Sexually Oriented Businesses. The
separation requirements of this section shall
not apply to a sexually oriented business once
it has located within the city in accordance
with the requirements of this section. [Ord.
3635 § 1, 20071.
16.60.020 Site development standards — General.
A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows:
l Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property regardless of the setback provisions established by any other pro-
vision of this code.
2 Street setback area shall be fully landscaped.
3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map.
B. Mixed -Use Developments.
1. A mixture of commercial and residen-
tial uses, including residential uses located on
the first or second floors of buildings, may be
permitted for developments meeting the fol-
lowing requirements:
a. The proposed development's com-
bined site area is at least two acres.
b. Floor area equivalent to the com-
bined total leasable area of the first (ground)
floor for all buildings located on the site is
devoted to commercial use. This commercial
floor area may be provided in any manner
desirable on-site, except that for all buildings
oriented to and facing frontage streets the
street -facing portions of the ground floor shall
be occupied by commercial uses. Parking
area(s) are excluded from this calculation. This
requirement is not intended to require com-
mercial uses facing service drives, alleys, or
other minor access easements that are not
related to the main commercial streets serving
the site. [Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
16.60.030 Site development standards —
Design standards.
Design review by the architectural design
board is required for any project that includes
buildings exceeding 60 feet in height in the CG
zone or 75 feet in height in the CG2 zone.
Projects not exceeding these height limits may
be reviewed by staff as a Type I decision.
Regardless of what review process is required,
(Revised 7/09) 16-15.2 ATTACHMENT 24
Minimum
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Minimum
Street
Side/Rear
Maximum
Floor
Lot Area
Lot Width
Setback
Setback
Height
Area
CG
None
None
4'2
Nonel
60'3
None
CG2
None
None
4'2
Nonel
75'3
None
l Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property regardless of the setback provisions established by any other pro-
vision of this code.
2 Street setback area shall be fully landscaped.
3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map.
B. Mixed -Use Developments.
1. A mixture of commercial and residen-
tial uses, including residential uses located on
the first or second floors of buildings, may be
permitted for developments meeting the fol-
lowing requirements:
a. The proposed development's com-
bined site area is at least two acres.
b. Floor area equivalent to the com-
bined total leasable area of the first (ground)
floor for all buildings located on the site is
devoted to commercial use. This commercial
floor area may be provided in any manner
desirable on-site, except that for all buildings
oriented to and facing frontage streets the
street -facing portions of the ground floor shall
be occupied by commercial uses. Parking
area(s) are excluded from this calculation. This
requirement is not intended to require com-
mercial uses facing service drives, alleys, or
other minor access easements that are not
related to the main commercial streets serving
the site. [Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
16.60.030 Site development standards —
Design standards.
Design review by the architectural design
board is required for any project that includes
buildings exceeding 60 feet in height in the CG
zone or 75 feet in height in the CG2 zone.
Projects not exceeding these height limits may
be reviewed by staff as a Type I decision.
Regardless of what review process is required,
(Revised 7/09) 16-15.2 ATTACHMENT 24
Edmonds Community (Development Code
all projects proposed in the CG or CG2 zone
must meet the design standards contained in
this section.
A. Screening and Buffering.
1. General.
a. Retaining walls facing adjacent
property or public rights-of-way shall not
exceed seven feet in height. A minimum of
four feet of planted terrace is required between
stepped wall segments.
b. Landscape buffers are not required
in land use zones with no required building set-
back.
c. Tree landscaping may be clustered
to block the view of a parking lot, yet allow
visibility to signage and building entry.
d. Landscape buffers shall be inte-
grated into the design and layout of water
detention and treatment elements, to minimize
the physical and visual impacts of the water
quality elements.
e. All parking lots are required to
provide Type V interior landscaping.
f. Type I landscaping is required for
commercial, institutional and medical uses
adjacent to single-family or multifamily zones.
The buffer shall be a minimum of 10 feet in
width and continuous in length.
g. Type I landscaping is required for
residential parking areas adjacent to single-
family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum
of four feet in width and continuous in length.
h. Type I landscaping is required for
office and multifamily projects adjacent to sin-
gle-family zones. The buffer shall be a mini-
mum of four feet in width and 10 feet in height
and continuous in length.
i. If there is a loading zone and/or
trash compactor area next to a single-family or
multifamily zone, there shall be a minimum of
a six -foot -high concrete wall plus a minimum
width of five feet of Type I landscaping. Trash
and utility storage elements shall not be per-
mitted to encroach within street setbacks or
within setbacks adjacent to single-family
16.60.030
zones. Mechanical equipment, including heat
pumps and other mechanical elements, shall
not be placed in the setbacks.
j. Landscape buffers, Type I, shall be
used in parking areas adjacent to single-family
zones.
k. When no setback is otherwise
required, Type III landscaping three feet in
width and continuous in length is required
between uses in the same zone.
2. Parking Lots Abutting Streets.
a. Type IV landscaping, minimum
four feet wide, is required along all street
frontages.
b. All parking located under the
building shall be completely screened from the
public street by one of the following methods:
i. Walls,
ii. Type I planting and a grill that
is 25 percent opaque,
iii. Grill work that is at least 80
percent opaque, or
iv. Type III landscaping.
B. Access and Parking.
1. Not more than 50 percent of total
project parking spaces may be located between
the building's front facade and the primary
street.
2. Parking lots may not be located on
corner locations adjacent to public streets.
3. Paths within Parking Lots.
a. Pedestrian walkways in parking
lots shall be delineated by separate paved
routes that are approved by federal accessibil-
ity requirements and that use a variation in tex-
tures - and/or colors as well as landscape
barriers.
b. Pedestrian access routes shall be
provided at least every 180 feet within parking
lots. These shall be designed to provide access
to on-site buildings as well as pedestrian walk-
ways that border the development.
c. Pedestrian pathways shall be six
feet in width and have two feet of planting on
each side or have curb stops at each stall in the
parking lot on one side and four feet of plant-
ing on the second side.
16-18.3 (Revised 7/09)
d. Parking lots shall have pedestrian
connections to the main sidewalk at a mini-
mum of every 100 feet.
4. Bonus for Parking Below Grade.
a. For projects where at least 50 per-
cent of the parking is below grade or under the
building, the following code requirements may
be modified for the parking that is provided
below grade or under -building:
i. The minimum drive aisle width
may be reduced to 22 feet.
ii. The maximum ramp slope may
be increased to 20 percent.
iii. A mixture of full- and
reduced -width parking stalls may be provided
without meeting the ECDC requirement to
demonstrate that all required parking could be
provided at full -width dimensions.
5. Drive-through facilities such as, but
not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug
stores, espresso stands, etc., shall comply with
the following:
a. Drive-through windows and stack-
ing lanes shall not be located along the facades
of the building that face a street.
b. Drive-through speakers shall not
be audible off-site.
c. Only one direct entrance or exit
from the drive-through shall be allowed as a
separate curb cut onto an adjoining street. All
remaining direct entrances/exits to the drive-
through shall be internal to the site.
6. Pedestrian and Transit Access.
a. Pedestrian building entries must
connect directly to the public sidewalk and to
adjacent developments if feasible.
b. Internal pedestrian routes shall
extend to the property line and connect to
existing pedestrian routes if applicable. Poten-
tial future connections shall also be identified
such that pedestrian access between develop-
ments can occur without walking in the park-
ing or access areas.
c. When a transit or bus stop is
located in front of or adjacent to a parcel,
pedestrian connections linking the transit stop
directly to the new development are required.
(Revised 7/09) 16-18.4
C. Site Design and Layout.
1. General. If a project is composed of
similar building layouts that are repeated, then
their location on the site design should not be
uniform in its layout. If a project has a uniform
site layout for parking and open spaces, then
the buildings shall vary in form, materials,
and/or identity. The following design elements
should be considered, and a project shall dem-
onstrate how at least five of the elements were
used to vary the design of the site:
a. Building massing and unit layout,
b. Placement of structures and set-
backs,
c. Location of pedestrian and vehicu-
lar facilities,
d. Spacing from position relative to
adjoining buildings,
e. Composition and types of open
space, plant materials and street trees,
f. Types of building materials and/or
elements,
g. Roof variation in slope, height
and/or materials.
2. Individuality for Particular Struc-
tures. If a project contains several new or old
buildings of similar uses or massing, incorpo-
rate two of the following options to create
identity and promote safety and feeling of
ownership:
a. Individual entry design for each
building.
b. Create variety in arrangement of
building forms in relation to site, parking, open
spaces, and the street.
c. Create variety through facade
materials and organization.
d. Create variety through roof forms.
e. Vary the size/mass of the buildings
so they are not uniform in massing and appear-
ance.
3. Lighting.
a. All lighting shall be shielded and
directed away from adjacent parcels. This may
be achieved through lower poles at the prop-
erty lines and/or full "cut off' fixtures.
Edmonds Community Development Code
b. Parking lots shall have lighting
poles with a maximum of 25 feet in height.
c. Pedestrian ways shall have low
height lighting focused on pathway area. Pole
height shall be a maximum of 14 feet, although
lighting bollards are preferred.
d. Entries shall have lighting for
safety and visibility integrated with the build-
ing/canopy.
D. Building Design and Massing.
1. Buildings shall convey a visually dis-
tinct "base" and "top." A "base" and "top" can
be emphasized in different ways, such as
masonry pattern, more architectural detail,
step -backs and overhangs, lighting, recesses,
visible "plinth" above which the wall rises,
storefront, canopies, or a combination thereof.
They can also be emphasized by using archi-
tectural elements not listed above, as
approved, that meet the intent.
2. In buildings with footprints of over
10,000 square feet, attention needs to be given
to scale, massing, and facade design so as to
reduce the effect of large single building
masses. Ways to accomplish this can include
articulation, changes of materials, offsets, set-
backs, angles or curves of facades, or by the
use of distinctive roof forms. This can also be
accomplished by using architectural elements
not listed above, as approved, that meet the
intent. Note that facade offsets or step -backs
should not be applied to the ground floor of
street -front facades in pedestrian -oriented
zones or districts.
3. Alternatives to massing requirements
may be achieved by:
a. Creation of a public plaza or other
open space which may substitute for a massing
requirement if the space is at least 1,000 square
feet in area. In commercial zones, this public
space shall be a public plaza with amenities
such as benches, tables, planters and other ele-
ments.
b. Retaining or reusing an historic
structure listed on the National Register. or the
Edmonds register of historic places. Any addi-
tion or new building on the site must be
designed to be compatible with the historic
structure.
4. To ensure that buildings do not dis-
play blank, unattractive walls to the abutting
streets or residential properties, walls or por-
tions of walls abutting streets or visible from
residentially zoned properties shall have archi-
tectural treatment applied by incorporating at
least four of the following elements into the
design of the facade:
a. Masonry (except for flat concrete
block).
b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the
base of the wall.
c. Belt courses of a different texture
and color.
d. Projecting cornice.
e. Projecting metal canopy.
f. Decorative tilework.
g. Trellis containing planting.
h. Medallions.
i. Artwork or wall graphics.
j. Vertical differentiation.
k. Lighting fixtures.
1. An architectural element not listed
above, as approved, that meets the intent. [Ord.
3736 § 11, 2009; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
16.60.040 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be car-
ried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building, except the following:
1. Public utilities;
2. Off-street parking and loading areas;
3. Drive-in business;
4. Secondary uses permitted under
ECDC 16.60.010(B);
5. Limited outdoor display of merchan-
dise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65
ECDC;
6. Community -oriented open air mar-
kets or seasonal farmers markets;
7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of
Chapter 17.75 ECDC. [Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
16-18.5 (Revised 7/09)