Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
2021-05-19 Architectural Design Board PacketCF EQ V Architectural Design Board
v � d
Remote Zoom Meeting
Agenda
"I,,. l R90
121 5th Ave. N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
www.edmondswa.gov
Michelle Martin
425-771-0220
Wednesday, May 19, 2021 7:00 PM Virtual Online Meeting
Remote Meeting Information
Join Zoom Meeting at:
https://zoom. us/j/91070773013?pwd=VXhJ W U hPN UVhZG03VEhi RW5sQXZmdzO9
Meeting ID: 910 7077 3013. Password: 559405
Call into the meeting by dialing: 253-215-8782
Call to Order
Attendee Name Present Absent Late Arrived
Public Portion
Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5513)
Continued Phase 2 Public Hearing for Pine Park 614 Design Review
Background/History
The ADB held Phase 1 of this public hearing on March 5, 2021. During that meeting, the Board
continued the hearing until May 5, 2021. Due to incorrect Zoom information on the May 5
agenda memo, the Board continued Phase 2 of the hearing until May 19 to allow opportunity
for additional public comment. Three additional Exhibits (10 -12) have been added to the May
19 memo.
Projects in the Downtown Business zones are subject to district -based design review under the
regulations of Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). According
to ECDC 20.01.003 and 20.12.010, district -based design review applications that trigger SEPA
review are Type III-B decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and design decision by
the Architectural Design Board (ADB).
Staff Recommendation
Take additional public comment and ask any additional questions of the applicant and staff. If
the ADB has sufficient information to make a decision, the Board can close the public hearing,
deliberate, and make a decision. If additional information is needed, continue to the public
hearing to a date certain and request specific information to complete the record.
Staff recommends approval of the project with the conditions noted in the attached staff
report.
Architectural Design Board Page 1 Printed 511312021
Remote Zoom Meeting Agenda May 19, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
• Pine Park 614 Phase 2 staff report (PDF)
• Exhibit 1- ADB minutes March 3 2021 (PDF)
• Exhibit 2 - Applicant Response to Phase 1 Hearing Comments(PDF)
• Exhibit 3 - Engineering Corrections on Initial Phase 2 Resubmittal
• Exhibit 4 - Applicant Response to Engineering Corrections
(PDF)
• Exhibit 5 - Plan Set for Phase 2 of Hearing - Revised
(PDF)
• Exhibit 6 - Courtesy Notice of Continued Public Hearing
(PDF)
• Exhibit 7 - Engineering Design Review Approval (PDF)
• Exhibit 8 - Phase 1 Staff Report and Attachments (PDF)
• Exhibit 9 - ADB 3-3-21 Phase 1 Pine Park PPT Slides
(PDF)
• Exhibit 10 - Patrick Allain comment rvcd 5-4-21 (PDF)
• Exhibit 11 - ADB 5-5-21 Phase 2 Pine Park PPT slides
(PDF)
• Exhibit 12 - ADB minutes May 5, 2021 (PDF)
III. Approval of Minutes
1. Generic Agenda Item (ID # 5515)
Approval of Minutes
Background/History
Minutes are approved during each meeting.
Staff Recommendation
Approve May 5th meeting minutes.
ATTACHMENTS:
• AD6210505d (PDF)
IV. Approval of Agenda
11. Administrative Reports
V. ADB Member Comments
VI. Adjournment
(PDF)
Architectural Design Board Page 2 Printed 511312021
2.1
Architectural Design Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/19/2021
Continued Phase 2 Public Hearing for Pine Park 614 Design Review
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
The ADB held Phase 1 of this public hearing on March 5, 2021. During that meeting, the Board
continued the hearing until May 5, 2021. Due to incorrect Zoom information on the May 5 agenda
memo, the Board continued Phase 2 of the hearing until May 19 to allow opportunity for additional
public comment. Three additional Exhibits (10 -12) have been added to the May 19 memo.
Projects in the Downtown Business zones are subject to district -based design review under the
regulations of Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). According to ECDC
20.01.003 and 20.12.010, district -based design review applications that trigger SEPA review are Type III-
B decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and design decision by the Architectural Design
Board (ADB).
Staff Recommendation
Take additional public comment and ask any additional questions of the applicant and staff. If the ADB
has sufficient information to make a decision, the Board can close the public hearing, deliberate, and
make a decision. If additional information is needed, continue to the public hearing to a date certain
and request specific information to complete the record.
Staff recommends approval of the project with the conditions noted in the attached staff report.
Narrative
The proposal is for three buildings containing six live/work units and eight residential units at 614 and
616 5th Ave. S (File PLN-2020-0053). The live/work units will be contained in two buildings adjacent to
5th Avenue (Buildings A and B) while the eight -unit building will be behind the live/work buildings and
face west (Building C). Drive aisles west of the buildings would load from the private alley south of the
site. To accommodate the new project, the existing improvements on the site will be removed and a
subdivision will be required to create a lot line between Buildings A & B and Building C.
Please refer to the attached staff report and Exhibits 1- 12 for a complete discussion of the project.
Attachments:
Pine Park 614 Phase 2 staff report
Exhibit 1- ADB minutes March 3 2021
Exhibit 2 - Applicant Response to Phase 1 Hearing Comments
Packet Pg. 3
2.1
Exhibit 3 - Engineering Corrections on Initial Phase 2 Resubmittal
Exhibit 4 - Applicant Response to Engineering Corrections
Exhibit 5 - Plan Set for Phase 2 of Hearing - Revised
Exhibit 6 - Courtesy Notice of Continued Public Hearing
Exhibit 7 -
Engineering Design Review Approval
Exhibit 8 -
Phase 1 Staff Report and Attachments
Exhibit 9 -
ADB 3-3-21 Phase 1 Pine Park PPT Slides
Exhibit 10
- Patrick Allain comment rvcd 5-4-21
Exhibit 11
- ADB 5-5-21 Phase 2 Pine Park PPT slides
Exhibit 12
- ADB minutes May 5, 2021
Packet Pg. 4
2.1.a
".12 C. 18gv
Project:
File Number:
Date of Report:
Staff Contact:
ADB Meeting
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING DIVISION'S REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
"PHASE 2" DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW
Pine Park 614
I]A0WIWI]91I117M
April 28, 2021
Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
Wednesday — May 5, 2021 at 7:00 P.M.
Due to COVID-19, a virtual public hearing will be held by the Architectural
Design Board. Join the Zoom webinar meeting at:
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, or Android device:
https://zoom.us/j/95360544929?pwd=ZmdOREFORkE3RkRaeVdB
RmpkNUxMZz09
Passcode: 818962
Or join by phone: US: +1 253 215 8782
Webinar ID: 953 6054 4929
Passcode: 818962
I. PROJECT PROPOSAL AND PROCESS
The proposal is for three buildings containing six live/work units and eight residential units at
614 and 616 5th Ave. S. The live/work units will be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5th
Avenue (Buildings A and B) while the eight -unit building will be behind the live/work buildings
and face west (Building Q. Drive aisles west of the buildings would load from the private alley
south of the site. To accommodate the new project, the existing improvements on the site will
be removed and a subdivision will be required to create a lot line between Buildings A & B and
Building C.
Packet Pg. 5
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
Projects in the Downtown Business zones are subject to district -based design review under the
regulations of Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). According
to ECDC 20.01.003 and 20.12.010, district -based design review applications that trigger SEPA
review are Type III-B decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and design decision by
the Architectural Design Board (ADB). The ADB held the Phase 1 portion of the public hearing
on March 5, 2021. During that meeting, the Board continued the hearing until May 5, 2021.
According to ECDC 20.12.005.13, the purpose of the hearing continuance is to allow the
applicant to revise the initial concept to address the input of the public and the ADB by
complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. The ADB will complete their
review of the design of the project and make the final decision on the design proposal at the
conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process.
The following Exhibits are included with this Phase 2 staff report:
1. ADB minute March 3, 2021
2. Applicant Response to Phase 1 Hearing Comments
3. Engineering Corrections on Initial Phase 2 Resubmittal
4. Applicant Response to Engineering Corrections
5. Plan Set for Phase 2 of Hearing - Revised
6. Courtesy Notice of Continued Public Hearing
7. Engineering Design Review Approval
8. Phase 1 Staff Report and Attachments
9. ADB 3-3-21 Phase 1 Pine Park PPT Slides
II. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS
A. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
The subject property is located near the southern end of the Edmonds downtown business area
on 5th Avenue South and is at the southern end of the Downtown Alliance Boundary. The
property is zoned BD3 (Downtown Convenience Commercial) as are the parcels directly to the
north and south. To the west and east are multi- and single-family zoned and developed
properties.
B. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS
Since the hearing was continued to a date certain during Phase 1 of the hearing process, no
additional public notice is required. However, staff mailed a "Courtesy Notice of Continued
Public Hearing" to property owners within 300 feet of the site (Exhibit 6). This courtesy notice
was also posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, Development Services Department,
and at the Library.
Ed Lorah and Paul McCulloh submitted comments and testimony at Phase 1 hearing
(Attachments 11 and 12 of Exhibit 8). The applicant responded to those comments in their
Phase 2 narrative (Exhibit 2). No additional comments have been received as of the date of this
staff report.
Page 2 of 19
Packet Pg. 6
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2.1.a
C. TECHNICAL STAFF REVIEW
The Phase 1 portion of the application was reviewed and evaluated by South Snohomish County
Fire and Rescue, Building Division, Public Works Department, and Engineering Division. Initial
comments by these reviewers were included with the March 5, 2021 report to the ADB.
[Attachment 10 of Exhibit 8]
South County Fire, Public Works, and the Building Division reserved further comment on the
design review to focus on the associated building permit reviews. The Engineering Division
reviewed the Phase 2 resubmittal and noted that the project is feasible, but they will also focus
review on the building permits (Exhibit 7).
D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Downtown Convenience" within the
"Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center" overlay. Goals and policies from the City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center related to this project
include:
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal A. Promote downtown Edmonds as an attractive setting
for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents
and the larger Edmonds community and as a destination for visitors from throughout the
region.
A.1 Ensure that the downtown/waterfront area continues — and builds on — its function
as a key identity element for the Edmonds community.
A.2 Enhance Edmonds' visual identity by continuing its pedestrian -scale of downtown
development, enhancing its shoreline character, and protecting and building on the
strong visual quality of the "5th and Main" core.
A.3 Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds
community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region
A.6 Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the downtown,
especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal D. Define the downtown commercial and retail core
along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements,
while protecting downtown's identity.
D.1 Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce
Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character.
D.8 Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere
with pedestrian and bicycle activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use
of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and
mixed use areas in the downtown area.
The Comprehensive Plan also provides the following description for the Downtown
Convenience Commercial designation:
Page 3 of 19
Packet Pg. 7
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
Downtown Convenience Commercial. This is the south end of 5th Ave, south of Walnut.
Commercial uses would be required on the first floor, but auto -oriented uses would be
permitted in addition to general retail and service uses. To encourage a vibrant downtown,
first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range
of retail and commercial uses. Weather protection would still be required, but to a lesser
degree than the retail core and only when the building was adjacent to the sidewalk. Height
and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial
District. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area
that is located behind the commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential
use.
General design objectives for site design, building form and building fagade are provided in the
Comprehensive Plan.
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.
A.1 Vehicular Access. Reduce the numbers and width of driveways (curb cuts) in order
to improve pedestrian, bicycle and auto safety.
A.2 Layout of Parking. Locating buildings in proximity to the street to facilitate direct
pedestrian access and help define the street edge. Parking should be placed to the
side and rear.
A.3 Connections On- and Offsite. Design site access and circulation within and
between sites to encourage linkages for pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles. Special
attention should be paid to providing and improving connections to transit.
A.4 Building Entry Location. Building entries should be configured to provide clear
entry points to buildings, be oriented to pedestrian walkways/pathways, and
support the overall intent of the streetscape environment. Space at the entry for
gathering or seating is desirable for residential or mixed use buildings.
A.5 Setbacks. Create and maintain the landscape and site characteristics of each
neighborhood area and provide a common street frontage tieing each site to its
neighbor. Setbacks should be appropriate to the desired streetscape, providing for
transition areas between public streets and private building entries where a variety
of activities and amenities can occur.
A.6 Open Space. For residential settings, create green spaces to enhance the visual
attributes of the development and provide places for interaction, play, seating, and
other activities.
A.7 Building/Site Identity. Improve pedestrian access and way finding by providing
variety in building forms, colors, materials and individuality of buildings.
A.8 Weather Protection. Provide covered walkways and entries for pedestrian weather
Protection.
A.9 Lighting. Provide adequate and appropriate illumination in all areas used by
Page 4 of 19
Packet Pg. 8
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians — including building entries, walkways,
parking areas, circulation areas and other open spaces — to support activity and
security.
A.10 Signage. Encourage signage that provides clear information and direction for
properties and businesses while preventing the streetscape from becoming
cluttered. Encourage the use of graphics and symbols in signage to support the
city's emphasis on uniqueness and the arts.
A.11 Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical Systems. Minimize the noise, odor
and visual impacts of utility systems using such features as landscaping, building
forms, or integrated design.
A.12 Integrating Site Features. Integrate natural landscape features and unique
landforms — such as rocky outcroppings or significant trees — into site design whenever
possible.
A.13 Landscape Buffers. Use landscaping and/or other features such as fences to
maintain privacy and create a visual barrier between incompatible uses. These
buffering techniques should also be used to soften hard edges (such as the
perimeters of parking lots) and reinforce pedestrian ways and circulation routes.
Native plants and rain gardens should be promoted as alternatives to lawns and
runoff retention areas
Findings: The proposed redevelopment would remove a curb cut from 5th Avenue
and use the alley to the south for vehicular access (Exhibit 5). Buildings A & B would
front 511 and have pedestrian entrances from the sidewalk. Weather protection is
provided along the sidewalk and lighting is provided at the sidewalk, between
Buildings A & B, along the alley, and at pedestrian entrances for Building C.
Pedestrian lighting is proposed at all entrances, between A & B, and along the alley.
The western setback area will be landscaped and include a fence to buffer the
project site from the west.
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.
A.14 Building Form. Encourage new construction to avoid repetitive, monotonous
building forms.
A.15 Massing. Reduce the apparent bulk and mass of buildings by encouraging human
scale elements in building design and/or by subdividing building masses vertically
or horizontally.
A.16 Roof Modulation. Use roof forms to help identify different programs or functional
areas within the building and support differentiation of building form and massing.
Roof design, in combination with wall modulation, can allow for additional light to
enter buildings or pedestrian spaces.
A.17 Wall Modulation. Variation in materials, decorative elements, or other features
Page 5 of 19
Packet Pg. 9
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
should be employed to support pedestrian scale environments and streetscapes, or
to help break up large building masses to keep in scale with the surrounding
environment.
Findings: All three buildings have a distinct top and base and use vertical and
horizontal modulation to reduce mass. Walls are modulated using canopies,
balconies, and decks.
Design Objectives for Building Facade. 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 and demonstrates the strong sense of place
and integrity valued by the residents of the City of Edmonds.
A.18 Building Facade Design. Encourage building fagades that reinforce the appearance
and consistency of streetscape patterns while supporting diversity and identity in
building design.
A.19 Window Variety and Articulation. Use window size and placement to help define
the scale and character of the building. Use the organization and combinations of
window types to reinforce the streetscape character or to provide variation in a
facade, as well as provide light and air to the building interior.
A.20 Variation in Facade Materials. Employ variation in materials, colors or design
elements on building fagades to help define the scale and style of the structure.
Variation in facade materials can help reduce the apparent bulk of larger buildings
while allowing variety and individuality of building design.
Findings: Varied materials and colors are used on all three buildings. Banks of
windows on the east and west facades of each of the buildings will provide light and
air. The window systems and sizes could include some additional variation.
Design objectives specifically for the downtown area addressing site design, building form and
building facade are also provided in the Comprehensive Plan.
Urban Design Goal B: Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. Design objectives and standards
should be carefully crafted for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center to encourage its unique
design character and important place -making status within the city.
B.1 Vehicular Access and Parking. Driveways and curb cuts should be minimized to assure a
consistent and safe streetscape for pedestrians. When alleys are present, these should be the
preferred method of providing vehicular access to a property and should be used unless there is
no reasonable alternative available. Configuration of parking should support a "park and walk"
policy that provides adequate parking while minimizing impacts on the pedestrian streetscape.
Findings: The redevelopment project would remove the only curb cut at the site from 51h
Avenue (Exhibit 5). Required off-street parking for the proposed units would access from the
existing alley to the south.
B.2 Pedestrian Access and Connections. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating
buildings close to the street and sidewalks, and defining the street edge. Cross walks at key
intersections should be accentuated by the use of special materials, signage or paving
treatments. Transit access and waiting areas should be provided where appropriate.
Page 6 of 19
Packet Pg. 10
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
Findings: The east facade of proposed Buildings A & B would define the street edge at 5th
Avenue. The one curb cut currently at the site would be removed resulting in new sidewalks
along the length of the development at 5t". No crosswalks or transit stops are located
adjacent to the site.
B.3 Building Entry Location. Commercial building entries should be easily recognizable and
oriented to the pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk grade.
Findings: The pedestrian entries for the live/work units in Buildings A & B would be at grade
on 5t" Avenue. They would be easily recognizable due to the storefront windows and
canopies overhead. Building C would be a residential building only.
B.4 Building Setbacks. Create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie each
site to its neighbor. Encourage the creation of public spaces to enhance the visual attributes of
the development and encourage outdoor interaction. In the Waterfront area west of the railroad,
buildings should be set back from the waterfront to preserve and provide a buffer from existing
each areas. In the Waterfront area, 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.
Findings: Proposed Buildings A & B would be located at the 51" Avenue sidewalk, which
would help to tie the site to the neighboring sites west of the street.
B.5 Building/Site Identity. In the downtown area, retain a connection with the scale and character
of downtown through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms, masses or building
elements. Encourage new construction to use designs that reference, but do not replicate historic
forms or patterns.
Findings: The proposed buildings are consistent with the scale, proportion, and character of
other buildings in the downtown area. Each will use brick, metal and masonry materials
similar to other downtown buildings.
B.6 Weather Protection. Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public
sidewalks or walkways.
Findings: Buildings A & B would include canopies over each pedestrian entry at 5t" Avenue
While not offering complete weather protection along the sidewalk, the canopies are wide
and deep enough to provide significant protection for pedestrians.
B.7 Signage. Lighting of signs should be indirect or minimally backlit to display lettering and
symbols or graphic design instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign. Signage using graphics
or symbols or that contributes to the historic character of a building should be encouraged.
Findings: Signage will be reviewed by staff with future building permit applications.
B.8 Art and Public Spaces. Public art and amenities such as mini parks, flower baskets, street
furniture, etc., should be provided as a normal part of the public streetscape. Whenever possible,
these elements should be continued in the portion of the private streetscape that adjoins the
public streetscape. In the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor, art should be a common element of building
design, with greater design flexibility provided when art is made a central feature of the design.
Page 7 of 19
Packet Pg. 11
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
Findings: In the public right-of-way, street tree grates are part of the proposed frontage
improvements and an existing flower pole will remain. The status of a memorial bench from
the Parks Department remains unresolved - a condition is proposed to resolve its location at
building permit.
B.9 Building Height. Create and preserve a human scale for downtown buildings. Building
frontages along downtown streetscapes should be pedestrian in scale.
Findings: The proposed buildings are two- and three -stories and stepped down the site to
the west to remain consistent with the 30-foot height limit of the BD3 zone.
B.10 Massing. Large building masses should be subdivided or softened using design elements that
emphasize the human scale of the streetscape. Building facades should respect and echo historic
patterns along downtown pedestrian streets.
Findings: Both proposed Buildings A & B emphasize human scale at 5t" Avenue and echo
historic building widths. Building C is longer but is vertically divided into narrower elements.
All three buildings show horizontal differentiation.
B.11 Building Fagade. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long facades into defined
forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant spaces in commercial and mixed
use areas. Avoid blank, monotonous and imposing building facades using design elements that
add detail and emphasize the different levels of the building (e.g. the top or cornice vs. the
pedestrian level or building base).
Findings: Both proposed Buildings A & B emphasize human scale at 51" Avenue and echo
historic building widths. Both buildings show horizontal differentiation on the east facade
and a defined roof edge.
B.12 Window Variety and Articulation. In the downtown retail and mixed commercial districts,
building storefronts should be dominated by clear, transparent glass windows that allow and
encourage pedestrians to walk past and look into the commercial space. Decorative trim and
surrounds should be encouraged to add interest and variety. Upper floors of buildings should use
windows as part of the overall design to encourage rhythm and accents in the fagade.
Findings: Buildings A & B use similar window systems for each of the six units facing 5th
Avenue. They serve to break up the facade vertically and horizontally but are not distinctive
As conditioned, staff finds the proposal is consistent with the referenced goals and design
objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
E. DESIGN GUIDELINES CHECKLIST
During Phase 1 of the public hearing on March 3, the ADB established design priorities for the
project based on the characteristics of the site and the surrounding area using the Design
Guidelines Checklist. The minutes for that meeting are in Exhibit 1 and the applicant's response
to the Checklist guidance is Exhibit 2.
1. Site Planning. The proposed site plan modernizes what today is an auto -centric commercial
development from the 1970s. Buildings A & B will be built to the street property line at 5th
Avenue. The live -work units in both buildings will have direct connections to the sidewalk with
Page 8 of 19
Packet Pg. 12
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2.1.a
canopies highlighting the entries at 5th Avenue. Parking is de-emphasized at the street front by
using the alley south of the project to load the required on -site stalls.
2. Bulk and Scale. Bulk and scale are consistent with the downtown area. The transition to the
multifamily -zoned site to the west includes a 15' required building setback. Within the required
setback area will be a strip of vegetation and wood fence.
3. Architectural Elements. The Board highlighted the importance of architectural elements and
materials and the revised proposal addresses the high priority given to these items.
4. Pedestrian Environment. The proposal improves the pedestrian environment at 5th Avenue.
Canopies over the sidewalks and entries will provide weather protection where there is none
now. Parking is located away from 5th Avenue.
Regarding trash and recycling, each unit is proposed to have an interior trash/recycling storage
area. For Buildings A & B this would be within the commercial portions of the live/work units at
sidewalk grade while Building C would have storage in each garage (Sheet A2.1 and A2.2 of
Exhibit 5). The intent is that each unit would bring toters out to the 5th Avenue sidewalk for
retrieval by the hauler. This arrangement is not yet approved by Sound Disposal, however.
Given the adjacent alley access, the Board may want to keep refuse off 5th Avenue and discuss
alley loading and/or centralized trash facilities.
5. Landscaping. New street trees are proposed along 5th Avenue. Small planters at the street front
and between Buildings A & B will provide additional interest. The landscaping along the west
property line will help buffer the project from the existing developments to the west. Green
roofs were not included.
As conditioned, staff finds that the revised project design satisfies the Board's prioritization for
Site Planning, Bulk and Scale, Architectural Elements, Pedestrian Environment, and
Landscaping.
F. APPLICABLE CODES
1. ECDC 16.43 — Downtown Convenience Commercial Zone (BD3)
A. ECDC 16.43.020 Uses.
The site is zoned BD3 and is subject to the use requirements of ECDC 16.43. The
proposal includes multiple residential and live/work units, and associated parking and
loading, which are all permitted primary or secondary uses in the BD3 zone.
B. According to ECDC 16.43.030, development standards in the BD3 zone include:
Page 9 of 19
Packet Pg. 13
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
Minimum
Height of
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Ground
Minimum
Maximum
Zone
Lot Area
Street
Side
Rear
Floor within
(Sq. Ft.)
Lot Width
Setback
Setback'
Setback'
Heightz
the
Designated
Street Front4
BD3
None
None
0'
0'
15'
30'
12'
The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and
structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line
adjacent to residentially (R) zoned property.
' Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in ECDC 16.43.030(C).
"Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street -front" means the vertical
distance from top to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the
ground floor located within the designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the
ground floor is the only floor above street grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top
of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. "Floor
finish" is the exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a finished floor, and
includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as
illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows an example of a ground floor height of 15
feet; note that the "finished" ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example.
C. Setbacks. The project site is immediately adjacent to Multiple Residential (RM-2.4)
zoned property on the west. As a result, the proposed development must maintain a
15' setback from the west property line. The setback is shown on the Conceptual Site
Plan (Sheet A1.1 of Exhibit 5).
D. Height. The maximum allowed height in the BD3 zone is 30 feet above average original
grade. Certain height exceptions are provided for in ECDC 16.43.030.C.3 and the
definition of "height" in ECDC 21.40.030. Height calculations were provided with the
Phase 2 submittal (Sheet A1.2 of Exhibit 5). Based on the information provided, it
appears that all three buildings would be below the maximum allowed height for the
zone. It should be noted that the deck elements on the west side of each of the
buildings must be included in the height calculations. Elements in the right-of-way are
excluded.
E. Ground Floor. According to ECDC 16.43.030.13, the designated street front area for the
subject site is 45 feet measured perpendicular from 5th Avenue South. Within the
designated street front area, a minimum floor -to -floor height of 12 feet is required and
entries to commercial spaces must be within seven inches of the grade level of the
adjoining sidewalk. In the BD3 zone, only commercial uses are allowed within the
designated street front area, while any permitted uses are allowed outside of that area.
Parking is not a commercial use and may not be located within the designated street
front area.
Page 10 of 19
Packet Pg. 14
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
An exception is available for certain BD3-zoned properties which have less than 90 feet
of depth measured from the street front. In that instance, parking may be located in the
rearmost 45 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first
45 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured
from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet.
Sheet A1.1 of Exhibit 5 shows a project site consisting of two future lots created by a
separate subdivision. If that subdivision is approved, the two live/work buildings at the
street front adjacent to 5th Avenue would be on a lot that is about 58 feet deep.
Building cross -sections are included on Sheet A1.2 and show 30' deep ground -floor
spaces with parking immediately behind that. The ground floor of each building has a
12' floor -to -floor height and entries are at or near sidewalk grade. A condition of
approval is proposed to require a subdivision of the project site to create a lot line west
of proposed Buildings A & B.
Staff will review future uses in the ground -floor tenant spaces through business license
applications and inspections.
F. Parking. Per ECDC 17.50.010.C.1, one parking stall is required for each dwelling unit and
two stalls are required per live/work unit. Sheet A1.1 of Exhibit 5 shows one enclosed
stall for each unit in Building C and two partially covered exterior stalls for each unit in
Buildings A and B.
G. Open Space. According to ECDC 16.43.030.E, for buildings on lots larger than 12,000 sq.
ft., at least five percent of the lot area of the project must be devoted to open space.
With a project area of 17,160 square feet (not including the alley), 858 square feet of
open space is required. However, if a lot line is created west of Buildings A & B, the
project would then consist of two lots that are each less than 9,000 sq. ft. In that case,
the 5% open space requirement would not apply. The applicant intends to obtain
subdivision approval to create that lot line, which is proposed as a condition of design
approval. If the subdivision is approved, the open space requirement would not apply.
As always, all zoning requirements (and related building, engineering, and public works
codes) will be verified through review and approval of permits for the buildings and site
improvements and through inspections during the construction process.
2. ECDC 22.43 Design Standards for the BD Zones
Design standards applicable to the BD zones are provided in ECDC Chapter 22.43.
A. ECDC 22.43.010 Massing and Articulation. Intent— To reduce the massiveness and bulk
of large box -like buildings, and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale.
Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized
by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which
the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by
a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a
shadow line.
Comments: Each of the three buildings uses a variety of forms, materials, patterns,
and colors to create a distinct top and base (Sheets A3.1 - A3.3 of Exhibit 5). The top
Page 11 of 19
Packet Pg. 15
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2.1.a
edges of Buildings A & B are highlighted with eaves and corbel brackets while
Building C has a rooftop deck area.
2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building
exceeds the historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as
a combination of materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional
building widths.
Comments: Older building widths in the downtown area typically vary from about
30 to 60 feet. Proposed Buildings A & B are about 60 feet wide at 5th Avenue. Each
building is further divided vertically into spaces that are about 20 feet wide using
stacked banks of windows. Building C is about 130 feet wide but uses stacked banks
of windows and decks to create spaces that seem about 16 feet wide.
B. ECDC 22.43.020 Orientation to Street. Intent — To reinforce pedestrian activity and
orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street through building design.
1. Building frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a
parking lot or alley.
Comments: Buildings A & B are oriented to 51h Avenue. Building C is tucked behind
A & B and not on a street.
2. Entrances to buildings in the BD1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street
and accessible from the adjacent sidewalk.
Comments: While not strictly applicable to this site since it is zoned BD3, entrances
to Buildings A & B are visible from 51h Avenue and accessible from the sidewalk.
3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of
the following elements:
a. Higher bay(s),
b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet),
c. Forecourt and entrance plaza.
Comments: Entrances to Buildings A & B are highlighted with small forecourts at the
sidewalk framed by planters and canopies. Building C is behind and does not orient
to the street.
C. ECDC 22.43.030 Ground Level Details. Intent — To reinforce the character of the
streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual interest along the ground level
of buildings facing pedestrian streets.
1. Ground floor, street facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall
incorporate at least five of the following elements:
a. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets,
b. Medallions,
c. Belt courses;
d. Plinths for columns;
e. Bulkhead for storefront window;
f. Projecting sills;
Page 12 of 19
Packet Pg. 16
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2.1.a
g. Tile work,
h. Transom or clerestory windows,
i. Planter box,
j. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent.
Comments: Buildings A & B incorporate lighting, medallions, planter boxes,
canopies, and large storefront windows.
2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the
sidewalk, as provided for in ECDC 16.43.030.
Comments: The commercial spaces in Buildings A & B are accessible and at grade
with the sidewalk at 51". Building C does not have the ground floor commercial
requirement.
D. ECDC 22.43.040 Awnings/Canopies and Signage. Intent —1) To integrate signage and
weather protection with building design to enhance business visibility and the public
streetscape. 2) To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to
improve way finding for visitors. 3) To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered,
and to minimize distraction from overuse of advertisement elements.
1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not
provided, then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a
metal or other framework.
Comments: Structural canopies are proposed over the sidewalk on both buildings at
5t" Avenue (Sheet A3.1 of Exhibit 5).
2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage.
Front valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance
returns.
Comments: The canopies are open -sided.
3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted.
Comments: None of the canopies are marquee, box, or convex in shape.
4. Retractable awnings are encouraged.
Comments: No retractable awnings are proposed.
5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame store-
fronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies
should be hung just below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists.
Comments: The proposed canopies frame the storefronts and do not conceal
architectural details.
6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in
character, scale and position, but need not be identical.
Comments: The canopies used on both buildings appear to be identical.
Page 13 of 19
Packet Pg. 17
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic
materials. Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate, therefore, vinyl or plastic
awning materials are not permitted.
Comments: Nonstructural awnings are not proposed.
8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Com-
binations of sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while
minimizing the size of individual signs.
Comments: No signs are proposed. Signs in the BD zones are subject to the design
standards in ECDC 22.43.040 and will be reviewed by staff through future building
permits.
9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design
elements are preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or
less are permitted and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage
permitted for a business in ECDC 20.60. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one
of the required elements under ECDC 22.43.030(B).
Comments: See #8 above.
10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering.
Comments: See #8 above.
11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or
backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design.
Comments: No signage was included with this proposal. Signage will be reviewed
for compliance with the applicable design standards of ECDC 22.43.040 and the sign
code requirements of ECDC 20.60 when a sign application is submitted.
12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or con-
tributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds
Register of Historic Places, or on a city council -approved historic survey.
Comments: Not applicable. The subject site is not on the National Register, the
Edmonds Register of Historic Places, nor on a city council -approved historic survey
13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An
historic sign may be used to meet this standard.
Comments: See #8 above.
E. ECDC 22.43.050 Transparency at Street Level. Intent —To provide visual connection
between activities inside and outside the building.
1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front shall have
transparent windows covering a minimum of 75 percent of the building fagade that
lies between an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade.
Comments: 51" Avenue has the designated street front requirement. No analysis of
the window transparency facing 51" Avenue was provided but by visual estimate of
Page 14 of 19
Packet Pg. 18
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
the renderings in Exhibit 5, it appears that about 50% of the space from 2' — 10' is
transparent (Sheet A3.1 of Exhibit 5). A condition is proposed that the ground floor
windows for the live/work units in Buildings A & B must be compliant with the 75%
transparency requirement at 5th Avenue.
2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or
prohibit visibility between the street and interior.
Comments: A condition is proposed.
3. Where transparency is not required, the facade shall comply with the standards
under ECDC 22.43.060.
Comments: Transparency is only required for the east walls of Buildings A & B since
they abut 511 Avenue.
4. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be
transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings
intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk.
Comments: Not applicable since the site is zoned BD3.
F. ECDC 22.43.060 Treating Blank Walls. Intent — To ensure that buildings do not display
blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street.
1. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where
windows are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under
ECDC 22.43.050). At least five of the following elements shall be incorporated into
any ground floor, street facing facade:
a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative 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. Decorative tile work,
f. Medallions,
g. Opaque or translucent glass,
h. Artwork or wall graphics,
i. Lighting fixtures,
j. Green walls,
k. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent.
Comments: As noted above, only the east walls of Buildings A & B abut 5th Avenue.
However, the west wall of Buildings A & B and the east and west walls of Building C
include windows, pedestrian and auto entrances, decks, and the like. The north and
south walls of all three buildings will be visible from the street but do not abut 5th
Avenue. These walls will not contain windows due to code requirements, but the
facades are treated with different materials and colors, and vertical and horizontal
differentiation. Light sconces are included on the south walls.
Page 15 of 19
Packet Pg. 19
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
G. ECDC 22.43.070 Building HVAC Equipment. Intent — To ensure that HVAC equipment,
elevators, and other building utility features are designed to be a part of the overall
building design and do not detract from the streetscape.
Rooftop HVAC equipment, elevators and other rooftop features shall be designed to
fit in with the materials and colors of the overall building design. These features shall
be located away from the building edges to avoid their being seen from the street
below. If these features can be seen from the adjoining street, building design shall
use screening, decoration, plantings (e.g., rooftop gardens), or other techniques to
integrate these features with the design of the building.
Comments: Elevators are not proposed for the units and no HVAC equipment was
shown on the drawings in Exhibit 5. There are no height exceptions for HVAC
equipment, so a condition is proposed that any HVAC equipment meet the
standards in ECDC 22.43.070.
2. When HVAC equipment is placed at ground level, it shall be integrated into building
design and/or use screening techniques to avoid both visual and noise impacts on
adjoining properties.
Comments: As noted above, HVAC equipment was not shown for the units. A PUD
transformer is proposed interior to the site near the northeast corner of Building C.
Based on the above analysis, staff finds that the proposal, as conditioned, is consistent with
design standards contained within ECDC Chapter 22.43.
3. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements
ECDC 20.13 contains specific landscaping requirements for multifamily and commercial
projects. Each proposal must meet those requirements as well as the standards in the City's
Street Tree Plan.
Sheet L1.O of Exhibit 5 shows the proposed landscaping for the site. Three Scarlet Sentinel
Maples are proposed as street trees at 5t" Avenue, which is consistent with the Street Tree
Plan. Additional landscape treatments are shown near the live/work entrances at 5th
Avenue and in the walkway between Buildings A & B.
Because the project site is adjacent to multifamily -zoned property on the west, Type I
landscaping is appropriate for that location. Per ECDC 2O.13.O3O.A:
Type I landscaping is intended to provide a very dense sight barrier to significantly
separate uses and land use districts.
1. Two rows of evergreen trees, a minimum of 10 feet in height and planted at
intervals of no greater than 20 feet on center. The trees must be backed by a
sight -obscuring fence a minimum of five feet high or the required width of the
planting area must be increased by 10 feet; and
Page 16 of 19
Packet Pg. 20
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2. Shrubs a minimum of three and one-half feet in height planted in an area at
least five feet in width, and other plant materials, planted so that the ground will
be covered within three years,
3. Alternatively, the trees and shrubs may be planted on an earthen berm at least
15 feet in width and an average of five feet high along its midline.
The landscaping along the western property line shown on Sheet L1.0 consists of a 6' wood
fence at the property line along with a mix of shrubs, ground covers, and one row of
evergreen (Serbian spruce) and deciduous trees (Vine maple). This arrangement is not
technically consistent with the Type I landscaping requirements. However, the ADB may
interpret and modify the requirements contained in ECDC 20.13, provided the modification
is consistent with the design review purposes found in ECDC 20.10.000, which include:
A. To encourage the realization and conservation of a desirable and aesthetic
environment in the city of Edmonds;
B. To encourage and promote development which features amenities and excellence
in the form of variations of siting, types of structures and adaptation to and
conservation of topography and other natural features;
C. To encourage creative approaches to the use of land and related physical
developments;
D. To encourage the enhancement and preservation of land or building of unique or
outstanding scenic or historical significance;
E. To minimize incompatible and unsightly surroundings and visual blight which prevent
orderly community development and reduce community property values.
If the Board feels that the proposed western landscaping meets the intent of ECDC
20.13.030.A and the design review purposes in ECDC 20.10.000, it may approve the
landscaping as proposed. Alternatively, the Board may require revisions to better achieve
the intent and purposes, or it may require full compliance with ECDC 20.13.030.A along the
western property line.
Automatic irrigation is required for the landscaping along the western setback unless
waived by the ADB.
4. ECDC 20.60 Signs
Signs in the BD zones are subject to the design standards in ECDC 22.43.040. No signs were
included with the application materials — staff will review and approve signage through
future building permits.
As conditioned, staff finds the proposal is consistent with the referenced zoning codes.
Page 17 of 19
Packet Pg. 21
2.1.a
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
III. RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020, when approving proposed development applications, the ADB is
required to find that the proposed development is consistent with the zoning ordinance, the
design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and the specific design criteria identified by the
ADB during Phase 1 of the public hearing. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and
exhibits of this report, staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board APPROVE the
proposal under File No. PLN2020-0053 with conditions as stated in the following recommended
motion:
THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ADOPTS THE FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND CONCLUSIONS OF
THE STAFF REPORT AND FINDS THAT THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING
ORDINANCE, THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE DESIGN CRITERIA
IDENTIFIED DURING PHASE 1 OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF ECDC
22.43, AND APPROVES THE PROPOSAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. A SUBDIVISION IS REQUIRED TO CREATE A LOT LINE WEST OF BUILDINGS A & BIN
ORDER FOR THE GROUND FLOOR DEPTHS TO SATISFY THE 30' MINIMUM REQUIREMENT
IN ECDC 16.43.030.B.10.E. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CANNOT BE ISSUED FOR ANY
OF THE BUILDINGS UNTIL THE SUBDIVISION IS RECORDED AT THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY
AUDITOR.
2. PEDESTRIAN PATHS WITHIN THE SITE MUST BE ESTABLISHED FROM THE BASE OF THE
STAIRS BETWEEN BUILDINGS A & B BACK TO BUILDING C AND ALONG THE ENTIRE
LENGTH OF THE EAST SIDE OF BUILDING C USING STRIPING, ALTERNATE MATERIALS, OR
61ILVAH _
3. HVAC EQUIPMENT FOR ALL UNITS MUST MEET THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS IN
ECDC 22.43.070.
4. THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE TYPE I REQUIREMENTS IN ECDC 20.13.030.A AND MEETS THE PURPOSES OF
THE DESIGN REVIEW CHAPTER IN 20.10.
5. THE EXISTING MEMORIAL BENCH IN THE SIDEWALK AT 5T" AVENUE MUST BE SITED AT
THE DIRECTION OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.
6. THE APPLICANT MUST WORK WITH SOUND DISPOSAL TO DETERMINE A PROCESS AND
CONFIGURATION FOR RECYCLING AND TRASH.
7. THE GROUND FLOOR WINDOWS FOR THE LIVE/WORK UNITS IN BUILDINGS A & B MUST
COMPLY WITH THE 75% TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENT AT 5TH AVENUE. IF THIS
CANNOT BE ACHIEVED DURING BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW, THE PROJECT MUST COME
BACK TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD FOR REVISION.
8. GROUND FLOOR STOREFRONT WINDOWS MUST BE TRANSPARENT. TO QUALIFY AS
TRANSPARENT, WINDOWS SHALL NOT BE MIRRORED OR DARKLY TINTED GLASS, OR
PROHIBIT VISIBILITY BETWEEN THE STREET AND INTERIOR.
STAFF WILL VERIFY COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH ALL RELEVANT CODES AND
LAND USE PERMIT CONDITIONS THROUGH REVIEW OF BUILDING AND ENGINEERING
Page 18 of 19
Packet Pg. 22
Pine Park 614
File No. PLN2020-0053
2.1.a
PERMITS. MINOR CHANGES TO THE APPROVED DESIGN MAY BE APPROVED BY STAFF
AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT WITHOUT FURTHER DESIGN REVIEW BY THE BOARD
AS LONG AS THE DESIGN IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THAT ORIGINALLY APPROVED.
IV. PARTIES OF RECORD
City of Edmonds
Applicant
Jacob Young at Design Collaborative
Persons who submitted written Ed Lorah (Parkview Twin HOA)
comments
Paul McCulloh
IV. INTERESTED PARTIES
N/A
Page 19 of 19
Packet Pg. 23
2.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Minutes of Virtual Meeting
March 3, 2021
Chair Strauss called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 7:00 p.m.
Board Members Present Board Members Absent Staff Present
Lauri Strauss, Chair Kim Bayer Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Bruce Owensby, Vice Chair Joe Herr Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Maurine Jeude
PUBLIC HEARING: PINE PARK 614 — PHASE 1 DESIGN REVIEW (FILE NUMBER PLN2020-0053
Chair Strauss reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing and then opened the hearing. She asked if any
Board Member had engaged in communications with opponents or proponents regarding the design review of File
Number PLN2020-0053 outside of the public hearing process, and all Board Members answered no. Next, she asked if
any Board Members had a conflict of interest or believed that he/she could not hear and consider the application in a fair
and objective manner, and all answered no. Lastly, she asked if anyone in the audience objected to a Board Member's
participation as a decision maker in the hearing, and there were no objections. Chair Strauss invited all those who
wanted to testify in the hearing to affirm that their testimony would be the truth. She then invited staff to present the
application.
Mr. Clugston explained that the subject site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial (BD3). Because the proposal
triggers a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), design review by the Architectural
Design Board is required through a two -phased public hearing. At the Phase 1 hearing, the applicant will present a
conceptual design and a description of the property to be developed, noting all significant characteristics. The Board will
use this information to make factual findings regarding the particular characteristics of the property and prioritize the
Design Guideline Checklist (Attachment 4). Following public testimony and completion of the checklist, the Board will
continue the public hearing to a date certain not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 hearing. At the Phase 2 hearing,
the applicant will respond to the guidance from the Phase 1 hearing, and the Board will review the proposal again and
issue a Type III Decision.
Mr. Clugston advised that the packet that was provided for the meeting included the Staff Report and 13 attachments.
An additional attachment (narrative from the applicant) was received on March 3'd and will be included in the packet that
is prepared for the Phase 2 Hearing.
Mr. Clugston provided an aerial photograph looking west at the project site at 614 and 616 — 5' Avenue South, just
south of Ace Hardware. The site was previously occupied by Curves and Baskin Robbins. He noted the location of the
alley to the south and existing parking lot between the two buildings. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing
development with three new buildings containing six live/work units and eight residential units. The live/work units will
be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5' Avenue (Buildings A and B) and the 8-unit residential building will be
behind the live/work buildings and face west (Building Q. Drive aisles west of the buildings will load from the private
alley south of the site.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 1 of 10
Packet Pg. 24
2.1.b
Mr. Clugston reviewed that multifamily, live/work, parking and loading are all allowed uses in the BD3 zone, and no
setback would be required from the street (51 Avenue) or on the sides (north/south). A 15-foot setback from the west
property line would be required because the property to the west is zoned Multifamily Residential (RM). The maximum
height limit in the BD3 zone is 30 feet. One off-street parking space would be required for each of the multifamily units
in Building C, and each of the live/work units would require 2 off-street parking spaces.
Mr. Clugston shared a site plan, noting the location of the two live/work buildings (Buildings A and B), which would sit
at the property line on 5' Avenue. The multifamily building (Building C) would be located behind, with a 15-foot
setback along the western property line. Again, he said no setback would be required on the north, south or east sides.
Mr. Clugston said the applicant has not provided height calculations, but the building sections provided in the packet
gives a general feeling for the height. Buildings A and B will be likely be right at 30 feet in height, and Building C will
be a little less than 30 feet in height. He said the applicant will be required to provide specific height calculations for the
Phase 2 hearing, and setbacks, height, etc. will be verified via the Building Permit process.
Mr. Clugston advised that the Designated Street Front Requirements apply in all of the Downtown Business (BD) zones.
Ground floor ceiling heights must be at least 12 feet and commercial uses are required to a depth of 45 feet from the
street front. Parking is not considered a commercial use. However, there is an exception in the BD2 and BD3 zones for
properties that have less than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front. In that instance, parking may be located in
the rearmost 45 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first 45 feet of the building. In no
case, can the commercial space be less than 30 feet deep. As proposed, Buildings A and B would utilize the exception,
with commercial spaces that are 30-feet deep and parking located immediately behind. The proposed floor -to -floor
height is 12 feet for each of the two buildings.
Mr. Clugston said the project site (Parcel A) is approximately 130 feet deep and 132 feet wide. When applying for
design review, the applicant thought there was a property line dividing the parcel into two separate lots, and the intent
was to do a lot -line adjustment. However, the line was later determined to be a tax parcel line rather than an actual lot
line. Because a lot -line adjustment is no longer an option, the applicant could request a 2-lot short plat to yield two lots.
Both of the new lots would be about 8,500 square feet in size and approximately 65 feet deep. While the project is not
currently code -compliant, it would become compliant if and when a 2-lot short plat is approved. The applicant intends to
submit an application in the next few days, and a decision should be relatively close at the Phase 2 hearing. If it is not
available at the Phase 2 hearing, staff will recommend a condition that short plat approval must be obtained. With short
plat approval, the commercial space could be 30-feet deep, with parking behind.
Mr. Clugston reviewed that for lots over 12,000 square feet or where buildings are longer than 120 feet at the street front,
5% of the lot area of the project area must be devoted to open space. With short plat approval, no open space would be
required since the east and west lots would each be less than 12,000 square feet and Buildings A and B would be less
than 60 feet wide at the street front. He noted that the applicant is proposing a small courtyard between Buildings A and
B, and with the ground floor commercial requirement, there will be more activation of the street front along 5' Avenue.
Mr. Clugston referred to the Design Review Checklist that was attached to the Staff Report. He advised that, following
the applicant's presentation and public testimony, the Board should work through the checklist and provide feedback to
the applicant. Lastly, the Board will be asked to schedule the Phase 2 portion of the hearing, considering May 5' or June
2" d as potential options.
Isaac Greenetz, Citizen Design Collaborative, said a lot of work has been done to fit the buildings onto the site,
activate the street, create pedestrian activity, and design facades that present well to the street. The conceptual design
that is being presented to the Board is an attempt to meet all elements of the Design Guideline Checklist, as well as the
City's Development Code requirements. The goal is to enliven the street as much as possible. He said he didn't have
anything to add to Mr. Clugston's thorough presentation, but he was available to answer any questions the Board might
have regarding the proposed project.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 2 of 10
Packet Pg. 25
2.1.b
Jacob Young, Citizen Design Collaborative, agreed that Mr. Clugston's presentation was thorough. He commented
that the property owners are long-time Edmonds residents, and they have identified a concern that there are very few
townhomes in the Edmonds downtown area. In addition to the project being profitable to them, they are interested in
doing a project that is in the best interest of the community.
Chair Strauss opened the hearing to public testimony.
Ed Lorah, Edmonds, said he was speaking on behalf of residents of the Park View Twin Condominium Homeowner's
Association, which is located just west of the subject parcel. He asked if the questions he raised in an email submitted
prior to the meeting (Attachment 11 of the Staff Report) would be addressed during the hearing. Mr. Clugston advised
that the Phase 1 hearing is a high-level analysis of the proposed project, and specific details about design would be
addressed at the Phase 2 hearing.
No other members of the public indicated a desire to participate in the hearing.
Vice Chair Owensby said he likes the initial site design and believes the project will benefit the area. He said he likes
the applicant's creative proposal to do a short plat so that all three buildings can be accommodated on the property.
Board Member Jeude said she understands that, as proposed, no open space would be required for the project if the short
plat application is approved. However, she asked how the applicant intends to enliven at the street level. Mr. Greenetz
explained that the street front portions of the ground floor of the buildings on 5r' Avenue (Buildings A and B) will be
reserved for commercial space, and the intent is that they function as facilities for people to engage at the street level.
Vice Chair Owensby asked if the commercial spaces in Buildings A and B would be limited in terms of the types of uses
allowed. Mr. Clugston responded that all of the uses allowed in the BD3 zone would be allowed in the commercial
spaces associated with the proposed development, including retail, offices, coffee shops, etc.
Chair Strauss said she walks by the site daily, and it has been an eyesore for some time. She believes the proposed
project will help to activate the street. However, she is concerned about some elements of the design. It appears that the
amount of impervious surface would increase significantly, which raises stormwater concerns. She asked if the applicant
is proposing to use permeable pavement to mitigate stormwater runoff on the site. Craig Pontius, Citizen Design
Collaborative, referred to the drawings provided by the Civil Engineer and said permeable pavement is proposed for
both the parking areas and the plaza between the two front buildings.
Chair Strauss commented that there is some information in the Design Guidelines about how the project can meet the
open space criteria. While she recognized that no open space would be required if the short plat is approved, she is
concerned there won't be a lot of inviting space around the proposed residential units. She suggested that a landscape
architect should be consulted to add planter boxes or other elements to the design. Mr. Greenetz noted that there would
be some room for landscape elements along the front of the building behind the sidewalk. The intent is to landscape,
where possible, at the entrances to each unit and in the courtyard between the two buildings. He summarized that there
will be opportunities on the site to create these small areas, but they will be more urban in nature.
Chair Strauss asked if the alley would be used to provide access to the residents in Building C. Mr. Greenetz answered
affirmatively. Chair Strauss advised the applicant to keep the property well -lit and inviting, as the building layout
appears to create a tunnel effect.
Chair Strauss asked how deep the canopies on the front of the building would extend over the sidewalk. Mr. Greenetz r
said they are currently drawn at 3-feet deep. Chair Strauss suggested the applicant consider extending them further out a
over the sidewalk, which would provide opportunities for outdoor uses associated with the commercial spaces. She
recalled that concern has been raised with other projects in the downtown area that the canopies should extend out
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 3 of 10
Packet Pg. 26
2.1.b
further to provide additional cover. Mr. Greenetz asked if the City allows canopies to project out over the sidewalk, and
Mr. Clugston answered affirmatively. However, he would need to check on the distance that canopies can extend out
into the right-of-way.
Chair Strauss asked if the applicant has considered pursuing Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Certification. Mr. Greenetz responded that it has been discussed as an option by the ownership group, but no decision
has been made at this point. He noted that 4-star Greenbuild is standard for development in Washington State and tends
to be just as good as LEED Certification. LEED Certification can become more of a paperwork process than an actual
environmentally -friendly process. The builder is conscientious about the environment and is doing everything possible
within budget. Chair Strauss said sustainable design is the focus of her career, and she would really like to see projects
in downtown Edmonds pursue LEED Certification.
Chair Strauss advised that the Design Guidelines talk about bulk and scale and compatibility and suggested that the
design is missing a middle. Because the top is darker than the bottom, it feels really heavy and enormous. She voiced
concern that when compared to the one-story buildings on each of the adjacent lots, the proposed project will feel big
and heavy. She suggested that the top layer be lightened and that a middle be added to provide more variation and
reduce the bulky appearance of the building.
Chair Strauss asked if the memorial bench in the right-of-way adjacent to the subject property would be relocated. Mr.
Greenetz said he isn't sure at this time. The idea is to add more benches, if possible, along the entire property. Mr.
Clugston said staff would seek direction from the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department about whether the
bench should remain in its current location or be moved somewhere else.
Chair Strauss reminded the applicant that the commercial spaces on the ground floor of Buildings A and B must be fully
compliant with the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Act requirements. For example, the restrooms must be large
enough for ADA accessibility. Mr. Clugston advised that would be confinned as part of the Building Permit review.
Chair Strauss noted that the applicant is proposing to provide roof access for occupants of one of the building, and she
asked if adding a vegetative roof was considered as an option. Mr. Greenetz responded that, as proposed, only Building
C would provide roof access. He agreed that a vegetative roof would be one option for making the space useable.
Chair Strauss pointed out that the western sun, when setting in Edmonds, will hit the side of the building from 5 p.m. to 9
p.m. The dark color that is proposed for the top of the buildings will make the western fagade that much hotter.
Ed Lorah, Edmonds, voiced concern that Building C will look like a monolithic wall from the western point of view.
As currently proposed, it will fill the entire lot from one end to the other, and the design doesn't provide a lot of
variation. In addition to this concern, the Park View Twin Condominium Homeowner's Association is concerned about
how the exterior lights on the proposed new buildings will impact their properties. From an aesthetic point of view, he
pointed out that every part of the lot would be full of concrete, with 14 residential units and 20 parking spaces. On
behalf of the Park View Twin Condominium Homeowner's Association, he asked the project designers to consider the
project's impact on neighboring properties. Mr. Greenetz agreed to work on being sensitive to the adjacent neighbors in
terms of light, the monolithic massing, and the size of the development, in general. He said it is challenging to develop
projects that are sensitive to existing development, as well as any future development that might occur on adjacent
properties.
Chair Strauss commented that placing the buildings the long way, north to south, is the best option to avoid blocking
sunlight to the condominium development behind. However, she agreed with Mr. Lorah that, as proposed, the site will
be crowded with very little open space.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 4 of 10
Packet Pg. 27
2.1.b
Chair Strauss reviewed that the Design Guideline Checklist is intended as a summary of the issues addressed by the
guidelines, and it is not meant to be a regulatory device or a substitute for the language and examples found in the
guidelines, themselves. Rather, it is a tool for assisting the determination about which guidelines are the most applicable
on a particular site. The Board worked through the Design Guideline Checklist as follows:
A. Site Planning
Lower
Higher
N/A
Priority
Priority
1. Reinforce existing site characteristics. The site is currently
X
developed with two dilapidated buildings, which should not be
replicated.
2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics. There are larger
buildings and commercial uses to the north and south on 5th Avenue.
X
The design should build on the existing activity at street level that is
created by existing commercial uses on either side. This guideline
has been addressed by the ground floor commercial space on 51h
Avenue.
3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street.
X
4. Encourage human activity on street.
X
5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites.
X
6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security,
privacy and interaction (residential projects). Because no front or
X
side setbacks are required, this guideline is not applicable.
7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential projects).
While no open space is required for the project, the Board asked the
X
applicant to considerpossibilities to add landscape elements, etc.
8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining
property,
X
9. Discourage parking in street front. There is already on -street
parking along 5:h Avenue. The applicant is not proposing any
X
parking in front of the building.
10. Orient building to corner and parking away from corner on
public street fronts (corner lots).
X
Ed Lorah, Edmonds, commented that the Board appears to be focusing more on Buildings A and B that will face 5'
Avenue. He encouraged them to think about the proposal as a total project and consider how it will impact adjacent
properties to the west. Chair Strauss agreed, but noted that many of the guidelines are specifically related to the street
front and sidewalk. She noted that minimizing intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites was identified as a high priority
that applies specifically to Building C. Vice Chair Owensby commented that many of the issues related to compatibility
with adjacent properties will be addressed via the zoning regulations. As an example, Mr. Clugston pointed out that
there are no setback requirements in the BD zones, except when adjacent to residential zones. In this particular case, a
15-foot rear setback would be required to reduce the project's impact on residential development to the west.
B. Bulk and Scale
Lower
Higher
N/A
Priority
Priority
1. Provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less -intensive zones. This
will be particularly important to protect the residential development
X
to the west from potential impacts.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 5 of 10
Packet Pg. 28
2.1.b
C. Architectural Elements and Materials
Lower
Higher
N/A
Priority
Priority
1. Complement positive existing character and/or respond to
nearby historic structures.
X
2. Unified architectural concept.
X
3. Use human scale and human activity.
X
4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials.
X
5. Minimize garage entrances. In addition to minimizing garage
entrances on Sth Avenue, it is also important to minimize garage
X
entrances from the alley to serve the residential units in Building C.
D. Pedestrian Environment
Lower
Higher
N/A
Priority
Priority
1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry.
Protected entries should be provided on all buildings, including
X
Building C.
2. Avoid blank walls. It was noted that the fire code requires a blank
wall on the south side. However, windows could be added on the
X
north side to break up the blank wall.
3. Minimize height of retaining walls. The applicant's current plan is
to address the slope of the site with the building rather than retaining
X
walls.
4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on
pedestrian areas. The applicant is doing this by locating the
X
buildings at the street, with parking behind.
5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures.
X
6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas. The applicant hasn't
addressed this issue yet.
X
7. Consider personal safety,
X
E. Landscaping
Lower
Higher
N/A
Priority
Priority
1. Reinforce existing landscape character of neighborhood. It was
noted that there isn't a lot of landscaping along the street front in this
neighborhood. However, there are some existing street trees. The
X
applicant was encouraged to add landscaping elements where ever
possible.
2. Landscape to enhance the building or site. Green spaces for the
residents should be encouraged.
X
3. Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions. The Board
X
wanted to see more landscaping included in the design, perhaps a
vegetated roof on the lower building so that people in the upper
building could see some green vegetation and people in the upper
building could enjoy the space.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 6 of 10
Packet Pg. 29
2.1.b
The applicant indicated the ability to provided a resubmittal for the Phase 2 hearing by the beginning of April, allowing
staff sufficient time to review the proposal again and prepare a Staff Report for a Phase 2 hearing on May 5'. If the
resubmittal is not completed by the beginning of April, the Board could continue the Phase 2 hearing to June.
The Board continued the Phase 2 portion of the hearing to May 5, 2021.
11 9 9 • 1]i�1 IFA 110IIJI Y 111
The Board approved the February 3, 2021 minutes as submitted.
PRESENTATION: CITY ATTORNEY TRAINING AND DISCUSSION
Mr. Taraday noted that he last presented training to the Architectural Design Board in 2019, and all three of the Board
Members present participated at that time. His current presentation is intended to be a refresher course. He agreed to
email his PowerPoint presentation to the Board Members via Planning Division staff.
Mr. Taraday explained that Washington State has a rule that there can only be one open record hearing on an application.
That means that, for quasi-judicial applications, the Architecture Design Board may be the only body to ever decide on
the application that has opportunity to ask the applicant a question. None of the subsequent bodies that review the
application will have an opportunity to ask an applicant a factual question about the project, and they cannot seek any
new information about the project. The Board has a tremendous responsibility to develop a factual record for its
decisions. A lot of the factual record will be developed via the applicant's interaction with staff, but it is very important
for Board Members to ask questions of clarification and request additional details and/or information as necessary to
unearth the critical facts relating to the project as thoroughly as possible. He encouraged the Board to pause and ask
questions. They can even continue the hearing to a future date, if necessary, to allow time for applicants, staff and
members of the public who participate in the hearing to answer questions or provide the additional information the Board
is seeking.
Vice Chair Owensby questioned if the Board's 2-phase public hearing process is consistent with the State's rule that
there can only be one open record hearing. Mr. Taraday explained that the Board has two different processes. With one
process, the Board serves as the recommending body. They meet with the applicant (not a public hearing) and provide
guidance to the Hearing Examiner, but the Hearing Examiner is responsible for conducting the public hearing,
establishing the factual record and making the final decision. With the other process, the Board serves as the decision -
making body. They conduct the public hearing, establish the factual record and make the final decision. It is much more
important that the Board is as thorough as possible when they are acting as the deciding body. Mr. Clugston added that,
typically, the Board holds just one public hearing on a project. With the 2-phased approach, the Board still only holds
one public hearing. However, following the Phase 1 portion of the hearing, the Board continues the hearing to a future
date for the Phase 2 portion. Mr. Taraday summarized that the one -hearing rule doesn't require that the hearing must
start and finish on the same day. Hearings can be continued, as needed.
Mr. Taraday advised that the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine requires that quasi-judicial hearings must be fair in fact
and appear to be fair to those who aren't the decision makers. Quasi-judicial hearings are hearings in which the Board
Members act as judges as opposed to policy makers. While the Planning Board's primary role is policy maker, the
Architectural Design Board primarily serves in a quasi-judicial capacity. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine applies
anytime the rights of an applicant are being determined, or Type III -A Decisions in the Architectural Design Board's
case.
Mr. Taraday said the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine is highly concerned about ex parte communications. In order to r
have an ex parte communication, there must be a pending quasi-judicial decision. At the very least, someone needs to a
have submitted an application. No member of a decision -making body may engage in ex party communications with
opponents or proponents with respect to a proposal that is the subject of a public hearing before them. If an ex parte
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 3, 2020
Page 7 of 10
Packet Pg. 30
2.1.c
CITIZEN
DESIGN
COLLABORATIVECO.COM DATE April 2, 2021
206.535.7908 TO Edmonds Design Review Board
121 5th Avenue N
Edmonds, WA 98020
WE ARE FAMILY
DESIGNING INSPIRED SPACE PROJECT Pine Park 614
TO CREATE COMMUNITY Citizen Design appreciates this opportunity to respond to comments received
during the Phase 1 design review hearing for the Pine Park 614 project. This
project is located at 610-614 5th Avenue S. The comments and our responses are
provided below.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Provide average grade and height limit calculations [staff comment].
• The requested calculations have been added to Sheet A1.2. The height
Limits are also depicted visually in the sections on that sheet.
Provide landscaping such as planter boxes.
• Proposed landscaping includes a landscape buffer [between the subject
parcel and its westerly neighbor] planted with shrubs, groundcover and
trees, planter boxes near Buildings A and B, and several street trees.
This information is included on Sheet L1.0. Possible species include vine
maple, mountain hemlock, viburnum, hydrangea and lavender.
Consider extending canopies further into the right-of-way to provide weather
protection for pedestrians.
• Pursuant to ECDC 18.70.030, canopies are to extend at least six feet into
the right-of-way when the sidewalk is more than eight feet wide. This
project abuts a 15 ft sidewalk, and the canopies have been revised to be
six feet deep. Larger canopies were considered but appeared out of scale
with the rest of the project.
Consider lightening the top layer of the design and adding a middle to provide
variant and reduce its bulky appearance. Lightening the color will also help
with solar heat gain in the afternoon.
• The proposed color of Building A and B's upper stories has been lightened
as requested. A prominent horizontal band between the second and
third stories helps to decrease the perceived mass of the upper section.
Addtional detailing, such as corbel brackets on the cornice, concrete
plinths, medallions and lighting fixtures, has also been added to the
facade to provide human scale and visual interest.
Concerns were raised that the western elevation will appear to be a monolithic
wall and provide too little variation when viewed from the neighboring parcel.
• The western facade of Building C, which faces the neighboring parcel,
is proposed to include projecting balconies with visible tie rods. These
features help break up the facade by introducing a rhythm and adding
detail. The bottom story is also recessed, and the upper stories include
significant areas of glazing and a prominent horizontal band. These
to
c
d
E
E
0
U
a�
c
M
d
Pine Park 614 1 Memorandum 12021
Packet Pg. 31
2.1.c
CITIZEN
DESIGN
further break up the facade and add interest. Finally, this elevation will
be partially screened from view by the plantings in the landscape buffer.
Note that the west rendered elevation shows only a third of the proposed
trees in orderto allowthe elevation to be seen and reviewed. Much less of
it will be visible through the full number of trees once they have matured.
SITE PLANNING
• The site is currently developed with two dilapidated buildings, which should
r
not be replicated [lower priority].
_
• The existing structures will be demolished and replaced by three high-
U
quality structures.
• There are larger buildings and commercial uses to the north and south on
li
5th Ave. The design should build on the existing activity at street level that is
N
created by existing commercial uses on either side. This guideline has been
addressed by the ground floor commercial space on 5th Ave. [higher priority].
a
• Noted. The commercial space has been retained in the revised design.
'0
• Provide an entry clearly identifiable from the street [higher priority].
• All street -facing units have prominent entries directly accessed from
:r
the sidewalk. Units behind the street -facing block are accessed via a
0
pedestrian pass -through at the center of the eastern facade. This pass-
0
through is provided with benches, planters and lighting to help it provide
rn
an attractive access point.
d
• Encourage human activity on the street [higher priority].
E
• The project includes ground floor commercial space, which will help
E
0
generate pedestrian activity.
U
• Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites [higher priority].
• Building C is separated from the existing condominium to the west by
both its own driveway and the condominium's parking lot. Furthermore,
a)
the above -described landscape buffer will provide a soft separation
between these buildings. The buildings are not provided with windows
y
on the north and south sides, thus avoiding any privacy concerns in
z
those directions.
a
While no open space is required for this project, the Board asked the applicant
to consider possibilities to add landscape elements, etc. [higher priority].
• As noted above, the project now includes landscaping where feasible.
Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining propoerty
[higher priority].
• The project provides all vehicular access via an existing, private alley
to the south. This allows it to eliminate the existing curb cut near the
middle of the subject, reducing the impact of vehicles on the pedestrian
environment.
BULK AND SCALE
• Provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less -intensive zones. This will be
particuarly important to protect the residential development to the west from
potential impacts.
• As noted above, a landscape buffer is provided between Building C and
the neighboring parcel. Building C's driveway is also located between
Pine Park 614 1 Memorandum 12021
Packet Pg. 32
2.1.c
CITIZEN
DESIGN
the building and landscape buffer, further separating the neighboring
structure from the new building. Concerning the building itself, several
features are provided on the west facade of Building C to break up its
mass and provide texture when viewed from the west.
ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND MATERIALS
• Use a unified architectural concept [lower priority].
• All three buildings use a harmonious combination and materials and
L_
similar massing to create a unified design concept.
d
• Use human scale and human activitiy [higher priority].
As noted above, the project provides ground -floor commercial suites
abutting the 5th Avenue right-of-way. This continues the pattern to both
li
the north and south, activating the pedestrian zone and encouraging
N
street -level activity. Concerning human scale, the project proposes
a variety of textures and secondary architectural elements along the
a
sidewalk.
• Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials [higher priority].
W
• Brick siding is used adjacent to the pedestrian environment to provide a
:r
high degree of texture where it will be interacted with most often. This
0
includes provision of plinths at the base of the building. Upper stories
0
on Buildings A and B use panel siding enriched by the use of stile and
rn
rail details and horizontal banding. This helps create the "base and top"
parti of the elevation. Building C instead uses a vertical siding pattern
E
for its upper stories, giving it a different identity and avoiding over-
E
0
repetition of the elements on Buildings A and B. All materials used will
U
be high quality and installed with a high degree of craftmanship.
• Minimize garage entrances. In addition to minimizing garage entrances on
5th Avenue, it is important to minimize garage entrances from the alley to
serve the residential units in Building C [higher priority].
• Building C's garage entries are located on the opposite side of the
y
structure from the pedestrian entries. They are also set back from the
z
overhanging upper facade, minimizing their appearace when viewed
a
0
from the west. Finally, the landscape buffer located along the westerly
property line will help screen them from view.
PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT
• Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry. Protected
entries should be provided on all buildings, including Building C [higher
priority].
• All three buildings provide canopies above their pedestrian entries.
• Avoid blank walls. It was noted that the fire code requires a blank wall on the
south side. However, windows could be added on the north side to break up
the blank wall [higher priority].
• The fire separation requirement noted in this comment also prohibits
windows on the north sides of Buildings A and C due to their proximity to
the property line. Since windows are not an option, the project provides
a stile and rail pattern on the north and south facades of Building A to
increase the visual interest of the building. Building C instead uses a
Pine Park 614 1 Memorandum 12021
Packet Pg. 33
2.1.c
CITIZEN
DESIGN
combination of vertically -patterned siding, brick and horizontal banding
to increase interest and reduce apparent bulk.
• Minimize height of retaining walls. The applicant's current plan is to address
the slope of the site with the building rather than retaining walls [lower
priority].
• This remains the case. Minimal retaining walls are proposed.
• Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on pedestrian areas.
The applicant is doing this be located the buildings at the street, with parking
behind [higher priority].
• This remains the case.
• Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas. The applicant hasn't addressed
this issue yet [higher priority].
• As this is a townhouse project, a centralized dumpster enclosure will
not be needed. Each unit will be responsible for storing and staging its
refuse containers, and it is anticipated that these will be co -located with
parking. This will help keep them out of public view and avoid impacts
on the pedestrian environment.
• Consider personal safety [higher priority].
• Lighting is provided at the pedestrian pass -through, in the alley and
along the 5th Avenue frontage to contribute to the safety of passersby.
to
LANDSCAPING
• Reinforce existing landscape character of the neighborhood. It was noted that
E
there isn't a lot of landscaping along the street front in this neighborhood.
E
0
However, there are some existing street trees. The applicant was encouraged
U
to add landscaping wherever possible [lower priority].
• Three new street trees have been added to the proposal and may be
seen on Sheet L1.0. This sheet also shows that planter boxes have been
=
added to the proposal where feasible.
• Landscape to enhance the building or site. Green spaces for the residents
y
should be encouraged [higher priority].
z
• Minimal area is available for landscaping on this site, primarily due to
a
0
parking and access requirements. It has been added where feasible.
• Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions. The Board wanted to
see more landscaping included in the design, perhaps a vegetated roof on
0
CL
the lower building so that people in the upper building could see some green
vegetation and people in the lower building could enjoy the space [lower
priority].
• Provision of a vegetated roof on Building C was considered, and it was
M
2
determined that expansize roof decks would be a better amenity for
0.
0.
the residents. It is possible that residents of this building will provide
Q
container plantings, increasing the overall amount of vegetation.
N
We welcome the board's further comments and look forward to working together
as the project continues.
Citizen Design
Pine Park 614 1 Memorandum 12021
Packet Pg. 34
2.1.d
MORANDUM
Date: April 19, 2021
To: Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
From: JoAnne Zulauf, Engineering Technician
Zachary Richardson, Stormwater Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Subject: PLN2020-0053 —Design Review
Pine Park 614-616 5t' Ave S
The comments provided below are based upon review of the application and documents submitted for
the subject application. Additional information is requested from the applicant at this time. Please ask
the applicant to respond to the following.
Utility Engineer Review:
The following comments are provided by the City Utility Engineer, Mike Delila. Please contact Mike
directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at mike. delilla@edmondswa.gov with any specific questions you
may have regarding his comments.
Please submit the following information.
4119121 Sewer and Water availability request was not received. To determine whether existing water
and sewer systems provide sufficient capacity for the proposed development, the applicant will need to
submit a request for Water -Sewer Availability determination. To request a Water and Sewer
availability determination, please email Engineeringpermits@edmondswa.gov with the address(s) to
start the process.
The utility engineer will need to send the subject proposal out to a consultant to determine what
upgrades (if any) would be needed within the City's system. This will take approximately two weeks.
General Engineering Review:
Page 1 1
Packet Pg. 35
2.1.d
The following comments are provided by the Engineering Technician, JoAnne Zulauf. Please contact
at Joanne.zulauf&edmondswa.gov with any specific questions you may have regarding these comments
Please make the following revisions to the plans.
Frontage Improvements and Access:
a) 4119121 Done. Call out the width of the drive aisles on site. Two way drive aisles shall be a
minimum of 24 ft in width.
b) 4119121 Done. Parking stalls shall be 8.5 x 16.5. If you can demonstrate that sufficient parking
area is available to provide all required parking spaces at the full width dimensions, then if
desired, a maximum of fifty percent of the total required parking spaces may be sized at reduced
width per the parking space dimensions, 8 x 16.5. See ECDC 18.95.020 for full requirements.
c) 4119121 Need more information. Provide a plan showing frontage improvements along 5t' Ave S
to determine if there are conflicts, or other issues barring feasibility:
i. Okay. 7-10 foot wide sidewalks required (width determined by available ROW).
ii. 4119121 No Information Provided. Proposed power pole relocations. Work with PUD
to determine new locations.
iii. Okay. Show location of street trees with 3' x 3' tree grates along the curb to ensure
adequate spacing from utilities, etc.
iv. 4119121 Not Shown Show flower pole on plan. Relocating if necessary.
2. Trash and Recycling; show how trash and recycling will be handled on the site. Please contact
Sound Disposal, 425-778-2404, for requirements.
4119121 A townhouse is not required to have a centralized trash area as long as an adequate plan is
shown and agreed upon by the local disposal company. There are several issues with the design that
has been submitted.
1. The plan only shows a trash bin space for each unit but not a recycle bin. This means there will
be twice as many than is shown on the plans.
2. The posts for the overhang area are not shown. Will they land in the trash areas?
3. The space proposed for the bins is 3 ft in width. With a car on either side there will be very
little room to use the bins without the lid hitting a car, or residents and their trash having
contact with the cars.
4. If there are double the bins that you have shown on the plans, will residents be able to get in
their cars?
5. There is a pretty good slope in the parking area. The bins will roll, get pushed around by the
weather, into parking stalls, into the drive aisle causing safety issues and a mess.
6. Where will all these bins be set out for pick up day? Will Sound disposal drive in to the lot?
There is no room for turn around and the slopes may make it difficult to back out.
Please revisit this design.
Approval from Sound Disposal of design and pick up to collect all the separate cans needs to be
submitted. Where will these cans go that will not interrupt ingress and egress? Provide a plan showing
how this can be done and provide an indication from Sound Disposal agreeing to this plan.
Page 1 2
Packet Pg. 36
2.1.d
Stormwater Engineer Review: 4119121 Done
Refer to attached plan review comments by City Stormwater Engineer, Zachary Richardson. Please
contact Zack directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at Zachary.richardson&edmondswa.gov with any
specific questions you may have regarding his comments.
No further action necessary for design review approval.
Stormwater items to address prior to building permit submittal:
No soils report or Geotech report was received therefore no verification of sizing of system, etc.
Infiltration is shown at less than typical setbacks (west building may even have footings in the
infiltration area). Confirm that Geotech has reviewed the plans and submit extra documentation to show
that the design is acceptable.
Also, the first two stretches of connecting pipe are only 8" so the capacity will need to be checked
though depending on infiltration rates may not be an issue.
Transportation Engineer Review:
The following comments are provided by the City Transportation Engineer, Bertrand Hauss. Please
contact Bertrand directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at Bertrand.hauss(d),edmondswa.gov with any
specific questions you may have regarding his comments.
No further action necessary for design review approval.
A Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet was provided indicating the project would create less than 25
peak -hour trips; therefore, a traffic study is not required. Specific mitigation fees will be further
reviewed during the building permit phase of the project.
Additional Items to Be Addressed at Civil Submittal.
1. Parking area between buildings is over the maximum parking slope allowed. A waiver can be
requested to up to a max of 14% provided certain criteria can be met. A request will need to be
received with your civil submittal. Please review Edmonds Community Development Code chapter
18.95 D for the waiver criteria.
2. The entrance to the parking area closest to building B cuts through the southeast parking stall. The
entrance will need to be revised so a full parking space is not encroached upon.
Page 1 3
Packet Pg. 37
2.1.e
CITIZEN
DESIGN
INFO (AT) April23, 2021
COLLABORATIVECO.COM
206.535.7908 Architectural Response Letter
RE: Edmonds Plan Review Correction Notice #1
WE ARE FAMILY Permit Application #: PLN2020-0053
DESIGNING INSPIRED SPACE Project Address: 614-616 511 Avenue S
TO CREATE COMMUNITY Preparer/Contact: Jacob Young
Contact Info: 206.535.7908
Please use the matrix below combined with the revised drawing set
as the response to the SDCI Plan Review Correction Notice. If you
have any questions or need additional information, please feel free
to contact our office. We look forward to continuing to work together
as this project moves forward.
Humbly submitted,
Citizen Design
Edmonds Response: UTILITIES
City Staff: Mike Delilla 425.771.0220
Date Rec: April 19, 2021
RESPONSE
Utilities We contacted the engineering division on April 23 to start this process as N/A
requested.
Edmonds Response: GENERAL ENGINEERING
City Staff: Joanne Zulauf ioanne.zulaufldedmondswa.gov Date Rec: April 19, 2021
RESPONSE
1
No power poles are located in the right-of-way abutting the subject
A1.1
parcels. Consequently, no relocation is needed. At the original pre -
application conference for this project, it also include redevelopment of
610 5tn Avenue S to the north. This lot does abut a right-of-way with power
poles, thus explaining the requirement to relocate them in the pre -
application notes. This lot is no longer included in the project scope.
The existin flower pole has been added to the site plan.
2
As noted in the corrections, a refuse storage enclosure is not required for
A1.1
a townhouse development. This project proposes that each townhouse will
A2.1-A2.2
store its refuse separately and that the owners will move the containers
ATT
to the collection location when needed.
Packet Pg. 38
2.1.e
Buildings A and B contain commercial space on their ground floors, and
it is typical in commercial construction for refuse to be stored in ventilated
rooms within the building envelope. As such, Buildings A and B have been
revised to include small refuse storage closets near their commercial
restrooms. Building C previously included its refuse storage within the
garage. Thus, the conflicts between parking, post locations and driveway
slope have been resolved.
For clarity, the word "trash" has been replaced with "refuse." The storage
areas are 2 ft by 6 ft, which is sufficient to store two 98-gallon carts [one
each for trash and recycling] and a smaller compost bin.
Sound Disposal was contacted on April 23 by telephone to start their
review process. At present, it is assumed that their preferred collection
location will be at the 5tn Avenue S curb as this right-of-way is reasonably
graded and the only public right-of-way abutting the subject parcels.
Packet Pg. 39
VICINITY MAP a NTS
wo
Do
zo
wo
Q�
S co
�c:>
Lr)r-
O N
� ^z
LL
Q
z /
z
Q p
> /
O
_
5TH AVENUE S
J
o<0
M = YA1 (N) STREET TREE WITH REMOVE (E) DRIVEWAY AND (E) FLOWER POE A1.2
4'-0" SQ TREE GRATE RESTORE CURB PER CITY STD TO REMAIN
PER USCAPE (TYP. OF 3) 0o °°0 o0
d 1
--REFUSE STAGING
° — J
a
° ° yea S.
d. a ° REPLACE (E) DRIVEWAY WITH
000 0 ° a a .. a o
.. -d ddCONC SIDEWALK AND EXTEND
TO R PER CITY STANDARD
d4.
° /I
M M M d d'. M d. 7 ° M � �d : M d./ .. d .. .� a
d d. a a o d
a 61'± ° . ad a d l . ° ♦. ° : 464'± 1 °. d 7 °
L0
U
w
BUILDING A:
p U
m
BUILDING B:
I(3) 3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH I
-a ?
I (3) 3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH I
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
o I AVG (E) GRADE: 83.3 ± I
b 2
+1
I AVG (E) GRADE: 83.4 ± I
r� IAGLA: 1735± SF (EA)
8
o p
U
o
AGLA: 1220± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 500± SF (EA)
`n U
WORK SUITE: 600± SF (EA)lea
I I
iz
I I
—
A1.2
20.3'± (TYP)
I 20.3'± (TYP)
a d
°
ad °
°
♦ e
d°{'
°
d°
d d
q
d.
°
41 °
11
1I
1 d
11
Q d :a d °
d
d°, d°
,
a a I. , a
` IC)
I1
d ° .
l
d d °
�I1� I°
1IIII
4 d
a
11
w
lII
a
d
do .
d
dd ,a 1
d
II1lfI
o Q
dd
li11
d
d
41
°d;
41
.d 411 .
1d'
1
= zY U
�—°t
+m
`ll `
°
--
d
'd.
°°a
z
oo-
° () °
d
tIII1
d .
do
dBUILDING
4.
Ida
a1
It
N
dn
° °°' °
d ° d
da I1
d
a
° I °
nI '
°
a
° d41 d 1 1
1cop
d,
a 4.1
da
°
.
..4Qd d
°
- I
5-6"
USCAPE
AREA
IOLEG/1
d ddd da°
d
° d.1 d' n d�d* a83d.d
° d d d d = d a d EG/ G 7rIl6a' .6.
EG/
'°+MOTOR COURT
a
d
a`
Qa —d ESTABLISH (N) R VIA SHORT SUBDVISION ° d..,. ' ed d
1.
.° _ ° —d
d . (UNDER SEPARATE PERMT) ° d
d dd . °° .d d
d e n . a °
d d- da..
. e. a
aJ
d d
d d d
:° ° o° dd
v LL
qd dc d
a d d O
d � -114 aM d d da M M MM °M
a
I I i 16.5'± (TYP) i
I
3
1.2
0
0
M
p N
O
° �
0
w6
>o
d N
z
d
Q
�-80-
80 BUILDING C: I — — — /I / — — — I
(8) 3-STORY TH (INC. BSMT) — j I
+1 FOOTPRINT AREA: 3960± SF S,
CY)�_— — I� �— t— �— AVG (E) GRADE: 78.3'±
AGLA: 990± SF (EA) 1 1 1 1 1 1 X
75 1 I-- I— I— I I _1 GARAGE/BSMT: 495±SF(EA)
_I_-1---I-- 1
1 I 1 1 � 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 4
A1.2 I I I I I I I I I I I I A1.2
d d. d a d °d d° \„� ° �� d a d� d t d a C d° _ t °d.
°O° a d
da d
.d e Cd (d° da Gc d
° a G a
d
Q°d1 dd d
da ° d d.° da d.°°d :.4 d
4 4
dd BUILDING (ABOVE) �' e d ' e ° ° ' a
d d d a - °. .. 'd d. d° d
�—
_�_ d da_ ° .._. ° ° o ° —° —° —d d
dd d ° d d 4 ° ° d ° ° d _a.. d" ^ ° d-. d d .d° 1 1 a a d d d ° +,'O °- °q .. d .o d d-/ Od..
A
da d ° a d (N) TREE IN BUFFER AREA ° ° (N) WOOD FENCE o a m °°DRIVEWAY ° d .a '/ d d °I
a ° d d ° ° PER USCAPE (TYP. OF 16) ° .PER USCAPE ° ° d a
° °
°°oo°boo 000 ° °°o°oo$,000. °°°pp0oo o. d ° °°�p0000 d d. d °°°c °00000. ° °°°o °�°boo... ° .°o°°pp0000 a d e°of000 Qo e a °cao 4fl0000 / o p00000 °°°o°°°oao6 c°°oa°A0000
a° o° o a° o° v °°o o° o° v o°S o° o° v o°S o° o° v o°o 0 o e °°o ° v °°S o v °S o°°o o v °°S o
° 0 0° 0 0° 0 ° o° 0 0°
a° G cc C cc C c° C c° G °0 0 e° G e G e° G e° G ee 0 0 0
00 °° onn 0° o°n 0° o°n 0° o°° 0° o°o °° °n °O °° °n °° °n °° ovo °° 2 ° °° °
° 1 0 ° ° ° ° ° ° �o o ° ° ° o a' ° °o
Al 0 0�000 0 0�0 0�000 0�0 oao oao 0 0 0�000 oao 0 0 0 0�000 oao o�000 oao o� o A1.2 oa'o 0
o o ° ° oo ° ° o oo ° ° eo °
0 0 ° C C
x� o do o °a x �� x x x�x x �?
00 87oo0 ° o0 8°000 ° o0 8°000 ° o0 8°000 ° o0 8°000 ° oa 8000,e° oa 8°°oe° o0 80000 ° o0 80000�° o0 80000� o0 8°000 ° oa 8°°oe° o0 80000 °
517-519 4TH AVENUE S
PARKVIEW TWIN CONDO /
APN: 006493-0010
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 10'
2
O
O
co N
W
� O
Z N
wC)
>C)
2 0
LO o
N
N Z
co
Q
_ 0 5 10 20
_ 1 " = 10,
PROJECT INFO.
SCOPE OF WORK
CONSTRUCT (3) BUILDINGS CONTAINING (6) LIVE/WORK
TOWNHOUSES AND (8) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES,
PER PLANS AND AS FOLLOWS:
• (3) LIVE/WORK TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 1735± SF
AGLA, 500± SF WORK SUITE AND (2) COVERED,
UNENCLOSED PARKING SPACES.
• (3) LIVE/WORK TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 1220± SF
AGLA, 600± SF WORK SUITE AND (2) COVERED,
UNENCLOSED PARKING SPACES.
• (8) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 990± SF
AGLA AND 495± SF GARAGE.
DIVIDE (E) PARCEL INTO TWO RESULTANT PARCELS VIA
SHORT SUBDIVISION (UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT).
(E) STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED.
ESTABLISH USES AND OCCUPY, PER PLANS.
SITE ADDRESS
614-616 5TH AVENUE S
EDMONDS, WA 98020
PARCEL MAP NUMBERS
PARCEL A: 270326-001-009-00
PARCEL B: 270326-001-029-00
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A:
SEC 26 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-5) N 55 FT FDT BAAP 30 FT W & 123
FT S OF NE COR S 1/2 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 TH RUN W 130 FT TH S
132 FT TH E 130 FT TH N 123 FT TO PUB SUBJ ESE PUD
PARCEL B:
SEC 26 TWP 27 RGE 03 BAAP 30 FT W & 132 FT S OF NE COR
S 1/2 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 TH RUN W 130 FT THE S 132 FT TH
E 130 FT TH N 132 FT TPB LESS N 55 FT THOF SUBJ ESE PUD
IF ANY
LOT AREA AND ZONING
LOT AREA: 0.39 AC (17,160± SF) TOTAL
ZONING: BD3
JURISDICTION
EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PROJECT DIRECTORY
OWNER AND DEVELOPER
SEATTLE LUXURY HOMES
557 ROY STREET #125
SEATTLE, WA 98109
ARCHITECT + APPLICANT
CITIZEN DESIGN
10 DRAVUS STREET
SEATTLE, WA 98109
CONTACT: JACOB YOUNG
TEL: 206.853.8055
EMAIL: JYOUNG@COLLABORATIVECO.COM
CIVIL ENGINEER + SURVEYOR
DAVIDO CONSULTING GROUP
15029 BOTHELL WAY NE #600
LAKE FOREST PARK, WA 98155
CONTACT: TIM GABELEIN, PE
TEL: 206.523.0024
EMAIL: TIM@DCGENGR.COM
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
TBD
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
TBD
Z
O
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
TBD
U
DRAWING INDEX
Ir-n
A1.1
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
7
A1.2
A1.3
CONCEPTUAL SITE SECTIONS
VICINITY MAP
L
O
A1.4
A2.1
CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN
BUILDINGS A&B FLOOR PLANS
V
A2.2
A3.1
BUILDING C FLOOR PLANS
RENDERINGS & RENDERED ELEVATIONS
A3.2
RENDERINGS
A3.3
CHARACTER STUDY
O
C01
CONCEPTUAL GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN
1-1.0
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
O
1 OF 1
SURVEY
7
m V
CITIZEN
DESIGN
z ' r W
O z
� Q W
Of
Ld
j
Q
N I—
z L0
O Z
U L
w
z .o
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1� Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
CONCEPTUAL
SITE PLAN
3
LD
0
o:
Lm
m
co
Y
R
a
m
c
a.
0
a)
c
a)
2
a
N
a)
N
fC
t
a
3
C
C
O
U
0
N
a>
o:
tm
aD
O
N
a>
�a
t
a
0
aD
c
�a
a
72
t
x
w
c
(D
t
u
r
Q
SCALE: AS NOTED
1 ■
Packet Pg. 40
AVG (E) GRADE CALCS
BUILDING A
83.5'+ 84.5'+ 83.0'+ 83.3'= 334.3'
334.3' / 4 = 83.575' = 83.58'
BUILDING B
84.6'+ 85.2'+ 80.0'+ 83.8'= 333.6'
333.6' / 4 = 83.40'
BUILDING C
82.4'+ 75.9'+ 73.5'+ 72.0'= 303.8'
303.8' / 4 = 75.95'
BUILDING A
= 83.0'± EG = 83.3'±
U
U
EG =
BUILDING B
=snn'+-
EG = 82.4'± EG = 75.9'±
U U
- BUILDING C
EG = 73.5'± \/ ' EG = 72.0'±
HEIGHT LIMIT DIAGRAM
SCALE: 1" = 20'
R
110
BUILDING C HT LIMIT: 105.95'± a -
100
90
80
BUILDING C AVG GRADE: 75.95'±
70
BUILDING A R
BUILDING C
0
rn FFE:104.0'±
ROOF: 101.0'±
0
q °' FFE: 95.0'±
FFE: 92.0'±
o_
� N
FFE: 82.5'± COMM. FFE: 83.01±
C /
- oo__-,. FFE: 74.0'+
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
R
110
BUILDING C HT LIMIT: 105.95± -
100
i
90
80
BUILDING C AVG GRADE: 75.95'± -
70
BUILDING B R
BUILDING C -
i9 -
. - . - . 00 FFE:104.9'±
ROOF: 101.0'±
0 CO FFE:96.4'±
a' FFE:92.0'±
0
COMM. FFE: 84.4'±
FFE: 82.5'±
bo=-FFE:74.0'± ------
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
BUILDING A BUILDING B
BUILDING A HT LIMIT: 113.58'±
110 0 00
FFE: 104.0'± FFE: 104.9'±
100 ' _
a>
FFE: 95.0'± FFE: 96.4'±
Leo O N
90 o
(V
COMM. FFE: 83.0'± COMM. FFE: 84.4'±
BUILDING A AVG GRADE: 83.58'± - - -
- LINE OF COMMERCIAL 77
70 FLOOR
I
(7� TRANSVERSE SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
BUILDING C HT LIMIT: 105.95'±
10(
9(
8(
BUILDING C AVG GRADE: 75.95'±
7(
R
R R
TRANSVERSE SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
GL
BUILDING A HT LIMIT: 113.58'±
BUILDING A AVG GRADE: 83.58'±
BUILDING B HT LIMIT: 113.40'±
BUILDING B AVG GRADE: 83.40'±
BUILDING B HT LIMIT: 113.40'±
BUILDING B AVG GRADE: 83.40'±
so
CITIZEN
DESIGN
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1i Revision 1 04/23/21
z
O
U
N�
L.L
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
V J
z
O CONCEPTUAL
U I SITE SECTIONS
It AND DIAGRAMS
0 SCALE: AS NOTED
0 10 20 40
ill =20' 0 Al ■
2
Packet Pg. 41
OLYMPIC VIEW EDMONDS HAMBURGER HARRYS BUS STOP
APARTMENTS AUTOBODY SHOP RESTAURANT 5TH AVE S & HOWELL WY
4 il�
k _
P
-•
r .
•. —r9 ,. will
o.
IN
�J
HOWELL WAY I t +
r _
NEEL
,L1 I Ill II II II
Y
•
1 . a I : loom
• _ �}
4W
J
p• a r e
ml
. 1w
■� ■ ti ,.ni: HOMELAND DR
w ' #
PROJECT SITE EXTENTS
,
RIF Jillio - 614-616 5TH AVENUE S
_ E --•
-.
- _ d
[-,
T
I
-
r
Y
I J Y
P w=
m ,�
n a
r
Z -� -
Yh.
•
-th
•
tn
Y
rY
- J1-
• - �.` •
r
`' H E M LOCK WAY.
J r..
-
-. +
ar
II
•
•
a �-
CITIZEN
DESIGN
D
o:
N
0
Y
R
a
m
a
Y°
C
2
V
a
O
N
N
O
0
�
a
Q
vj
0
0
0
Z
U
O
o:
vi
Z w
O Z
Q w
=
Q
ON
W
N
Z �
t
O Z
U
a
L
w
N
a
72
City of EDMONDS
x
w
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
E
April 2, 2021
a
1N Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: AS NOTED
Al 0
1 Packet Pg. 42
2.1.f
EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE
WALL SCONCE
WALL SCONCES ARE LOCATED ALONG THE EAST (5TH AVENUE)
FACADE OF BUILDINGS A AND B. THEY ARE ALSO UTILIZED
THROUGHOUT THE INTERIOR OF THE SITE TO ILLUMINATE THE
PEDESTRIAN PASS -THROUGH AND BUILDING C'S ENTRIES
FROM THE MOTOR COURT. FINALLY, THEY ARE PROVIDED ON
THE SOUTH FACADES OF BUILDINGS A AND C TO PROVIDE
LIGHT IN THE ABUTTING ALLEY.
"CARSON" BY REJUVENATION HARDWARE (OR EQUAL)
— MAX. WATTAGE: 30OW
PROPOSED LAMP: 15W LED (1500 LUMENS)
SURFACE MOUNT
SURFACE MOUNT FIXTURES ARE LOCATED ON THE
UNDERSIDES OF THE ENTRY CANOPIES TO PROVIDE
LIGHT AT EACH UNIT ENTRY.
"REEL" BY ACCESS LIGHTING (OR EQUAL)
WATTAGE: 15W
INTEGRATED LAMP: 15W LED (1200 LUMENS)
STRING LIGHTS
STRING LIGHTS ARE PROPOSED IN THE PEDESTRIAN
PASS -THROUGH TO PROVIDE BOTH ILLUMINATION AND
AMBIENCE.
"S14" BY BULBRITE (OR EQUAL)
MAX. WATTAGE: 120OW
PROPOSED LAMP: (15) 11 W INCANDESCENT
(1125 LUMENS TOTAL)
IBM
CITIZEN
DESIGN
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1i Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
CONCEPTUAL
LIGHTING PLAN
SCALE: AS NOTED
CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN
SCALE: N/A
Al 04
Packet Pg. 43
61'-0"
20'-4"
61'-0"
2.1.f
0
M
O
O
61'-0"
20'-4"
4 I'_A 4 M" V
20'-4"
t
PHASE 1A (ELEVATOR):
(3)3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.31±
AGLA: 1735± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 500± SF (EA)
20'-4"
CD
co FFE: FFE: FFE: FFE: FFE: FFE:
QA All QA All QA All QA All QA All QA All
ol
20'-4"
01 14'-1 1 /2" 6'-6"
20'-4"
'-3 1 /2" 7'-0 1 /2" 13
0
0
0
o ao
0
co
O
i
61'-0"
61'-0"
L
13'-3 1 /2"
PHASE 1B:
(3) 3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.4'±
AGLA: 1220± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 602± SF (EA)
CITIZEN
DESIGN
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1L Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: AS NOTED
BUILDING A FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0"
W
BUILDING B FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0"
W
A201
Packet Pg. 44
16-5 1 /2"
FFE:
74.0'±
FFE:
74.0'±
FFE:
74.0'±
FFE:
74.0'±
131'-8"
FFE:
74.0'±
FFE:
74.0'±
FFE7 ' FFE-.FFE:
FFE:
74.0'±
131'-8"
16-5 1 /2"
9'-5 i /2" 7'-0" J
FFE: FFE: F FFE. F FFE. F FFE.
82.5'± 82.5'± 82.5'± 82.5'± 82.5'±
C�l C�l C�l cc C�l 01
N [+ 1+
i--7O
4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0" .�-
' 4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN
H. J J- F E4, F J D J F J 13 F
F- F- F- F- F-_3 F-
J J J J J J J J J J J J J
LIVING LIVING LIVING LIVING LIVING E:l LIVING LIVING
V >
V 0 \, 0
BALCONY
16-5 1 /2"
10'-5"
BALCONY
BALCONY
BALCONY
131'-8 1 /2"
BALCONY
BALCONY
KITCHEN
J
BALCONY
F-
L-
FFE:
73.5'±
4'-0"
- Z)
KITCHEN
F J
BALCONY
J
rim
1
rew
� I MAM
I
, 10
0 mt4 4
M. BATH
M. BATH
11'-9 1/2"
.17 16-5 1 /2"
BUILDING C FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0"
W
c-
(8) 2 BEDROOM UNITS
PHASE 1C:
(8) 3—STORY TH (INC. BSMT)
FOOTPRINT AREA: 3960± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 78.3'±
AGLA: 1320± SF (EA)
GARAGE/BSMT: 495± SF (EA)
CITIZEN
DESIGN
U
05
0
w
/ e U5
Z 1 r z
w
0 Ili
F- Q W
c a
0 111 I—
Z LLI Lc)
O z %0
U
W EZL .0
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1L Revision 1 04/23/21
z
O
U
V)
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
z
O
U
FLOOR PLANS
L.L
O
H SCALE: AS NOTED
I --I
O
z
Packet Pg. 45
BUILDING A (BEYOND)
FIBERGLASS WINDOWS
AND DOORS (BLACK)
(N) TREES PER USCAPE.
SOME TREES NOT
SHOWN FOR CLARITY.
OVERHANGING EAVE
W/ CORBEL BRACKETS
PANEL SIDING
(LIGHT GRAY)
(N) STREET TREES
PER USCAPE
PLANTERS PER USCAPE
BUILDING C
WEST RENDERED ELEVATION
SCALE: NTS
EAST RENDERED ELEVATION
SCALE: NTS
ffi- — qbia. �si�,
'ter
sf� r.-
BUILDINGS A & B VIEWED FROM NORTHEAST
SCALE: NTS
BUILDING B (BEYOND)
METAL GUARDRAIL (BLACK)
VERTICAL SIDING (GRAY)
DETAIL BAND (BLACK)
METAL BALCONY (BLACK)
WALL SCONCE
BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES)
METAL COLUMN (BLACK)
STILES AND RAILS
ADDED FOR DEPTH
FIBERGLASS WINDOWS
AND DOORS (BLACK)
DETAIL BAND (LIGHT GRAY)
BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES)
METAL CANOPY (BLACK)
WALL SCONCE
DECORATIVE MEDALLION
DETAILED CONCRETE PLINTH
SOUTH RENDERED ELEVATION
SCALE: NTS
BUILDING A BUILDING C
NORTH RENDERED ELEVATION
SCALE: NTS
BUILDING A VIEWED FROM EAST
SCALE: NTS
T'
PANEL SIDING (LIGHT GRAY)
DETAIL BAND (LIGHT GRAY)
BRICK VENEER SIDING
(EARTH TONES)
WALL SCONCE
CONCRETE PLINTH
RETAINING WALL (CONC)
METAL GUARDRAIL (BLACK)
DETAIL BAND (BLACK)
VERTICAL SIDING (GRAY)
METAL COLUMN (BLACK)
BRICK VENEER SIDING
(EARTH TONES)
CITIZEN
DESIGN
o:
Lm
0
co
Y
L
a
m
c
a.
L
O
0)
r—
�L
a�
2
a
O
N
N
O
y
u,
0
all
Q
c
vj
Z,
0
0
0
U
Z
O
.y
W
o:
N
Z W
O_ Z
Q W
2
Q
o
N
w ~
y
z
O
a
U Z
W
j
a
LO
City of EDMONDS
x
w
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
E
April 2, 2021
r
a
1i Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
RENDERINGS
AND RENDERED
ELEVATIONS
SCALE: AS NOTED
A301
Packet Pg. 46
Aw
=. m
eF
* J
�No - �; �r
awl.
z_ y
-1
r
`-ter
p
FM
A _ -m rr
00,40.
i�
,
mw Frtil
, �
y�
FR°
3 �
AW
Ill 10[C%4&TiIMUTAaB»:1011IT15.`folImIl: WTA=2 :il1I■D]1 0 leffeLTIIM11//a0
_- Kiq
_
�_- �-
10
pppppp�
Y
st
65,
_
1
PROMINEl'
CORNICE
TOP
METAL CANOPIES
GROUND LEVEL DETAILS
CHARACTER STUDY
SCALE: NTS
PLINTH ORNAMENTAL LIGHTING DECORATIVE MEDALLION BULKHEAD
PLANTER BOXES
CITIZEN
DESIGN
a
�K 0
z
0
� o
vw
vi
z ry w
o �
Q w
j ^
� L>
1 a
w ~ z
0
U L
W
z �O
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1i Revision 1 04/23/21
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
CHARACTER
STUDY
SCALE: AS NOTED
A303
Packet Pg. 48
1
2
3
rd
5
A w B
20 10 0 20 40
SCALE IN FEET
KEY NOTES:
DETAIL/
KEY
NOTE
SHEET
0
REM EX UGP FROM SNOPUD VAULT
-
O2
CONNECT TO EX PRIMARY POWER
-
O3
PROPOSED BURIED PHONE LINE
-
4O
PROPOSED TRANSFORMER
-
O5
NEW WATER SERVICE TO BLDG
-
OREUSE
EX WATER METER AND
SERVICE IF SIZED APPROPRIATELY
-
WATER SERVICE
ONEW
CONNECTION TO MAIN
-
ONEW
WATER METER
-
O9
NEW SEWER CONNECTION TO MAIN
-
NEW FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION
10
TO MAIN
-
11
CONFIRM STORM LOCATION AND
REMOVE OR RELOCATE AS
-
NECESSARY
12
TAX PARCEL BOUNDARY
-
REUSE EX WATER SERVICE IF
13
SIZED APPROPRIATELY
-
THE TWO TAX PARCELS WITHIN
14
"PARCEL A", (A SINGLE LOT) TO BE
CONSOLODATED AS PART OF THIS
-
PROJECT
15
PROPOSED CB
-
50'L x 15'W INFILTRATION FACILITY
G(1.0'
G
DEEP) PROVIDING 100%
INFILTRATION OF PHASE 1C ROOF
-
RUNOFF
39.51 x 19'W INFILTRATION
17
FACILITY (1.0' DEEP) PROVIDING
100% INFILTRATION OF PHASE 1A &
-
1 B ROOF RUNOFF
18
CONNECT TO EX CB
-
19
PROPOSED SSSCO
-
20
NEW FIRE SERVICE METER
-
21
REMOVE EX DRIVEWAY APPROACH
& REPLACE WITH SIDEWALK AND
-
CURB & GUTTER
22
PROPOSED CURB WALL
-
23
PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN
-
FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION
GNEW
G
TO BLDG
-
REMOVE ALL EX TREES ON -SITE
25
(TYP)
-
ROOF RUNOFF TO ROUTE TO
26
INFILTRATION FACILITY
-
27
PROPOSED SDCO
-
6 PERFORATED PVC LAID FLAT
28
(TYP)
-
29
6" SD @ 2.00% MIN (TYP)
-
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW FROM
30
INFILTRATION FACILITY TO
CONNECT TO STORM SYSTEM IN
-
ALLEY
oz
LEGEND:
10
U)q
p N
N
� g
CONCRETE
o� 6
a
o
ASPHALT ROADWAY
> ui
QW
�m
J
LANDSCAPE
p
U' LL
Z z
PERMEABLE PAVEMENT
O
SURFACING
N
ON
6 Z75 1110.
U)ui
=
INFILTRATION FACILITY
oo
z -i
oQ
2z
ABBREVIATIONS:
LS
=LAND SURVEYOR
< °
OHP
= OVERHEAD POWER
a
Z X
X
BLDG = BUILDING
PL
= PROPERTY LINE
U W 7
BM = BENCHMARK
PVI
=POINT OF VERTICAL
w coBOTS
= BOTTOM OF STEP(S)
INTERSECTION
Q W
CB =CATCH BASIN
ROW
= RIGHT OF WAY
CL =CENTERLINE
SD
= STORM DRAIN
CW =CONCRETE WALK
SDCO
= STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT
a
= °o
cn
DRN =FOOTING DRAIN
SDFM
= STORM DRAIN FORCE
m
EG = EXISTING GRADE
MAIN
N
o
EL = ELEVATION
SDMH
= STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
N
ELEV = ELEVATION
SS
= SANITARY SEWER
ESMT = EASEMENT
SSMH
= SANITARY SEWER
Y w
EX =EXISTING
MANHOLE
� 'a o
FF =FINISHED FLOOR
SSS
= SANITARY SIDE SEWER
o
FG = FINISHED GRADE
SSSCO
= SANITARY SIDE SEWER
z co
w -iFL
J W
=FLOW LINE
CLEANOUT
`'' W >
��..
G =GAS
TOC
= TOP OF CURB
w m o
HMA = HOT MIX ASPHALT
TOPS
= TOP OF STEP(S)
ID = INNER DIAMETER
TYP
= TYPICAL
Z o o
IE = INVERT ELEVATION
W
=WATER
J � e)
LF = LINEAL FEET
WDF
= WOOD FENCE
i
l-O
U Q Q
A m B
D w E
I
I
I
I
I
I
Iw
z
\w
I NOTE:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OVERLAPS
INTO RIGHT OF WAY OF 4TH STREET
PARKVIEW TWIN, A CONDOMINIUM
517 4TH AVE S
F
PARK PLACE EDMONDS, A CONDO
400 HOWELL WAY
G
CB RIM
=72.98
4" PVC W IE=72.18
4" PVC N IE=72.18
Li
4
19
1
I
I
1 �
1
L
-
�
o�
1
/
15
15
L
L
■
■
/
-UT
/
7
-1
/
I
I
L
J
\
PHASE 1C-
q C
GARAGE FF 74 o
0
\
LEVEL 1 FF 83.90
K
L
- - - L
U)
W
16
5
\ �
\
0
I
27
t
26 J
°
1
24
UT
ASPHALT \
28
\
�'
I
U)
\
U)
\
cn
L
J
�
o
�
SSMH RIM =62.75 ♦ sao\ 15 - 25 J 19 W
CTR C PAN -57.70 _ _ - \� \ / sBsa U)
�\
38 63' � � \ - \ \ � ■ ■
131.37
37 N89°54'04"W - - - - - - - _ - - N89°54'04"W -
\ \ ASPHALT A LEY \ \
b N 1596VERLAP b CB RIM =62.60 ss \ \
CD (SMH �SS \1S�8
N 10" CONP6E=60.70 KASEMENT 760310 239 I
c SD SD / SD D # $� SD
S89°54'04"E � � / SEE EXCEPTION / S89°54'04
rt, 38.63' - i - - J 1261.37'
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC CB
531 4TH AVE S
30
d 1 S
\ C FR ANN-63.08
sn� S 1SS �1 S ^ SS -
s SD 1SD
"E 9
d cn CB RIM =69.29
1 1 6" CON N IE=67.04
.1
ONE BALLARD LLC
610 5TH AVE S
I I- - j
L_ �
OMN -�
UT 0
L�--
c
-G)
qn
L_ 1
GP �JGP
27 -1
F
C
w-
.. UGP
PHASE 1B
LEVEL 1 FF 84.40
1 UT
L�
23 15 0 27 1 I
-r 22 �T �S 1 1 S
- SD
30 I 3 1
D
PK REAL PR PERTY LLC
622 5TH AVE S
CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE & UTILITY PLAN
SCALE: 1 " = 20'
C D E F G H
V c
dQ
z // SS S rn si
' 4
0
I �
/ 8 .94
0 / S MH C
� d
CB RIM =84.18
8" PVC W IE=82.68
6" PVC N IE=82.78
a
SS
CB RIM =84.79
8" PVC W IE=82.89
CB RIM =84.39
8" PVC W IE=82.89
SSMH RIM=85.68
CTR CHANN IE=80.48
SDMH RIM =86.94
18" CON S IE=86.34
18" CONC N IE=82.14
GENERAL NOTES:
K
� z
Y
W
Q W W
J J 1--W ¢ C�
d d <006 W
C7 (.0 (D CD W f)f
�Lu
N W(V W W Dm�
W W co S O W
W W ~ Q U �
ZM Z"t °d0OZU)
Z U❑ z �C7zWZ
O W z� z
7)¢W F-
H F- � H W 0 Z OZ U
W! w IZ O W W li
w2 wv�<W
U)00 co OQuj0U
zv zv �w>>�
O3: O3: o-jWoz
v) w v) W WWI:
Ir�~
-D
W w W W U o2S m O m
Q ❑ 0
0 W W
W z0
m H � O 0 Q
0 3:cm cm Q Q
W 0 0
1-- N N
Q Lo L
❑ N N
O O W a
z a a -i
Lo
Lo
00
rn
W
Q
z
�
E
o
(0
N -
U
d
O O
N
O
Q)
co m
O CDN
N
m O
O
Ln Ln
0
m O
W
O M-P
N O
N
ON
3:CD
:=
NO
3
Lo U)
dig
3
aD
d
o:
aY
10
v
Y
a
aD
n.
0
a�
L
m
x
3
a
N
�PMIN J./O
a
OF
WASy/�OO��
7
co 2
EL
A
0
O
('44i
54904 GISTE��v
\
Tess ONAL
y
aD
a�
c
m
x
0
N
d
cn
m
m
a
L.
�°
Z
w
J
a
Lo
J
I-
x
w
w
rn
z 3:
W
�
w
a
^
U) �
Q
Cw
G
(n
ILL,J
\w 0
/
Q
O
Q
Q
w
w
W
w
Ln
Q
Z
Ln
t
�^^
Y
�
1
00
w
U
z
O
U
1. ALL STORMWATER TO BE INFILTRATED ON -SITE. WATER
QUALITY TREATMENT TO BE PROVIDED BY NATIVE SOILS W w
MEETING SOIL PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL SUITABILITY z o
PROPERTIES FOR TREATMENT OR ENGINEERED SOILS LAYER O a
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSC-6 VOLUME III, CHAPTER 3, SECTION PROJ. MANAGER: Bi
3.3.7 OF THE 2014 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR DESIGNED BY: iv
WESTERN WASHINGTON. DRAWN BY: RB
2. ALL UNITS WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A NFPA 13D
CHECKED BY: 131
FLOW -THROUGH FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
J
SCALE: AS SHOWN
REV. SHEET
1
12/9/2020 A OF
2
APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION SHEET NUMBER
CITY OF EDMONDS
DATE: c ol
BY:
CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION
K Packet Pg. 49
2.1.f
REFERENCE IMAGES
TREES
Y.
ACER CIRC/NATUM I VINE MAPLE [4]
ACER RUBRUN I SCARLET SENTINEL MAPLE [3]
='t
a
4 J t ' --
PICEA OMOR/KA I SERBAIN SPRUCE [9]
J � L
SHRUBS
HYDRANGEA MACROPHYLLA 'PIA' I COMPACT
MOPHEAD HYDRANGEA
VIBURNUM DAVIDII I DAVID VIBURNUM
PERENNIAL
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOL/A I ENGLISH LAVENDER
GROUNDCOVER
JUN/PERUS HORIZONTALIS 'W/LTONII' I BLUE CARPET JUNIPER
r
� D
a
rL5TH AVENUE S
SCARLET SENTINEL
°°o°o °°° ° o000 00° opoo oo° °
MAPLE (TYP.)
c o c
00 0 00 0 0o v o cX
000 � o 000 � o
0 0
00
0 0
0
00 0°0 00 0°0 o0
° o ° °
pa� o �° oaa o°°g �° '0a 0°°o
So ° So ° So °
COMPACT MOPHEAD COMPACT MOPHEAD
HYDRANGEA (TYP.) HYDRANGEA (TYP.)
I
I I
I
I
a al '
La---------�---J
L---�---J
1
J
a
a a v
a
_
a
a
a
a
c 4 Q 4
a
a
U ry
Z w
Lu 0
Co Z
W
Q
J
_
U)
= J
U C�
Z Z
ul u1
[o I .
a - a
a a ° a
°a a
a �
a a
a a
a a
a
l! �
a
a VINE MAPLE SERBIAN SPRUCE-," a a
(TYP.) zj
(TYP.) a
°°°O 1$G° °°°0 °0°G° °°°°o a00 a� 00°0 ���"`°"""a0 °0°0 0�°° °p°0 0$00 p°0oZ
p°0 o0 ° °°0 00 ° 7 o0q0 °0°0 0na° . a ° ° ° a o a ° ° O a ° a 0 0 ° ° 0 °
� sae tl"o sae tl"o sae ?v °a° ?v 0
4 ° ° ° 4 ° ° 4 ° c o ° ° 0 ° c o ° ° 0 ° c o o
° o 00 ° °o a° ° o a° 0 ° ° °° °° °° °° °°
0 0 0 0 ° 0 0.D 0 0 yo oQ 0 0 0
o �� o �� o0 00 oo oo oAo oo o� q oo oo 00
00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000 00 000. 00 000 00 00o a� �� 00 000 .
°pO000 �So upOo«> ° uaOZ«>o 'So ° °°°moo So ° ° °�� no °°° �So °° °°° a:
�� ° o o ° ° ��o ° o ° o
0 °° u% o° ° °� u o c c ° a� o o �'o u �p u o "- ° n�
1 o a o o g o a pcP °��' u g � °° a o o g °° o 0 o g !b o °0-00 o g `��� �r o oho � o o��OcP1 ° � o g � oo a o o R �° °°�l�o R R�� !E o r°SIP
DAVID o $oo°° o $oo°° o $oo°° o $oo°° o $00°° o $oo°° o $oo ° ° o $oo°° o $oo°° DAVID o o $oo°° o $oo°° o
VIBURNUM (TYP.) BLUE CARPET NEW 6 HIGH WbOD FENCE
JUNIPER (TYP. VIBURNUM (TYP.)
GROUND COVER)
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 10'
2
D
D a
p a
a
pQ
Q
RETAINING WALL
Q
O
it
Lu
CITIZEN
DESIGN
Z 0� w
O_ ZD
Z
W
j n
Of
Q
F _
(n W Z L0
O 7 �O
U L
i
W
Z %O
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW PH. 2
April 2, 2021
1i Revision 1 04/23/21
z
O
U
rU) FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
V /
z
O CONCEPTUAL
U LANDSCAPE
PLAN
O SCALE: AS NOTED
0 10 20 40
jj dh
0 Im
l„=20' O •
z
Packet Pg. 50
2.1.f
W
LLJ
V) a
X
= o E
J 47 In =
p>-
c000N
1�wwI
Q
QF-Fwz
z O w W
M_jWIL D><
NORTHEAST QOF. THE NORTHEAST UARTE R LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. ORDER NIO, 500026739SDATEDEAPRIL 28,T. A.01 MMITMENT,
CITY OF EDMONDS, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON Parcel A:
Beginning at a point 30 feet West and 132 feet South of the Northeast corner
of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
V, Northeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, W-M-;
thence running West 130 feet;
CB RIM =72,98 thence South 132 feet;
4" PVC W IE=72.18 thence East 130 feet;
4" PVC N IE-72.1 thence North 132 feet to the Point of Beginning.
=
Parcel B:
Beginning at a point 30 feet West and 264 feet South of the Northeast corner
PARK PLACE EDMONDS, A CONDO ONE BALLARD LL i of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
610 5TH AVE S Northeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, W.M.;
400 HOWI=LL WAY thence South 20 feet, more or less, to the North line of Lot 12, Block 2, City
as 8 CONCRETE WAL Park Addition to Edmonds, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 9
e.
77
N89'54'04"W i of Plats, page 10, records of Snohomish County, Washington;
a
ONE STORY BUILDING I € thence West along the North line of Lots 12 and 1, said Block 2 and said line
li 614 5TH AVE. S. extended for 300 feet; thence North 20 feet, more or less, to the South line of
TFT
FFE=84.05' the North 264 feet of said South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
0 o Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 26;
L.•,.... thence East along said South line for 300 feet to the Point of Beginning.
o i In �n in e County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
I
a Situateth
i
I 307 z
I SCHEDULE B SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
CB RIM``, 82.22
o ! » i i I i a CB RIM =84.18 1. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,
I i 10 CON ,W IE=j80.42 8" PVC W IE=82.68 as granted in a document:
I f 4" CONC E IE=;80.62 I 6" PVC N IE=82.78
o Granted to: Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County
ASPHALT PARKING `° I Purpose: Underground electric transmission and/or distribution system
rr= Recording Date: April 30, 1971
so o sn Recording No.: 2194686
f ^ so Affects: Parcel A
GRASS I PARVE/ /t The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record.
oil. L /9 �
2, Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,
o as granted in a document:
LW
CB RIM =84.79
8" VC W IE=82.89
Purpose: Ingress and egress
I
i Recording Date: March 10, 1976.
P
o N o I �w POST j Recording No.: 7603100239
W Affects: Portion of Parcel N 0
r7 O ;
ASPHALT` e
cf)o 0 0 3. Rights of the public, if any, in and to that portion of Parcel B which lies within 4th Street.
NOTE: c .
CON.C. "WALK N o CB RIM =84.39
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OVERLAPS ,� O 4. Easement contained in amended and restated Declaration for Porkview Twin
INTO RIGHT OF WAY OF 4TH STREET 8 PVC W IE=82.89 Condominium recorded under recording no. 200512080249 reciting that easement
�, U? over parcel B is an exclusive easement.
a�
Q ,
\ w n 5. Payment of the real estate excise tax, if required. The Land is situated within
2 STORY CONC. BLOCK BUILDING �^ the boundaries of the City of Edmonds. Present rate of real estate excise tax as
of the date herein is 1.78%.
PARKVIEW TWIN A CONDOMINIUM o 616 5TH AVE. S.
C RIM =69.54 FFE=85.26 MAIN I Any conveyance document must be accompanied by the official Washington State Excise
517 4TH AVE S 6 CON S IE=67.84 FFE=76.59' ALLEY Tax Affidavit. The applicable excise tax must be paid and the affidavit approved at the
Etime of the recording of the conveyance documents.
SSMH RIM =6 .Z5 6. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid
CTR HA N=.S .70 �n SSMH RIM=85.68 on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not
= include interest and penalties):
38.63' 131.37' CTR CH AN N I E— 48 p
_j clud e s
N89'S4'04"W N89'54'04 i o Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 270326-001-009-00 Levy Code: 00210
a I 8Q
API -TALI ALLEY• Assessed Value —Land: $351,100.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: $79,900.00
N _ — =69.68 p
o ( OVERLAP 0 CB RIM =62.6_Q._. - <s SSMH RIM — PARCEL
U
0 CTR CHANN=63.08 CID
._ ss ss ss ss ss ss ss 7. General and Special Taxes: Billed: $4,738.22 Paid: $0.00 Unpaid: $4,738.22
o o p �s; SDMH RIM = 86.94 p p
N o Q V) 0 Sj0„ cn"N�I^ F IF=60 7� EASEMENT 760 �100239,: Sp � o U � 18" CON S IE-86.34 Affects: Portion of Parcel A
589'54'04"E SEE EXCEPTION 4 S89'54'04" E
18' CONC N IE=82.14 General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half
38.63' ;.... 261.3T UP E unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year
(amounts do not include interest and penalties):
PK REAL PROPERTY LLC r Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 270326-001-029-00 Levy Cade: 00210
Assessed Value —Land: 488 200.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: 135 800.00
s
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLG -- -- 622 5TH AVE S � � p $
531 4TH AVE S a General and Special Taxes: Billed: $6,859.98 Paid: $0.00 Unpaid: $6,559.98
Affects: Remainder of Parcel A
CB RIM =69.29 � ". _..�_..'
6" CON N IE=67.04 8. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first
10" CONC W 67.0 29 half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year
8" CONC S IE-66.69 (amounts do not include interest and penalties):
Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 270326-001-023-00 Levy Code: 00210
Assessed Value —Land: $44,800.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: $0.00
General and Special Taxes: Billed: $492.51 Paid: $0.00 Unpaid: $492.51
Affects: Parcel B
NOTES. 9. Liability, if any, for personal property taxes pursuant to RCW 84.56.070 wherein
no sale can be made without prepayment of said tax, including advance tax. For
LEGEND HORIZONTAL DATUM: ASSUMED CARDINAL BEARING NORTH FOR THE CENTERLINE OF further information, please call the Snohomish County Treasurer's Office at (425)388-3307.
3RD AVENUE SOUTH.
10. A tax lien for the amount shown and any other amounts due, in favor of the
N WATER VALVE VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. HELD SNOHOMISH COUNTY MONUMENT #2066 FORA United States of America, assessed by the District Director of Internal Revenue.
-b- HYDRANT PUBLISHED ELEVATION OF 79.226 FEET. BENCHMARK IS 2" IRON PIPE WITH
® WATER METER LEAD/TACK IN CASE 140 FEET MORE OR LESS SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF Taxpayer: William P. Brust, owner of record Brust Development Company, L.L.C.
QS Q❑ MANHOLES (SS/SD) WALNUT STREET AND 5TH AVENUE SOUTH. Amount: 11,333,265.83 Recording Date: December 14, 2010
CB Recording No.: 201012140477
El -0- POWER UTILITY POLE CENTER LINES SITE AREA: PARCEL A= 17,160 SQ. FT. OR 0.39 ACRES AND PARCEL B= 5227 SQ.
/ PROPERTY LINES FT. OR 0.12 ACRES WITH AN ADDITIONAL 773 SO, FT. BY LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT Any unrecorded leaseholds, right of vendors and holders of security interests on
GUY ANCHOR RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES FALLS IN 4TH AVENUE SOUTH personal property installed upon the Land and rights of tenants to remove trade
POWER TRANSFORMER — — LOT LINES fixtures at the expiration of the terms.
©FT POWER/TELEPHONE VAULT DITCH LINE ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
—► — FLOW LINE
M PM POWER METER w WATER LINE THE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Of ALL SURVEY MARKERS SHOWN HEREON ARE
❑ TELEPHONE/TV RISER ss SANITARY SEWER LINE BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATIONS TAKEN IN JULY ,2015, UNLESS OTHERWISE
ID GAS VALVE SD STORM DRAIN LINE INDICATED.
GAS LINE
❑O GAS METER P UNDERGROUND POWER LINES WORK PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS SURVEY UTILIZED THE FOLLOWING SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION.
STREET LIGHT UT UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINES EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES: (A) 1" TRIMBLE S6 SERIES ELECTRONIC TOTAL TO HOME STREET BANK AND CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY:
❑�❑ LUMINAIRE uTV UNDERGROUND CABLE TV LINES STATION, MAINTAINED TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS PER W.A.C.
X SPOT ELEVATION UFO UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC LINES 332-130-100. (B) FIELD TRAVERSE, EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE
n SIGN P OVERHEAD POWER LINES W.A.C. 332-130-090. MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR
a MAILBOX OHL OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS,
—o o o c o — CHAIN LINK FENCE LTHISOCATED
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DRAWING ACCURATELY PRESENTS SURFACE FEATURES AND INCLUDES ITEMS 2, 4, 7(81), 8, 9, 11(A), 13, 14, 16, AND 18 OF TABLE A THEREOF.
ROCKERY — x — x x x x — WIRE FENCE LOCATED DURING THE COURSE OF THIS SURVEY. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
CONIFEROUS TREE U L a WOOD FENCE HEREON ARE BASED SOLELY UPON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND PACE THE FIELD WORAS COMP TED ON AUGUST 4, 2015.
F7
ENGINEERS, INC. DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY OR ASSUME LIABILITY FOR
GRAPHIC SCALE THEIR ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS. CONTRACTOR/ENGINEERS SHALL VERIFY DA 5jVjR AP.v/� ________
DECIDUOUS TREE EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
—� A
20 0 20 40 CALL FOR LOCATE: UTILITY LOCATION SERVICE: 811
19 FOUND CASED MONUMENT
SITE PARKING: THE SITE HAS 15 PARKING STALLS.
SET
H D. O'HAR PLS CERTIFICATE NUMBER 38985
SET MAGNETIC NAIL W/ WASHER ( IN FEET' NO OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF EARTH MOVING WORK, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR o
BUILDING ADDITIONS WITHIN RECENT MONTHS. 0 88985
SET 5/8" IRON REBAR W ___-- 1 inch = 20 ft.
PLASTIC CAP STAMPED L S. #------ NO OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF SITE USE AS A SOLID WASTE DUMP, SUMP OR `�lONA�sLT"�a"
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. SANITARY LANDFILL.
PORTION OF: NE 1 /4, NE 1 /4, SECTION 26, T. 27 N., R. 3 E., W.M. 7
DATE 7/17/2015 PROJECT NO.
CAD/CALC SDO 11255 Kirkland Way, Suite 300 � A.L.T.A. /ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY
Kirkland, WA 98033 SCALE 1�� =20
DRAWN p.425,827.2014 f.425-827,5043 5TH AND HOWELL WAY SURVEY TEAM PG FOR 15451
PLAT CHK SDo Civil j Structural Planning EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Survey FIELD BOOK 696 HOME STREET BANK
SWEET OF
SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D An Engineering Services Company paceengrs.com DWG FILE 15451—ALTA.DWG
Packet Pg. 51
2.1.g
CITY OF EDMONDS
COURTESY NOTICE OF CONTINUED
PUBLIC HEARING
`I? , l sy%)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pine Park 614 is a proposal for three buildings containing six live/work
units and eight residential units at 614 and 616 5th Ave. S. The
live/work units will be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5th
Avenue (Buildings A and B) while the eight -unit building will be behind
the live/work buildings and face west (Building C). Drive aisles west of
the buildings would load from the private alley south of the site. To
accommodate the new project, the existing improvements on the site
will be removed and a subdivision will be required to create a lot line
between Buildings A & B and Building C.
The project site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial (BD3).
District -based design review projects that require a SEPA determination
are Type III -A decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and
decision by the Architectural Design Board (ADB).
PROJECT LOCATION: 614 & 616 5th Avenue South and adjacent private alley (Tax ID #:
27032600100900,27032600102900 & 27032600102300)
NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young (Citizen Design Collaborative)
FILE NO.:
DATE OF NOTICE
PLN2020-0053
April 28, 2021
REQUESTED PERMITS: District -based design review, SEPA determination
OTHER REQUIRED Building permits, subdivision
PERMITS:
EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTS: SEPA checklist and DNS, critical area checklist, traffic impact analysis
COMMENTS ON
PROPOSAL DUE: May 5, 2021
PUBLIC HEARING
INFORMATION: Phase 1 of the hearing was opened on March 5 and continued at that
time until May 5. Phase 2 of the public hearing will be held by the
Architectural Design Board on Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 7:00 p.m.
Packet Pg. 52
2.1.g
Due to COVID-19, Phase 2 of the public hearing will be held on Zoom
Join the meeting at:
https://zoom.us/j/95360544929?pwd=ZmdOREFORkE3RkRaeVdBRmpkN
11xM77n9
Or via phone by dialing 253-215-8782
Meeting ID: 953 6054 4929
Password: 818962
Any person has the right to comment on this application during public
comment period, receive notice and participate in any hearings, and
request a copy of the decision on the application. The City may accept
public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open
record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision
hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit.
Information on this development application can be found at
https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public involvement/public notic
es/development notices under permit number PLN2020-0053, by
emailing the City contact listed below, or by calling the City of Edmonds
at 425-771-0220. Please refer to the application number for all inquiries.
CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
425-771-0220
%-West -11--�.
WEST RENDERED ELEVATION
SOUTH RENDERED ELEVATION
(D EAST RENDERED ELEVATION i 1 NORM RENDERED ELEVATION
►t •r
- 1 1
rl BUILDING A VIEWED FROM EAST
rl BUILDINGS A S B VIEWED FROM NORTHEAST
Packet Pg. 53
2.1.h
MEMORANDUM
Date:
April 26, 2021
To:
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
From:
JoAnne Zulauf, Engineering Technician
Subject:
PLN2020-0053 — Design Review
Pine Park 614-616 5' Ave S
Engineering has reviewed the design review application for the proposed 6 live/work units
and 8 residential units for the location of 614-616 5t' Ave S. Approval of the design review
application shall not be interpreted to mean approval of the improvements as shown on the
preliminary plans. The information provided is consistent with Title 18 Edmonds Community
Development Code & Engineering standards.
Power pole and flower pole relocations shall meet all frontage requirements, ECDC codes and
the requirements of Snohomish PUD.
Trash and recycling shall be located as to not interfere with parking or ingress/egress. Plan
for trash pick up shall be reviewed and approved by Sound Disposal prior to COE approval
Stormwater management shall be consistent with ECDC 18.30 and the 2017 Stormwater
Addendum. Traffic Impact and General Facility fees will be assessed at the time of building
permit issuance.
Compliance with Engineering Division standards will be verified during the building permit
process.
Thank you.
City of Edmonds
Packet Pg. 54
2.1.i
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM
"PUBLIC HEARING: PHASE 1"
To: The Architectural Design Board (ADB)
From:
Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
Project: Pine Park 614 (File No. PLN2020-0053)
Date of Report: February 24, 2021
Public Hearing: Wednesday — March 3, 2021 at 7:00 P.M. (Phase 1*)
Due to COVID-19, a virtual public hearing will be held by the Architectural
Design Board. Join the Zoom webinar meeting at:
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, or Android device:
https://zoom.us/I/95360544929?pwd=ZmdOREFORkE3RkRaeVdB
RmpkNUxMZz09
Passcode: 818962
Or join by phone: US: +1 253 215 8782
Webinar ID: 953 6054 4929
Passcode: 818962
* Note: The public hearing will be continued to a date certain for Phase 2
of the two -phased design review process.
I. PROJECT PROPOSAL
The proposal is for three buildings containing six live/work units and eight residential
units at 614 and 616 5th Ave. S. The live/work units will be contained in two buildings
adjacent to 5th Avenue (Buildings A and B) while the eight -unit building will be behind
the live/work buildings and face west (Building C). Drive aisles west of the buildings
Packet Pg. 55
2.1.i
would load from the private alley south of the site. To accommodate the new project,
the existing improvements on the site will be removed.
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
The subject site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial (BD3). Since this proposal
triggers a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA),
project design is reviewed the Architectural Design Board through a two -phased public
hearing. This district -based design review process was developed to provide for public
and design professional input at an early point in the permitting process. The process is
described in Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and
is summarized below.
This submittal (Attachments 1- 3) initiates Phase 1 of the two -phased ADB public
hearing process. According to ECDC 20.12.005.A, for Phase 1 of the process, the
applicant must provide a preliminary conceptual design and must also provide a
description of the property to be developed noting all significant characteristics. The
ADB will use this information to make factual findings regarding the particular
characteristics of the property and will prioritize the design guideline checklist
(Attachment 4) based on these facts in addition to the design objectives of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and within the Edmonds Community Development Code.
Following public testimony at the Phase 1 hearing and completion of the design
guideline checklist by the ADB, the public hearing is continued to a date certain, not to
exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 hearing date.
Per ECDC 20.12.005.B, the purpose of the continuance of the hearing to Phase 2 is to
allow the applicant to design or redesign the initial conceptual design to address the
input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline
checklist criteria. Once this is done, the design will be submitted to staff, who will
review the proposal and schedule the project for final review (Phase 2). Staff will
provide a more detailed analysis of the proposal's compliance with the prioritized
design guidelines and criteria as part of the Phase 2 hearing. The ADB will further
review the design of the project and will make the final decision on the design at the
conclusion of Phase 2 of the public hearing.
III. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
1. Topography: The general area slopes down east -west toward Puget Sound. The
subject site was graded in the past to create a level area on the east where the
existing buildings and parking lot are located. A small slope to the west of the
parking area leads down to a separate flat undeveloped area.
2. Critical Areas: A Critical Areas Checklist was reviewed in under File No. CRA2017-
0073 and it was determined that no critical areas were located on nor adjacent to
the site, and a "Waiver" was issued.
3. SEPA Review: Review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was required
for this project because the proposal includes more than four dwelling units. A SEPA
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 2 of 8
Packet Pg. 56
2.1.i
checklist was submitted with the application and a Determination of Nonsignificance
was issued on February 9, 2021 (Attachment 8).
IV. DEPARTMENTAL TECHNICAL COMMENTS
The Phase 1 portion of the subject application was evaluated by staff from the
Snohomish County Fire District #1 and Building Division as well as the Public Works
Department/Engineering Division.
The Building Division did not have comments at this stage in the review process but had
provided general comments at a previous pre -application meeting.
South County Fire and Public Works/Engineering Division comments are included as
Attachment 10. Fire noted that all units must be sprinkled and added several specific
standards to meet including for turning radius into the site and the requirement for 'No
Parking Fire Lane' signage in the drive aisles. Public Works/Engineering provided
comments regarding utilities, frontage improvements, stormwater, and traffic impact
fees. These issues can be primarily managed at the building permit phase, but the
feasibility of frontage improvements and trash/recycling will be further evaluated in the
Phase 2 hearing submittal.
V. DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
1. ECDC 16.43 — Downtown Convenience Commercial Zone (BD3)
A. ECDC 16.43.020 Uses
The site is zoned BD3 and is subject to the use requirements of ECDC 16.43
(Attachment 5). The proposal includes multiple residential and live/work units,
and associated parking and loading, which are all permitted primary or
secondary uses in the BD3 zone.
B. According to ECDC 16.43.030, development standards in the BD3 zone include:
Minimum
Height of
Ground
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Maximum
Floor
Zone
Lot Area
Lot
Street
Side
Rear
Heightz
within the
(Sq. Ft.)
Width
Setback
Setback'
Setback'
Designated
Street
Front°
BD3
None
None
0'
0'
0'
30'
12'
1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and
structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent
to residentially (R) zoned property.
2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in ECDC 16.43.030(C).
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 3 of 8
Packet Pg. 57
2.1.i
4 "Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street -front" means the vertical
distance from top to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground
floor located within the designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground
floor is the only floor above street grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the
ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. "Floor finish" is the
exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a finished floor, and includes, but is not
limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-
1. Figure 16.43-1 shows an example of a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the
"finished" ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example.
C. Setbacks. The project site is immediately adjacent to Multiple Residential (RM-
2.4) zoned property on the west. As a result, the proposed development must
maintain a 15' setback from the west property line. The setback is shown on the
Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet A1.1 of Attachment 3).
D. Height. The maximum allowed height in the BD3 zone is 30 feet above average
original grade. Certain height exceptions are provided for in ECDC 16.43.030.C.3
and the definition of "height" in ECDC 21.40.030. While height calculations were
not provided with the Phase I submittal, building section drawings do show the
maximum height for all three buildings less than 30' above finished floor (Sheet
A1.2 of Attachment 3). Height calculations are required for all three buildings
with the Phase 2 resubmittal. It should be noted that the deck elements on the
west side of each of the buildings must be included in the height calculations.
Eaves, like those on the east sides of the buildings, may be excluded if they are
less than 30".
Ground Floor. According to ECDC 16.43.030.13, the designated street front area
for the subject site is 45 feet measured perpendicular from 5t" Avenue South.
Within the designated street front area, a minimum floor -to -floor height of 12
feet is required and entries to commercial spaces must be within seven inches of
the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. In the BD3 zone, only commercial uses
are allowed within the designated street front area, while any permitted uses
are allowed outside of that area. Parking is not a commercial use and may not
be located within the designated street front area.
An exception is available for certain BD3-zoned properties which have less than
90 feet of depth measured from the street front. In that instance, parking may
be located in the rearmost 45 feet of the property, even if a portion of the
parking extends into the first 45 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth
of commercial space as measured from the street front of the building be less
than 30 feet.
The project plans in Attachment 3 show two live/work buildings at the street
front adjacent to 51" Avenue on a project site that is 130' deep (Sheet A1.1).
Building cross -sections are included on Sheet A1.2 and show a 30' deep ground -
floor spaces with parking immediately behind that. The ground floor of each
building has a 12' floor -to -floor height and entries are at or near sidewalk grade.
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 4 of 8
Packet Pg. 58
2.1.i
Compliance with the ground floor requirements will be verified during review of
the Phase 2 submittal. Redesign of the ground floor area will be necessary to
comply with the commercial use requirements within the 45-foot designated
street front depth from 5t" Avenue.
Parking. Per ECDC 17.50.010.C.1, one parking stall is required for each dwelling
unit and two stalls are required per live/work unit. Sheet A1.1 of Attachment 3
shows one enclosed stall for each unit in Building C and two partially covered
exterior stalls for each unit in Buildings A and B.
G. Open Space. According to ECDC 16.43.030.E, for buildings on lots larger than
12,000 sq. ft., at least five percent of the lot area of the project must be devoted
to open space. With a project area of 17,160 square feet (not including the
alley), 858 square feet of open space is required. No open space is identified on
Sheet A1.1 of Attachment 3. The open space must be provided adjacent to the
street lot line and can be any combination of outdoor seating areas, a public
plaza, or landscaping that includes a seating area that is accessible to the public.
2. ECDC 20.12 District -Based Design Guidelines
A. Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.070.A, the ADB must use the design guidelines and
design review checklist applicable to the district -based design review process for
its review. These guidelines and checklist are included for reference as
Attachment 4. The ADB will use the checklist to prioritize the design guidelines
for the subject proposal.
B. Compliance with the district -based design guidelines will be reviewed by the ADB
during Phase 2 of the review process.
3. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements
A. ECDC 20.13 contains specific landscaping requirements for new developments,
which the ADB can interpret and modify according to ECDC 20.13.000.
B. As noted previously, a 15' setback is required on the west side of the project
since it is adjacent to a residentially -zoned parcel in that location. According to
ECDC 16.43.030.H, that area must be landscaped with trees and ground cover
and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum
height fence, wall or solid hedge is not required since the use adjacent to the
setback on the subject parcel would be residential. A landscaping plan must be
submitted for the Phase 2 review to evaluate the vegetation within the 15'
setback area and around the remainder of the site.
C. Street trees will be required. Existing street furniture, art poles, and planter
baskets in the sidewalk along 5t" Avenue should be incorporated to the new
project, where possible.
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 5 of 8
Packet Pg. 59
2.1.i
4. ECDC 22.43 Design Standards for the BD Zones
A. Design standards applicable to the BD zones are provided in ECDC Chapter 22.43
(Attachment 6).
B. The cover letter in Attachment 2 describes how the applicant believes the
project meets the standards. Compliance with the BD design standards will be
reviewed by the ADB in detail during Phase 2 of the review process.
5. Comprehensive Plan Urban Design Objectives
A. In addition to the design guidelines applicable to the district -based design review
process and the BD -zone design standards, the proposal must also comply with
the applicable downtown design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan because
the site is designated "Downtown Convenience" and within the
"Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center" overlay. Refer to Pages 122 through
127 of the December 2017 Comprehensive Plan for the applicable design
objectives (Attachment 7).
B. Compliance with the downtown design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
will be reviewed by the ADB during Phase 2 of the review process.
VI. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS
The subject application was submitted on December 21, 2020 and was found to be
complete on January 11, 2021. A "Notice of Application" was issued on January 25,
2021. This notice was posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, and Community
Development Department. It was not posted at the Library since it is closed due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The notice was also mailed to property owners within 300 feet of
the site and published in the Everett Herald.
A separate "Notice of Public Hearing and SEPA Determination" was issued on February
9, 2021. This notice was posted in the manner noted above. The public notice materials
are included as Attachment 9. The City has complied with the noticing provisions of
ECDC 20.03.
Two comments have been received to date:
1. Ed Lorah, representing the Parkview Twin Condo HOA immediately west of the
project site, has several concerns including stormwater coming off the project site,
parking, lighting, ownership, and project timing (Attachment 11).
Staff response: As noted in staff's response in Attachment 11, all stormwater
generated by the project must be managed on -site. In his review of the project, the
City's Stormwater Engineering noted general feasibility of the project. Specific
details of how stormwater will be managed and compliance with the stormwater
code in Chapter 18.30 ECDC will be evaluated during building permit review
(Attachment 10).
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 6 of 8
Packet Pg. 60
2.1.i
Regarding parking, each of the eight units in the west building would have one stall
per unit while each of the six units in the two eastern buildings would have two
stalls — one for the 'live' use and one for 'work' use. No guest parking is required by
the code and none would be provided so other visitors to the site would have to use
the on -street spaces during their visits.
Project lighting will be addressed as part of the Phase 2 submittal while the applicant
can better address anticipated project timing and ownership options.
2. Paul McColluh, a neighbor to the south, was concerned with parking on- and off -site
(Attachment 12).
Staff response: See above.
VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020.A.1, the purpose of Phase 1 of the public hearing process is
for the ADB to identify the relative importance of design criteria that will apply to the
project proposal during the subsequent design review. The basic criteria to be
evaluated are listed on the design guideline checklist. In identifying the relative
importance of the design criteria, the ADB must use the applicable design criteria of the
BD3 zone, the downtown design objectives in the Comprehensive Plan, and any relevant
district -specific design objectives of ECDC Chapters 20.12 and 20.13.
Staff recommends that the ADB conduct the following after the public comment portion
of the Phase 1 public hearing:
1. Consider all applicable design guidelines and standards referenced in this report and
complete the design guidelines checklist in Attachment 4, prioritizing all applicable
design guidelines and objectives.
2. Request that the applicant address the following as part of the submittal for Phase 2
of the hearing:
a. Update the site plan to show open space consistent with ECDC 16.43.030.E.
b. Update the designated ground floor street front area at 51" Avenue to show the
required 45-foot depth of commercial uses.
c. Provide height calculations to verify the proposal's consistency with the
maximum building height requirements for the BD3 zone.
d. Respond to the design guideline checklist.
e. Respond to the Fire and Public Works/Engineering comments in Attachment 10.
f. Respond to the public comments received to date.
3. Continue the public hearing to a date certain for Phase 2 of the public hearing
process, not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 meeting date. May 5 or June 2 is
recommended to allow sufficient time for the applicant to respond and for staff to
evaluate the response and prepare the for the next portion of the hearing.
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 7 of 8
Packet Pg. 61
2.1.i
VIII. PARTIES OF RECORD
City of Edmonds
Applicant
Jacob at Design Collaborative
Persons who submitted written Ed Lorah (Parkview Twin HOA)
comments
Paul McCulloh
IX. INTERESTED PARTIES
N/A
X. ATTACHMENTS
1. Land Use Application
2. Applicant's Cover Letter
3. Preliminary Project Plans (Phase 1)
4. Design Guideline Checklist
5. ECDC 16.43: BD — Downtown Business
6. ECDC 22.43: Design Standards for the BD Zones
7. Comprehensive Plan Excerpt Urban Design Goal B: Downtown/Waterfront Activity
Center
8. SEPA Checklist and Determination of Nonsignificance
9. Public Notice Materials for Phase 1
10. Departmental technical comments
11. Ed Lorah comment
12. Paul McCulloh comment
13. Traffic impact analysis
Pine Park 614
PLN2020-0053 — Phase I
Page 8 of 8
Packet Pg. 62
City of Edmonds
Land Use Application
X ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW • ' • •
❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # ZONE
❑ HOME OCCUPATION DATE REC'D BY
❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION
❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE RECEIPT #
❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE
❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT ❑ HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB ❑ CC
❑ STREET VACATION
❑ REZONE
❑ SHORELINE PERMIT
❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION
❑ OTHER:
• PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THE APPLICATION IS A PUBLIC RECORD •
PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION 614-616 5TH AVENUES
PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) PINE PARK 614
PROPERTY OWNER BK INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC PHONE # 206.673.4543
ADDRESS 557 ROY STREET #125, SEATTLE, WA 98109
E-MAIL ABUKOWSKI@BAYEQ.COM FAX # N/A
TAX ACCOUNT # 270326-001-009-00 + 270326-001-029-00 SEC. 26 TWP. 27 RNG. 3E
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY)
CONSTRUCT (3) BUILDINGS CONTAINING A TOTAL OF (8) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES AND (6) LIVE/WORK TOWNHOUSES, PER
PLANS. RECONFIGURE PROPERTY LINES VIA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT. EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED.
DESCRIBE HOW THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY)
SEE ATTACHED COVER LETTER AND DESIGN DRAWINGS.
APPLICANT JACOB YOUNG PHONE # 206.535.7908
ADDRESS 10 DRAVUS STREET, SEATTLE, WA 98109
E-MAIL JYOUNG@COLLABORATIVECO.COM FAX # N/A
CONTACT PERSON/AGENT SAME AS APPLICANT. PHONE #
ADDRESS
E-MAIL FAX #
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 ewith ubmitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and that I am authorized to file this application on the beh of the o er as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE 12.07.2020
Property Owner's Authorization
Augustus Bukowski
I, 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 9IAAAS AS 6AAU/C DATE 12/7/2020
Questions? Call (425) 771-0220.
Revised on 8122112 B - Land Use Application Page 1 of I
Packet Pg. 63
2.1.i
MF
CITIZEN
DESIGN
INFO (AT)
COLLABORATIVECO.COM
206.235.7908
WE ARE FAMILY
DESIGNING INSPIRED SPACE
TO CREATE COMMUNITY
Pine Park 614 Design Narrative
December 11, 2020
To whom it may concern,
This letter is provided to explain, in narrative form, the compliance of the design
standards for the proposed project located at 614-616 5th avenue S. in Edmonds.
The development will consist of (3) buildings containing (6) live/work townhouses and
(8) residential townhouses. The (6) live/work units will be split into (2) street facing
buildings along 5th Avenue S. and the (8) residential townhouses will be located behind
the live/work buildings facing west.
The street facing buildings have been designed in accordance with the design
standards for the BD zones as stated in Chapter 22.43 of the Edmonds City Code.
The building has been designed with a distinct base and top. The base is proposed to
be a medium toned brick with alternating brick patters at the plinth level to distiguish
the columns between units. The top is adorned with a pattern of fiber cement panels
and trim and metal windows that echo historic patterns. The top edge is finished with
projected decorative cornices to create a deep shadow line.
The building frontage takes advantage of 9' tall glass doors and windows with metal
canopies that provide a distinct and visually prominent entrance to each unit. The
frontage will be adorned with decorative lighting, medallions, bulkheads at storefront
windows, projecting sills and planter boxes to enhance the street presence and
reinforce the character of the surrounding buildings.
The character of these buildings will be defined by their refined material pallette
of black metal, charcoal detailing and brick. These combination of these materials
will provide a rich experience for pedestrians and occupants and we hope will be a
treasured addition to downtown Edmonds.
Sincerely,
Citizen Design
ARCHITECTURAL FEASIBILITY AGREEMENT
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 64
VICINITY MAP a NTS
/
/
/
Q /
z
aw
J >
w_ �
Oo
5TH AVENUE S
J
c') 1 2
M M M M M M
77
—
I
BUILDING A: Q U) BUILDING B:
Lu
(3) 3-STORY LIVE/FOO PRINT AREA: 183R0+_+_ SF I u CSY CWO (3) 3-STORY LIVE/OK TH
? I FOO PRINT AREAV1830+_+_ SF
o I I AVG (E) GRADE: 83.3'± I o I AVG (E) GRADE: 83.4'±
ch AGLA: 1735± SF (EA) o p M AGLA: 1220± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 500± SF (EA) I co U I WORK SUITE: 600± SF (EA) I —
z II
o 3 I I I I
0
m Z CD I I 20.3'± (TYP) \ I I I 20.3'± (TYP)
z > LO
°. CO°, a .. d' d ° , ..Q°P. a .e
OL=M° ° °."I_ '.°I 'ad a I.d. °" 'Ida '. I, e. .. e.' :d ° „la° .. e
N •p ° n I ° aq I I a I, °:: 9d.' I d 'd.e� .a I•. °,. ° �. 'd °1 a I. I ° I a l ..da A
w z 1 ..lea. . a ( "I ... I I' a d ; I. : i 4.. d.e l ° ` I a I
m� '
a= °
z a d 4 a o d ° tl. d ° a
w w °�. dl °d I I I.:, a' °°'Q ° le.. dl'{ °I d I d.I. a.'d.l
Q I . '�I° IIa° d. d ° °II c. tl.� —' II II °: II ` �-- d'—a. .�'bId . — .• : Je• I .Il .• —� lJTI d—.a Jl a a_.:d ° Ifd .Q ° II ad' II a,O 'ePII _a' e.f .a° ?• 1I n° .d°a° . Ta J.da•j,lII':. . tl •°.'. II 'a a, d d tl
tl' —a ` .III°10z BUILDING (ABOVE) °d
'l°
U d d ad qY °
N m�' ° ° a a
dI ° °At°; d d
d Ld �° d°_ a - a d'° e d d dd
.44od d a .e
.
.. °. . I
° a /•d d d.. —U °q .d I d, '` a
a d dy a e a .a `d e d_ 3 ° •° d: :e° J
e
L'-4
a.d ad a ed ° i a e ° qa d
G = 82.7'± a ' aa 4 a e.e°add '° ° dd.tl°..EG/FG=76.6'±
RELOCATE R VIA LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTad
dd. a .. •.a a 6e °a a..a tl 'd G a .e ° a °• n 'Q .d ?d.. a °. d. 4.
la _ d•tl °:. a ? e q d d. n e\' ad. J ° ° d.. °
°..e °d ° ° d °. tl ,d. .a. ° d e °aa• aJ
a '° •d. d ° •° .e. ° n .a d ?° d a ° d .e c .e d'
;r 4 LL
e M a: M 9. ° M a d M°: e. a °:. ' d M qa M °.' � M ° a M a. ° a; `2
,.a d °. d 1a e d . ° ..tl 132'_ ° d / ° e a• q
I I I 16.5'± (TYP)
�w
U
O Y Q
N Q C/)
m F
5'-6"
USCAPE
AREA
3
1.2
O
O
i
M
Q N
O
O'
0� O
O
W
� CO
O
W' N
W z
Q
—80-
80BUILDINGc:
(8) 3-STORY TH (INC. BSMT)
+1 FOOTPRINT AREA: 3960± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 78.3'±
I I I AGLA: 990± SF (EA)
75 I I I I— I GARAGE/BSMT: 495± SF (EA)
I 1 I � 1 I
517-519 4TH AVENUE S
PARKVIEW TWIN CONDO
APN: 006493-0010
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 10'
A1.2—
T
N
PROJECT INFO.
SCOPE OF WORK
CONSTRUCT (3) BUILDINGS CONTAING (6) LIVE/WORK
TOWNHOUSES AND (8) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES,
PER PLANS AND AS FOLLOWS:
• (3) LIVE/WORK TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 1735± SF
AGLA, 500± SF WORK SUITE AND (2) COVERED,
UNENCLOSED PARKING SPACES.
• (3) LIVE/WORK TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 1220± SF
AGLA, 600± SF WORK SUITE AND (2) COVERED,
UNENCLOSED PARKING SPACES.
• (8) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSES TO EACH CONTAIN 990± SF
AGLA AND 495± SF GARAGE.
RECONFIGURE (E) BOUNDARY LINE VIA BOUNDARY LINE
ADJUSTMENT.
(E) STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED.
ESTABLISH USES AND OCCUPY, PER PLANS.
SITE ADDRESS
614-616 5TH AVENUE S
EDMONDS, WA 98020
PARCEL MAP NUMBERS
PARCEL A: 270326-001-009-00
PARCEL B: 270326-001-029-00
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL A:
SEC 26 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-5) N 55 FT FDT BAAP 30 FT W & 123
FT S OF NE COR S 1/2 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 TH RUN W 130 FT TH S
132 FT TH E 130 FT TH N 123 FT TO PUB SUBJ ESE PUD
PARCEL B:
SEC 26 TWP 27 RGE 03 BAAP 30 FT W & 132 FT S OF NE COR
S 1/2 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 TH RUN W 130 FT THE S 132 FT TH
E 130 FT TH N 132 FT TPB LESS N 55 FT THOF SUBJ ESE PUD
IF ANY
LOT AREA AND ZONING
LOT AREA: 0.39 AC (17,160± SF) TOTAL
ZONING: BD3
JURISDICTION
EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON
0
O
c N
W
M
PROJECT DIRECTORY
2 O�
O
N • •
OWNER AND DEVELOPER
coz
a
Q
SEATTLE LUXURY HOMES
557 ROY STREET #125
SEATTLE, WA 98109
ARCHITECT + APPLICANT
CITIZEN DESIGN
10 DRAVUS STREET
SEATTLE, WA 98109
CONTACT: JACOB YOUNG
TEL: 206.853.8055
EMAIL: JYOUNG@COLLABORATIVECO.COM
CIVIL ENGINEER + SURVEYOR
DAVIDO CONSULTING GROUP
15029 BOTHELL WAY NE #600
LAKE FOREST PARK, WA 98155
CONTACT: TIM GABELEIN, PE
TEL: 206.523.0024
EMAIL: TIM@DCGENGR.COM
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
\
TBD
sk
0 5 10 20
_ 1 If
= 10'
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
TBD
GENERAL CONTRACTOR
TBD
DRAWING INDEX
A1.1
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
A1.2
CONCEPTUAL SITE SECTIONS
A1.3
VICINITY MAP
A2.1
BUILDINGS A&B FLOOR PLANS
A2.2
BUILDING C FLOOR PLANS
A3.1
RENDERINGS
A3.2
CHARACTER STUDY
C01 CONCEPTUAL GRADING
AND UTILITY PLAN
1 OF 1 SURVEY
ON
CITIZEN
DESIGN
z
0
W
N
zLu
D
0 1�
Q W
D
c a
N H
Ldz L0
o Z
U
w
z %0
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW
December 10, 2020
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
CONCEPTUAL
SITE PLAN
3
Q
SCALE: AS NOTED
Al
Attachment
Packet Pg. 65
PLN2020-&
R
110
BUILDING C HT LIMIT: 106.0'± -
100
90
80
3UILDING C AVG GRADE: 76.0'±-1
70
BUILDING C
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
R
110
PHASE 1C HT LIMIT: 106.0'± -
100
90
80
PHASE 1C AVG GRADE: 76.0'±-4
70
BUILDING A R
BUILDING B R
BUILDING C -
. 00 FFE:104.9'±
ROOF: 101.0'±
00 FIFE:
0
FIFE: 92.0'±
0
CO N
COMM. FFE: 84.4'±
FIFE: 82.5'±
b0=_FFE:74.0'±-------
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
R BUILDING A BUILDING B
BUILDING A HT LIMIT: 113.3'± -
110 0 00
02
°' FFE: 104.0'± FFE: 104.9'±
too C
FFE: 95.01± FFE: 96.4'±
90 N
(V �
COMM. FFE: 83.0'± COMM. FFE: 84.4'±
BUILDING A AVG GRADE: 83.3'± - - - -
80
LLINE OF COMMERCIAL
70 - FLOOR
TRANSVERSE SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 20'
BUILDING C HT LIMIT: 106.0'±
10(
8(
3UILDING C AVG GRADE: 76.0'±
7(
4 TRANSVERSE SECTION
� A1.2 % SCALE: 1" = 20'
R
k-4�,BUILDING A HT LIMIT: 113.3'+-
BUILDING A AVG GRADE: 83.3'±
GL
BUILDING B HT LIMIT: 113.4'±
BUILDING B AVG GRADE: 83.4'±
BUILDING BHT LIMIT: 113.4'±
BUILDING B AVG GRADE: 83.4'±
so
CITIZEN
DESIGN
Q
U
05
O
w
N
Z w
O_ z
F Q W
c a
z L0
O Z �p
U
w
Z %0
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW
December 10, 2020
Z
O
U
N�
L.L
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
V J
Z
O CONCEPTUAL
U SITE SECTIONS
ry
0 SCALE: AS NOTED
0 10 20 40
ill =20' 0 ■
Z Attachmen
Packet Pg. 66
PLN2020-0L
400 HOWELL WAY
APARTMENTS
PAR KVIEW TWIN
CONDOMINIUM
OLYMPIC VIEW
APARTMENTS
tt a w.nZye. I
r
ems! +
' "Tt p'
"-wit
W
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: N/A
i
�EDMONDS
AUTOBODYSHOP
�..
Jr-6
_ a
s.
HAMBURGER HARRYS BUS STOP
RESTAURANT 5TH AVE S & HOWELL WY
h !� 1 �3•
r _
N
OWN
hur� �f9114
.' qw—
'E li
J
• .. ■ ■
IT
I 4
wl
w
ti
R ft
f *'.4L
* ,
HEMLOCK WAY
ppr
Fill
y
f
EDELWEISS
APARTMENTS
NORTH SEATTLE
NATURAL MEDICINE
EDMONDS MANE ATTRACTION
BEAUTY SALON + RAYM0ND
JAMES FINANCIAL SERVICES
SHELLABARGER CREEK
MINIATURES & MORE
HOBBY STORE
BARKADA
RESTAURANT
CITIZEN
DESIGN
3
u
v
O
a
N
N
O
00
�
rn
�
a
C
�
r�
C
Z
0
U
O
fn
r�
c
w
Z
?
0
a
Q
w
U
D
a
I-
N
1 I
I-
Z
W1
�
O
7
•o
+`�+
U
L
Lu
a
00
City of EDMONDS w
DESIGN REVIEW E
December 10, 2020 a
Z
O
Illl—
ry
Illl—
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
V J
Z
0 VICINITY MAP
U
ry
0 SCALE: AS NOTED
H
O
Z Attachmen
PLN2020-01
Packet Pg. 67
61 '-0"
20'-4"
2.1.i
M
y�y
O
O
20'-4"
10'-9 1 /2" ? � 9'-3"
61 '-0"
20'-4"
20'-4"
PHASE 1A (ELEVATOR):
(3)3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.31±
AGLA: 1735± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 500± SF (EA)
0
0
co
0
0
0
o E0
0
Cl)
O
61'-0"
20'-4"
14'-1 1 /2" 6'-6"
61'-0"
20'-4"
13'-3 1 /2" 7'-0 1 /2"
13'-3 1 /2"
PHASE 1B:
(3) 3-STORY LIVE/WORK TH
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.4'±
AGLA: 1220± SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 602± SF (EA)
CITIZEN
DESIGN
U
05
0
w
U5
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW
December 10, 2020
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: AS NOTED
BUILDING A FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0"
W
BUILDING B FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0"
W
-Attac men
PLN2020-0LPacket Pg. 68
2.1.i
0
0
131'-8"
16'-5 1 /2"
L--
131'-8"
16-5 1 /2"
11 9'-5 1 /2" T-0"
--I
131'-8 1 /2" 1"
— 16'-5 1 /2"
10'-5"
I WL I ji.
011,
1.10
1.10
' 11'-91/2"
16-5 1 /2"
1 BUILDING C FLOOR PLANS IN
A2.2 SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0" _
(8) 2 BEDROOM UNITS
PHASE 1 C:
(8) 3—STORY TH (INC. BSMT)
FOOTPRINT AREA: 3960± SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 78.3'±
AGLA: 1320± SF (EA)
GARAGE/BSMT: 495± SF (EA)
CITIZEN
DESIGN
Q
U
05
� Z
O
W
N
Z ry W
O �
Q W
� n
r a
N H
LLJ
O Z �p
U
W
Z %0
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW
December 10, 2020
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
FLOOR PLANS
SCALE: AS NOTED
I
-Attac men
PLN2020-0LPacket Pg. 69
19w
9,
a V �
7--= 7
Mae a
elo ;ej
Ix
IL
-mew
NEI
IWO
...........
01.
IL
f
on
ELA&
r
lam
Mal
I MWAM�j
0
-4b
MR
W
loop
mmm
N.-
mmm
mmm
'77 �m
�� _ - - mm
mmm
po m
06ME9W
7
Tr
m
m
m
0
w
w
9,
9,
2.1.i
PROMINENT
CORNICE
TOP —
BASE —
METAL CANOPIES
GROUND LEVEL DETAILS
PLINTH ORNAMENTAL LIGHTING DECORATIVE MEDALLION BULKHEAD
PLANTER BOXES
CITIZEN
DESIGN
a
�K 0
z
0
� o
vw
vi
z ry w
o �
Q w
j ^
� L>
1 a
w ~ z
0 Z U
W
z �O
City of EDMONDS
DESIGN REVIEW
December 10, 2020
FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY
CHARACTER
STUDY
SCALE: AS NOTED
CHARACTER STUDY
SCALE: NTS
Attac men
PLN2020-01
Packet Pg. 71
1
2
3
rd
5
A w B
20 10 0 20 40
SCALE IN FEET
KEY NOTES:
DETAIL/
KEY
NOTE
SHEET
0
REM EX UGP FROM SNOPUD VAULT
-
O2
CONNECT TO EX PRIMARY POWER
-
O3
PROPOSED BURIED PHONE LINE
-
4O
PROPOSED TRANSFORMER
-
O5
NEW WATER SERVICE TO BLDG
-
OREUSE
EX WATER METER AND
SERVICE IF SIZED APPROPRIATELY
-
WATER SERVICE
ONEW
CONNECTION TO MAIN
-
ONEW
WATER METER
-
O9
NEW SEWER CONNECTION TO MAIN
-
NEW FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION
10
TO MAIN
-
11
CONFIRM STORM LOCATION AND
REMOVE OR RELOCATE AS
-
NECESSARY
GTAXPARCEL
G
BOUNDARY
-
EX WATER SERVICE IF
GREUSE
G
SIZED APPROPRIATELY
-
THE TWO TAX PARCELS WITHIN
14
"PARCEL A", (A SINGLE LOT) TO BE
CONSOLODATED AS PART OF THIS
-
PROJECT
15
G
PROPOSED CB
-
50'L x 15'W INFILTRATION FACILITY
16
(1.0' DEEP) PROVIDING 100%
INFILTRATION OF PHASE 1C ROOF
-
RUNOFF
39.51 x 19'W INFILTRATION
0FACILITY
0
(1.0' DEEP) PROVIDING
100% INFILTRATION OF PHASE 1A &
-
1 B ROOF RUNOFF
18
G
CONNECT TO EX CB
-
GPROPOSEDSSSCO
-
20
NEW FIRE SERVICE METER
-
21
REMOVE EX DRIVEWAY APPROACH
& REPLACE WITH SIDEWALK AND
-
CURB & GUTTER
22
PROPOSED CURB WALL
-
23
PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN
-
FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION
GNEW
G
TO BLDG
-
REMOVE ALL EX TREES ON -SITE
25
(TYP)
-
26
ROOF RUNOFF TO ROUTE TO
INFILTRATION FACILITY
-
27
PROPOSED SDCO
-
6 PERFORATED PVC LAID FLAT
28
(TYP)
-
C
29
6" SD @ 2.00% MIN (TYP)
_
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW FROM
30
INFILTRATION FACILITY TO
CONNECT TO STORM SYSTEM IN
_
ALLEY
oz
LEGEND:
ICD
U)P
p N
N
g
°
CONCRETE
oNT 6
a
Lu p
ASPHALT ROADWAY
Q pW
�m
J
LANDSCAPE
�LL
LL
z
if-3
z
PERMEABLE PAVEMENT
O
SURFACING
ON
U �
ui
U)=
INFILTRATION FACILITY
O w
z -i
oQ
2z
uo
ABBREVIATIONS:
LS
= LAND SURVEYOR
< °
OHP
= OVERHEAD POWER
a
Z X
X
BLDG = BUILDING
PL
= PROPERTY LINE
7
BM = BENCHMARK
PVI
= POINT OF VERTICAL
U) W
w �
BOTS = BOTTOM OF STEP(S)
INTERSECTION
Q W
CB =CATCH BASIN
ROW
= RIGHT OF WAY
Lo
CL =CENTERLINE
SD
= STORM DRAIN
a
CW =CONCRETE WALK
SDCO
= STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT
= °o
M
DRN =FOOTING DRAIN
SDFM
= STORM DRAIN FORCE
m
EG = EXISTING GRADE
MAIN
N
o
EL = ELEVATION
SDMH
= STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
N
ELEV = ELEVATION
SS
= SANITARY SEWER
ESMT = EASEMENT
SSMH
= SANITARY SEWER
Y
EX =EXISTING
MANHOLE
yj
N
FF = FINISHED FLOOR
SSS
=SANITARY SIDE SEWER
' p 6 CO
FG = FINISHED GRADE
SSSCO
= SANITARY SIDE SEWER
z co
w J
J W
FL =FLOW LINE
CLEANOUT
w C)
ate..
G =GAS
TOC
= TOP OF CURB
w m o
HMA = HOT MIX ASPHALT
TOPS
= TOP OF STEP(S)
w
ID = INNER DIAMETER
TYP
=TYPICAL
Z o o
IE = INVERT ELEVATION
W
= WATER
J 2 0
LF = LINEAL FEET
WDF
= WOOD FENCE
1
�-O
U Q Q
A B
D w E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I W
z
\w
I NOTE:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OVERLAPS
T INTO RIGHT OF WAY OF 4TH STREET
PARKVIEW TWIN, A CONDOMINIUM
517 4TH AVE S
F
PARK PLACE EDMONDS, A CONDO
400 HOWELL WAY
G
L "o'
4-I /
'TS
I
I � L
14
/ 15 L -
% I
p
\ H
CB RIM =72.98
4" PVC W IE=72.18
4" PVC N IE=72.18
4
@sK r`r7�f.7GT /C
7 ' up
U)
U)
i 19
SSMH RIM =62.75 _ 380\ 15 25 Co
CTR C Co
PAN 57.7` _ _ \\ / s Bsa
-
38.63' - _ - \ 131.37' \ ■ ■ 30
N89°54'04"W _ - - - - - - - _ - - N89°54'04"W -
`- \ \ \ ASPHALT A LEY \ \d 1 S 9 68
m 59VERLAP b CB RIM =62.60
s \ C ANN-63.08
o SSMH SS o Cits�fdC �� SS �\ SS �S S�S 18 \ S ASS S� SS
N o 10" CONSi6E=60.70 KASEMENT 760310 239 I sn 1 1
SD SD / SD DD $A � SD ' 6 SD SD 9
S89°54'04"E � � / SEE EXCEPTION / S89°54'04"E I
38.63' _ i - - -_ 261.37'
I �
i
-11 �I
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC -
531 4TH AVE S
d 0 CB RIM =69.29
I 6" CON N IE=67.04
ONE BALLARD LI
610 5TH AVE S
L
L__COMN -�
UT
L�--
c
�n
I�
L1
GP �JGP
27 -1
12
D
C
w-
.. UGP
PHASE iB
LEVEL 1 FF 84.40
I
I L�
23 15 27 I UTI
-r 22 �T �S I 1 S
- SD
r i 30 I 3 1
15
PK REAL PR PERTY LLC
622 5TH AVE S
CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE & UTILITY PLAN
SCALE: 1 " = 20'
C A D A E A F A G A H
a�
mi-FIff: a
� c
L
aQ �� / <\ca
' SS S rn 4
O /
1
I �
1 os
6.
M SH C
I
CB RIM =84.18
8" PVC W IE=82.68
6" PVC N IE=82.78
a
SS
CB RIM =84.79
8" PVC W IE=82.89
CB RIM =84.39
8" PVC W IE=82.89
SSMH RIM=85.68
CTR CHANN IE=80.48
SDMH RIM =86.94
18" CON S IE=86.34
18" CONC N IE=82.14
GENERAL NOTES:
K
� z
Y
W
Q W W
J J HLu 2 Lu¢C�
d d QO°6W
(D (.0 C9� w fU�
�Lu
N �(V
wW W �m�
� Lu =SOW
Lu Lu ~ Q U C/)
ZM Z"t 0?50QZcn
Z (�❑ (�❑ �C7ZwZ
O w H w H z z
> W❑ U❑ 0 W Z W uj 0
Q H F- H W 0 m Z ZZ U
�LZ wW Oww�li
w2 Lu �vUQw
�00 Co00 oQU)0U
zU zU �w>>�
03: 0�Woz
U) Lu v)w wW=Z�
~-
I�
w w w w U I m O m
Q 0 0
0 2 w W
Lu z0
Co H JODQ
(.0(.0Q Q
Lu 0 0
1-- N N
Q Lo L
❑ N N
0 o Lu
zo a a J4
Lo
00
0')
w
Q
z
>
E
o
(0
N -
U
d
O CDa)
O 7
Q)
Co Co
O O
N N
m O
O
Lf) U-)d�
CDw
O O
-P
N a)
a)
C) CD
CD
N Nrn
3
7
a
TWIN J. /O
y���i,L�
OF WAscD
N
aD
�
a
2
=
EL
1.
A'
�QT
44i
54904
R
ASS/ONAL ECG\
E
t
Q
c
ns
O
Q.
d
z
Q
m
to
a
J
0
Y
~
w
J
L0
N
07
Q
J
w
0-
v
z
Cn
W
a
Q
wCn
J
w0
Q
Q
uj
0
Q
LJJ
0
z
W
W
Lo
Q
Lo
I-
Z^^
Y
m
Co
I..L
W
U
z
O
U
1. ALL STORMWATER TO BE INFILTRATED ON -SITE. WATER
QUALITY TREATMENT TO BE PROVIDED BY NATIVE SOILS w w
MEETING SOIL PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL SUITABILITY 0
PROPERTIES FOR TREATMENT OR ENGINEERED SOILS LAYER O a
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SSC-6 VOLUME III, CHAPTER 3, SECTION PROJ. MANAGER: Bi
3.3.7 OF THE 2014 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR DESIGNED BY: iv
WESTERN WASHINGTON. DRAWN BY: RB
2. ALL UNITS WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A NFPA 13D
FLOW -THROUGH FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM. CHECKED BY: Bi
J
SCALE: AS SHOWN
REV. SHEET
12/9/2020 A of
2
APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION SHEET NUMBER
CITY OF EDMONDS
DATE: CO BY:
CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION
K Packet Pg. 72
PLN2020-0
2.1.i
0
0
')
i
0
V)
W
i
o
N
w
z�FPzM
fD X i J N IL X
NORTHEAST QOF. THE NORTHEAST QUARTER LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. ORDER NIO, 500026739,S
D 026739SDATEDEAPRIL 28,T201 COMMITMENT,
CITY OF EDMONDS, COUNTY OF SNOHOMIS, H STATE OF WASHINGTON Parcel A:
Beginning at a point 30 feet West and 132 feet South of the Northeast corner
of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
V, Northeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, W_M-;
thence running West 130 feet;
L8CON
,98 " thence South 132 feet;
E=72.18 thence East 130 feet;
E-72.1 thence North 132 feet to the Point of Beginning.
=
Parcel B:
Beginning of a point 30 feet West and 264 feet South of the Northeast corner
PARK PLACE EDMONDS, A CONDO ONE BALLARD LL ' of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
610 5TH AVE S Northeast Quarter of Section 26, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, W.M.;
400 HOWELL WAY thence South 20 feet, more or less, to the North line of Lot 12, Block 2, City
0— o-- asE WAL o Park Addition to Edmonds, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 9
N89'54'04"W i of Plats, page 10, records of Snohomish County, Washington;
Q ONE STORY BUILDING I € thence West along the North line of Lots 12 and 1, said Block 2 and said line
li 614 5TH AVE. S. _ " rR extended for 300 feet; thence North 20 feet, more or less, to the South line of
TFT
FFE=84.05' the North 264 feet of said South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
° ° W Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 26;
L.•,.... thence East along said South line for 300 feet to the Point of Beginning.
o in_ in .... �nSituate in e County o Snohomish, State o Washington.
I the C ty f S h h St t f W 'ngt
SCHEDULE B SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
I g I uP
i ?, 11:rz__
CB RIM``, 82.22
I i i I i o CB RIM =84.1$ 1. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,
I i 10 CON ,W IE=180.42 i E � 8" PVC W IE=82.68 as granted in a document:
j f 4" CONC E IE=;80.62 I to 6" PVC N IE=82.78
o Granted to: Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County
j Purpose: Underground electric transmission and/or distribution system
ASPHALT PARKING 5v Recording Date: April 30, 1971
SD ° j sn so SD
Recording No.: 2194686
f Affects: Parcel A
GRASS I A The exact location and extent of said easement is not disclosed of record.
PARCEL /`1
I
2, Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto,
o B — as granted in a document.
C RIM — 4.79
c I $
8" PVC W IE=82.89
z Purpose. Ingress and egress
pro I ! POST Recording Date: March 10, 1976.
o iQ o I
Recording No.:7603100239
WO N Affects: Portion of Parcel 8
ASPHALT
cf)NO o
NOTE: ° o 3. Rights of the public, if any, in and to that portion of Parcel B which lies within 4th Street.
o
CON.C.�"WALK N o CB RIM =84.39
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OVERLAPS Q 4. Easement contained in amended and restated Declaration for Parkview Twin
INTO RIGHT OF WAY OF 4TH STREET �3 8 PVC W IE=82.89 Condominium recorded under recording no. 200512080249 reciting that easement
�, U? over parcel B is an exclusive easement.
Q�
\ w 5. Payment of the real estate excise tax, if required. The Land is situated within
2 STORY CONC. BLOCK BUILDING �^ the boundaries of the City of Edmonds. Present rate of real estate excise tax as
of the date herein is 1.78%.
616 5TH AVE. S.
PARKVIEW TWIN, A CONDOMINIUM C RIM =69.54 Any conveyance document must be accompanied by the official Washington State Excise
517 4TH AVE S FFE=85.26 MAIN I
6" CON S IE=67.84 FFE=76.59' ALLEY Tax Affidavit. The applicable excise tax must be paid and the affidavit approved at the
Etime of the recording of the conveyance documents.
SSMH RIM =6 .Z5 d 6 ' 6. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid
CTR HAtN5 in SSMH RIM=85.68 on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not
— include interest and penalties):
38.63' 131.37' CTR CHANN IE— .48 p
J
' clud e s
N89'54'04"W N89'54'04" o Year: x Account 326-001-009-00 Levy Code: 00210
$0
A PI-IALI 'ALLEY", Q Ye • 2015 Ta Accou No • 270
SSMH RIM=•69.68 � Assessed Value —Land: S351,100.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: $79,900.00
o N OVERLAPCB RIM=62.6.0._. _. ss ` CTR CHA N-6 PARCEL B v
i� s
ss 3'08 ss ss ss ss ` 7. General and Special Taxes: Billed: S4,738.22 Paid: $0.00 Unpaid: $4,738.22
0 p s SDMH RIM •= 86.94
L
j0" cnN(: F IF=60.79, EASEMENT 760 �100239,: SD
� o c� � 18" CON S IE-86.34 Affects: Portion of Parcel A
S89'54'04"E SEE EXCEPTION 4 S89°54'04"E
I 18' CONC N IE=82.14 General and special taxes and charges, payoble February 15, delinquent if first half
38.63' ;, 261.37' up
E unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year
(amounts do not include interest and penalties):
PK REAL PROPERTY LLC r Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 270326-001-029-00 Levy Code: 00210
Assessed Value —Land: 488 200.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: 135 800.00
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC -- -- 622 5TH AVE S � � � p �
531 4TH AVE S a General and Special Taxes: Billed: $6,859.98 Paid: S0.00 Unpaid: $6,859.98
Affects: Remainder of Parcel A
CB RIM =69.29 � . _..�_..'
6" CON N IE=67.04 S. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first
6" ON I W IE 7.04 half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year
10"8" CONC S IE-66.69 (amounts do not include interest and penalties):
Year: 2015 Tax Account No.: 270326-001-023-00 Levy Code: 00210
Assessed Value --Land: $44,800.00 Assessed Value —Improvements: $0.00
General and Special Taxes: Billed: 492.51 Paid: 0.00 Unpaid: 492.51
Affects: Parcel B
NOTES. 9. Liability, if any, for personal property taxes pursuant to RCW 84.56.070 wherein
no sale can be made without prepayment of said tax, including advance tax. For
HORIZONTAL DATUM: ASSUMED CARDINAL BEARING NORTH FOR THE CENTERLINE OF further information, please call the Snohomish County Treasurer's Office at (425)388-3307.
LEGEND 3RD AVENUE SOUTH.
10. A tax lien for the amount shown and any other amounts due, in favor of the
D4 WATER VALVE VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88. HELD SNOHOMISH COUNTY MONUMENT #2066 FORA United States of America, assessed by the District Director of Internal Revenue.
-� HYDRANT PUBLISHED ELEVATION OF 79.226 FEET. BENCHMARK IS 2" IRON PIPE WITH
® WATER METER LEAD/TACK IN CASE 140 FEET MORE OR LESS SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF Taxpayer: William P. Brust, owner of record Brust Development Company, L.L.C.
QS Q❑ MANHOLES (SS/SD) WALNUT STREET AND 5TH AVENUE SOUTH. Amount: $1,333,265.83 Recording Date: December 14, 2010
❑ CB Recording No.: 201012140477
POWER/UTILITY POLE CENTER LINES SITE AREA: PARCEL A= 17,160 SQ. FT. OR 0.39 ACRES AND PARCEL B= 5227 SO.
PROPERTY LINES FT. OR 0.12 ACRES WITH AN ADDITIONAL 773 SO, FT. BY LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT Any unrecorded leaseholds, right of vendors and holders of security interests on
GUY ANCHOR RIGHT—OF—WAY LINES FALLS IN 4TH AVENUE SOUTH personal property installed upon the Land and rights of tenants to remove trade
❑E POWER TRANSFORMER — — LOT LINES fixtures at the expiration of the terms.
©� POWER/TELEPHONE VAULT DITCH LINE ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
—►--►— FLOW LINE
M GPM POWER METER w WATER LINE THE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF ALL SURVEY MARKERS SHOWN HEREON ARE
❑ TELEPHONE/TV RISER ss SANITARY SEWER LINE BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATIONS TAKEN IN JULY ,2015, UNLESS OTHERWISE
ID GAS VALVE 5D STORM DRAIN LINE INDICATED.
GAS ❑O NE
GAS METER UP UNDERGROUND POWER LINES WORK PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS SURVEY UTILIZED THE FOLLOWING SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION.
STREET LIGHT UT UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINES EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES: (A) 1" TRIMBLE S6 SERIES ELECTRONIC TOTAL TO HOME STREET BANK AND CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY:
❑�❑ LUMINAIRE UTV UNDERGROUND CABLE TV LINES STATION, MAINTAINED TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS PER W.A.C.
X SPOT ELEVATION UFO UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC LINES 332-130-100. (B) FIELD TRAVERSE, EXCEEDING REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE
n SIGN P OVERHEAD POWER LINES W.A.C. 332-130-090. MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR
o MAILBOX OHL OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS,
—0-0-0-0-0— CHAIN LINK FENCE THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DRAWING ACCURATELY PRESENTS SURFACE FEATURES AND INCLUDES ITEMS 2, 4, 7(61), 8, 9, 11(A), 13, 14, 16, AND 18 OF TABLE A THEREOF.
ROCKERY — x — x x x x — WIRE FENCE LOCATED DURING THE COURSE OF THIS SURVEY. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
M HEREON ARE BASED SOLELY UPON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS AND PACE
1� CONIFEROUS TREE 0 d 0 WOOD FENCE THE FIELD WORK AS COMP TED ON AUGUST 4, 2015.
ENGINEERS, INC. DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY OR ASSUME LIABILITY FOR
GRAPHIC SCALE THEIR ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS. CONTRACTOR/ENGINEERS SHALL VERIFY DA F A R AP.v/� ________
DECIDUOUS TREE EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
—�
2D D 20 4D CALL FOR LOCATE: UTILITY LOCATION SERVICE: 811 I
FOUND CASED MONUMENT
SITE PARKING: THE SITE HAS 15 PARKING STALLS.
SETH D. O'HAR PLS CERTIFICATE NUMBER 38985
SET MAGNETIC NAIL W/ WASHER ( IN FEET NO OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF EARTH MOVING WORK, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR o
BUILDING ADDITIONS WITHIN RECENT MONTHS. 38985
SET 5/8" IRON REBAR W/1 inch = 20 ft.rsr��'
PLASTIC CAP STAMPED L.S. NO OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF SITE USE AS A SOLID WASTE DUMP, SUMP OR ION ..L
#------------ SANITARY LANDFILL. AL LAIC
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. $ s�
PORTION OF: NE 1 /4, NE 1 /4, SECTION 26, T. 27 N., R. 3 E., W.M.
11255 Kirkland Way, Suite 300 DATE 7/17/2015
PROJECT N0.
CAD/CALC SDO Kirkland, WA98033 5TH AND HOWELL WAY SCALE 1"=20' A.L.T.A. / ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY
DRAWN
p.425,827.2014 f.425-827,5043 SURVEY TEAM PG FOR 15451
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
PLAT CHK SDO Civil Structural Planning Survey FIELD BOOK 696 HOME STREET BANK
OF
SYM REVISION DATE BY APP'D An Engineering Services Company paceengrs.com DWG FILE 15451—ALTA.DWG SHEET
Attachment 3
" 2 0"0-0 Packet Pg. 73
P L
2.1.i
Applying the Design Guidelines
When designing projects and issuing permits for new developments, applicants
and City staff will rely on these guidelines to help define specific design
conditions that will be required for project approval. As these design guidelines
get applied to particular development projects, some important things to
remember are:
1. Each project is unique and will pose unique design issues. Even two
similar proposals on the same block may face different design
considerations. With some projects, trying to follow all of the guidelines
could produce irreconcilable conflicts in the design. With most projects,
reviewers will find some guidelines more important than others, and the
guidelines that are most important on one project might not be important
at all on the next one. The design review process will help designers and
reviewers to determine which guidelines are most important in the context
of each project so that they may put the most effort into accomplishing the
intent of those guidelines.
2. Project must be reviewed in the context of their zoning and the zoning of
their surroundings. The use of design guidelines is not intended to change
the zoning designations of land where projects are proposed; it is intended
to demonstrate methods of treating the appearance of new projects to
help them fit their neighborhoods and to provide the Code flexibility
necessary to accomplish that. Where the surrounding neighborhood
exhibits a lower development intensity than is current zoning allow, the
lower -intensity character should not force a proponent to significantly
reduce the allowable size of the new building.
3. Many of the guidelines suggest using the existing context to determine
appropriate solutions for the project under consideration. In some areas,
the existing context is not well defined, or may be undesirable. In such
cases, the new project should be recognized as a pioneer with the
opportunity to establish a pattern or identity from which future
development can take its cues. In light of number 2 above, the site's
zoning should be considered an indicator of the desired direction for the
area and the project.
4. Each guideline includes examples and illustrations of ways in which that
guidelines can be achieved. The examples are just that — examples. They
are not the only acceptable solution. Designers and reviewers should
consider designs, styles and techniques not described in the examples but
that fulfill the guideline.
5. The checklist which follows the guidelines (Checklist) is a tool for
determining whether or not a particular guideline applies to a site, so that
the guidelines may be more easily prioritized. The checklist is neither a
regulatory device, nor a substitute for evaluating a sites conditions, or to
summarize the language of examples found in the guidelines themselves.
Page 1 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 74
2.1.i
Considering the Site
Edmond's Land Use Code sets specific, prescriptive rules that are applied
uniformly for each land use zone throughout the city. There is little room in the
Code's development standards to account for unique site conditions or
neighborhood contexts. A project architect can read the Code requirements and
theoretically design a building without ever visiting the site.
However, to produce good compatible design, it is critical that the project's
design team examine the site and its surrounding, identify the key design
features and determine how the proposed project can address the guidelines'
objectives. Because they rely on the project's context to help shape the project,
the guidelines encourage an active viewing of the site and its surroundings.
For a proposal located on a street with a consistent and distinctive architectural
character, the architectural elements of the building may be key to helping the
building fit the neighborhood. On other sites with few attractive neighboring
buildings, the placement of open space and treatment of pedestrian areas may
be the most important concerns. The applicant and the project reviewers should
consider the following questions and similar ones related to context when looking
at the site:
■ What are the key aspects of the streetscape? (The street's layout and
visual character)
■ Are there opportunities to encourage human activity and neighborhood
interaction, while promoting residents' privacy and physical security?
■ How can vehicle access have the least effect on the pedestrian
environment and on the visual quality of the site?
■ Are there any special site planning opportunities resulting from the site's
configuration, natural features, topography etc.?
■ What are the most important contextual concerns for pedestrians? How
could the sidewalk environment be improved?
■ Does the street have characteristic landscape features, plant materials,
that could be incorporated into the design?
■ Are there any special landscaping opportunities such as steep
topography, significant trees, greenbelt, natural area, park or boulevard
that should be addressed in the design?
■ Do neighboring buildings have distinctive architectural style, site
configuration, architectural concept?
Page 2 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 75
2.1.i
Design Guidelines Checklist
This checklist is intended as a summary of the issues addressed by the
guidelines. It is not meant to be a regulatory device or a substitute for the
language and examples found in the guidelines themselves. Rather, it is a tool
for assisting the determination about which guidelines are the most applicable on
a particular site.
A. Site Planning
N/A
Lower
Priority
Higher
Priority
1. Reinforce existing site characteristics
❑
❑
❑
2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics
❑
❑
❑
3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street
❑
❑
❑
4. Encourage human activity on street
❑
❑
❑
5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites
❑
❑
❑
6. Use space between building and sidewalk to
provide security, privacy and interaction (residential
projects)
❑
❑
❑
7. Maximize open space opportunity on site
(residential projects)
❑
❑
❑
8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians
and adjoining property
❑
❑
❑
9. Discourage parking in street front
❑
❑
❑
10. Orient building to corner and parking away from
corner on public street fronts (corner lots)
❑
❑
❑
B. Bulk and Scale
N/A
Lower
Higher
Priority
Priority
1. provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less-
❑
❑
❑
intensive zones
Page 3 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 76
2.1.i
C. Architectural Elements and Materials
N/A
Lower
Priority
Higher
Priority
1. Complement positive existing character and/or
respond to nearby historic structures
❑
❑
❑
2. Unified architectural concept
❑
❑
❑
3. Use human scale and human activity
❑
❑
❑
4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish
materials
❑
❑
❑
5. Minimize garage entrances
❑
❑
❑
D. Pedestrian Environment
N/A
Lower
Priority
Higher
Priority
1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected
pedestrian entry
❑
❑
❑
2. Avoid blank walls
❑
❑
❑
3. Minimize height of retaining walls
❑
❑
❑
4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots
on pedestrian areas
❑
❑
❑
5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures
❑
❑
❑
6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas
❑
❑
❑
7. Consider personal safety
❑
❑
❑
E. Landscaping
N/A
Lower
Higher
Priority
Priority
1. Reinforce existing landscape character of
❑
❑
❑
neighborhood
2. Landscape to enhance the building or site
❑
❑
❑
3. Landscape to take advantage of special site
❑
❑
❑
conditions
Page 4 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 77
2.1.i
A-1: Responding to Site Characteristics
The siting of buildings should respond to specific site conditions
and opportunities such as non -rectangular lots, location on
prominent intersections, unusual topography, significant
vegetation and other natural features.
Explanations and Examples
Site characteristics to consider in project design include:
1) Topography
• Reflect, rather than obscure, natural topography. For
instance, buildings should be designed to "step up"
hillsides to accommodate significant changes in elevation.
• Where neighboring buildings have responded to similar topographic conditions
in their sites in a consistent and positive way, consider similar treatment for
the new structure.
• Designing the building in relation to topography may help to reduce the
visibility of parking garages.
2) Environmental constraints
• Site buildings to avoid or lessen the impact of development on
environmentally critical areas such as steep slopes, wetlands and stream
corridors.
3) Solar orientation
• The design of a structure and its massing on the site can enhance solar
exposure for the project and minimize shadow impacts on adjacent structures
and public areas.
4) Existing vegetation
• Careful siting of buildings can enable significant or important trees or other
vegetation to be preserved.
5) Existing structures on the site
Where a new structure shares a site with an existing structure or is a major
addition to an existing structure, designing the new structure to be
compatible with the original structure will help it fit in.
A-2: Streetscape Compatibility
The siting of buildings should acknowledge and reinforce the
existing desirable spatial characteristics of the right-of-way.
Explanation and Examples
The character of a neighborhood is often defined by the
experience of traveling along its streets. We often perceive
streets within neighborhoods as individual spaces or "rooms."
How buildings face and are set back from the street determine
the character and proportion of this room.
Page 5 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 78
2.1.i
A-3: Entrances Visible from the Street
Entries should be clearly identifiable and visible from the
street.
Explanation and Examples
Entries that are visible from the
street make a project more
approachable and create a sense of
association among neighbors.
A-4: Human Activity
New development should be sited and designed to
encourage human activity on the street.
Explanation and Examples i�.•
Livelier street edges make for safer streets. Ground floor
shops and market spaces providing services needed by
residents can attract market activity to the street and
increase safety through informal surveillance. Entrances,
porches, awnings, balconies, decks, seating and other
elements can promote use of the street front and provide
places for neighborly interaction. Siting decisions should
consider the importance of these features in a particular;' .,
context and allow for their incorporation.
Also, architectural elements and details can add to the
interest and excitement of buildings and spaces. Elements from the following list
should be incorporated into all projects. Projects in pedestrian oriented areas of the
City should include an even greater number of these details due to the scale of the
buildings and the proximity of the people that will
experience them.
■ Lighting or hanging baskets supported by
ornamental brackets
■ Belt courses
■ Plinths for columns
■ Kickplate for storefront window
■ Projecting sills
■ Tilework
■ Transom or clerestory windows
■ Planter box
■ Variations in applied ornament, materials, colors
or trim.
■ An element not listed here, as approved, that
meets the intent.
Page 6 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 79
2.1.i
In pedestrian oriented areas, ground floor commercial
space is encouraged to be at grade with the sidewalk.
If the entrance can not be located at the grade of the
sidewalk, special care must be taken to ensure that
there is both a visual and physical connection between
the pedestrian way and the entrance that enhances
the pedestrian orientation of the building.
The ground level fagades of buildings that are oriented
to street fronts in the CW, BC, BN, and BP zones shall
have transparent windows to engage the public. To
qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored
or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between
the street and interior. Where transparency is not
provided, the fagade shall comply with the guidelines
under the section 'Treating Blank Walls'.
In the Downtown Commercial Core
The ground level fagades of buildings that are oriented to streets should have a
substantial amount of transparent windows, especially in the retail core. A primary
function of the pedestrian oriented retail core is to allow for the visual interaction
between the walking public and the goods and services businesses located on the
first floor are providing.
To qualify as transparent, windows shall not
be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit
visibility between the street and interior.
Where transparency is not provided, the
fagade shall comply with the guidelines under
the section 'Treating Blank Walls'. Buildings
that are entirely residential do not have a
specific transparency requirement. However,
all -residential buildings shall be treated as if
they have blank walls facing the street and
must comply with the guidelines under the
section 'Treating Blank Walls'. That portion of
Ground level spaces that opens up to the
sidewalk through means of sliding or roll up
doors shall be considered to comply with any
transparency requirements regardless of the amount of
glass in the opening.
Awnings are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts.
They may be structural (permanently attached to and
part of the building) or non-structural (attached to the
building using a metal or other framework). To enhance
the visibility of business signage retractable awnings are
encouraged and should be open -sided. Front valances are
permitted and signage is allowed on valances, but not on
valance returns. Marquee, box, or convex awning shapes
are not permitted. Awnings should be located within the
building elements that frame storefronts, and should not
conceal important architectural details. Awnings should
also be hung just below a clerestory or "transom"
� 44
Page 7 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 80
2.1.i
window, if it exists. Awnings on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in
character, scale and position, but need not be identical. Non-structural awnings
should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high -
gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are
not permitted. Structural Awnings should be designed to incorporate natural light.
Artificial lighting should only be used at night.
Signage should be designed to integrate with the
building and street front. Combinations of sign types
are encouraged which result in a coordinated design
while minimizing the size of individual signs. Blade or
projecting signs which include decorative frames,
brackets or other design elements are encouraged. This
type of detail is consistent with the design elements
mentioned above that enhance the interest of the area.
Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have
large expanses of lettering. Signage in the "Arts Center
Corridor" defined in the Comprehensive Plan is required
to include decorative sign frames or brackets in its
design.
Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage
should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display
lettering and symbols or graphic design. Signage should
be given special consideration when it is consistent with
or contributes to the historic character of sites on the
National Register or the Edmonds Register of Historic
Places
A-5: Respect for Adjacent Sites
Buildings should respect adjacent properties by being located
on their sites to minimize disruption of the privacy and outdoor
activities of residents in adjacent buildings.
Explanation and Examples
One consideration is the views from upper stories of new
buildings into adjacent houses or yards, especially in less
intensive zones. This problem can be addressed in several
ways.
■ Reduce the number of windows and decks on the
proposed building overlooking the neighbors.
■ Step back the upper floors or increase the side or rear
setback so that window areas are farther from the property line.
■ Take advantage of site design which might reduce impacts, for example by
using adjacent ground floor area for an entry court.
■ Minimize windows to living spaces which might infringe on the privacy of
adjacent residents, but consider comfort of residents in the new building.
■ Stagger windows to not align with adjacent windows.
Page 8 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 81
2.1.i
A-6: Transition Between Residence and Street
For residential projects, the space between the building and
the sidewalk should provide security and privacy for residents
and encourage social interaction among residents and
neighbors.
Explanation and Examples
The transition between a residential building and the street
varies with the depth of the front setback and the relative
elevation of the building to the street.
A-7: Residential Open Space
Residential projects should be sited to
maximize opportunities for creating usable,
attractive, well -integrated open space.
Examples and Explanations
Residential buildings are encouraged to
consider these site planning elements:
■ Courtyards which organize
architectural elements, while providing
a common garden or other uses.
■ Entry enhancement such as
landscaping along a common pathway.
A-8: Parking and Vehicle Access
Siting should minimize the impact of automobile parking and
driveways on the pedestrian environment, adjacent properties
and pedestrian safety.
Explanation and Examples
Techniques used to minimize the impacts of driveways and
parking lots include:
■ Locate surface parking at rear or side lots.
■ Break large parking lots into smaller ones.
■ Minimize number and width of driveways and curb
cuts.
■ Share driveways with adjacent property owners.
■ Locate parking in lower level or less visible portions of site.
■ Locate driveways so they are visually less dominant.
Access should be provided in the following order of priority:
i) If there is an alley, vehicular access should use the alley. Where feasible, the
exit route should use the alley.
-%6ae5•f
,-1YFX A era
Page 9 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1 /06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 82
2.1.i
ii) For corner parcels, access should be off the secondary street rather than the
primary street.
iii) Share the driveway with an adjacent property. This can be a driveway with
two-way traffic.
iv) A driveway serving a single project is the least preferred option.
Drive -through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug
stores, espresso stands, etc., should comply with the following:
i) Drive -through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the
facades of the building that face a street.
ii) Drive -through speakers shall not be audible off -site.
iii) The entrance and exit from the drive -through shall be internal to the site, not
a separate entrance and/or exit to or from the street.
A-9: Location of Parking on Commercial Street Fronts
Parking on a commercial street front should be
minimized and where possible should be located behind
a building.
Explanation and Examples
Parking located along a commercial street front where
pedestrian traffic is desirable lessens the attractiveness
of the area to pedestrians and compromises the safety
of pedestrians along the street.
A-10: Corner Lots
Building on corner lots should be oriented to the corner
and public street fronts. Parking and automobile access
should be located away from corners.
Explanation and Examples
Corner lots offer unique opportunities because of their
visibility and access from two streets.
(above and below)
Corner lot treatments.
Page 10 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 83
2.1.i
B-1: Bulk, and Scale Compatibility
Projects should be compatible with the scale of development
anticipated by the applicable Land Use Policies for the
surrounding area and should be sited and designed to provide a
sensitive transition to near -by, less intensive zones. Projects on
zone edges should be developed in a manner that creates a
step in perceived bulk, and scale between anticipated
development potential of the adjacent zones.
Explanation and Examples
For projects undergoing Design Review, the analysis and
mitigation of bulk and scale impacts will be accomplished
through the Design Review process. Careful siting and design treatment based on
the technique described in this and other design guidelines will help to mitigate some
bulk and scale impacts; in other cases, actual reduction in the bulk and scale of a
project may be necessary to adequately mitigate impacts. Design Review should not
result in significant reductions in a project's actual bulk and scale.
Bulk and scale mitigation may be required in two general circumstances:
1. Projects on or near the edge of a less intensive zone. A substantial
incompatibility in scale may result from different development standards in the
two zones and may be compounded by physical factors such a s large
development sites, slopes or lot orientation.
2. Projects proposed on sites with unusual physical characteristics such as large
lot size, or unusual shape, or topography where buildings may appear
substantially greater in bulk and scale than that generally anticipated for the
area.
Factors to consider in analyzing potential bulk and scale impacts include:
• distance from the edge of a less intensive zone
■ differences in development standards between abutting zones (allowable
building width, lot coverage, etc.)
■ effect of site size and shape
• bulk and scale relationships resulting from lot orientation (e.g. back lot line to
back lot line vs. back lot line to side lot line)
• type and amount of separation between lots in the different zones (e.g.
separation by only a property line, by an alley or street, or by other physical
features such as grade changes).
Page 11 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 84
2.1.i
In some cases, careful siting and design treatment may be sufficient to achieve
reasonable transition and mitigation of bulk and scale impacts. Some techniques for
achieving compatibility are as follows:
■ use of architectural style, details (such as roof lines or fenestration), color or
materials that derive from the less intensive zone. (See also Guideline C-1:
Architectural Context.)
■ creative use of landscaping or other screening
■ location of features on -site to facilitate transition, such as locating required
open space on the zone edge so the building us farther from the lower
intensity zone.
■ treating topographic conditions in ways that minimize impacts on neighboring
development, such as by using a rockery rather than a retaining wall to give
a more human scale to a project, or stepping a project down a hillside.
■ in a mixed -use project, siting the more compatible use near the zone edge.
In some cases, reductions in the actual bulk and scale of the proposed structure may
be necessary in order to mitigate adverse impacts and achieve an acceptable level of
compatibility. Some techniques which can be used in these cases include:
■ articulating the building's facades vertically or horizontally in intervals that
conform to existing structures or platting pattern.
■ increasing building setbacks from the zone edge at ground level
■ reducing the bulk of the building's upper floors
• limiting the length of, or otherwise modifying, facades
• reducing the height of the structure
■ reducing the number or size of accessory structures.
C-1: Architectural Context
New buildings proposed for existing neighborhoods with a
well-defined and desirable character should be compatible
with or complement the architectural character and siting
pattern of neighboring buildings.
Explanation and Examples
Paying attention to architectural characteristics of
surrounding buildings, especially historic buildings, can help
new buildings be more compatible with their neighbors,
especially if a consistent pattern is already established by
similar:
■ building articulation
• building scale and proportion
■ or complementary architectural style
■ or complementary roof forms
• building details and fenestration patterns
• or complementary materials
Even where there is no consistent architectural pattern, building design and massing
can be used to complement certain physical conditions of existing development.
In some cases, the existing context is not so well-defined, or may be undesirable. In
such cases, a new project can become a pioneer with the opportunity to establish a
pattern or identity from which future development can take its cues.
Page 12 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 85
2.1.i
In most cases, especially in the downtown commercial area, Buildings shall convey a
visually distinct 'base' and 'top'. Abase' can be emphasized by a different masonry
pattern, more architectural detail, visible 'plinth' above which the wall rises,
storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent
cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line.
Architectural Features
Below are several methods that can help integrate new buildings into the
surrounding architectural context, using compatible:
■ architectural features
■ fenestration patterns, and
■ building proportions.
Building Articulation
Below are several methods in which buildings may be articulated to create intervals
which reflect and promote compatibility with their surroundings:
■ modulating the facade by stepping back or extending forward a portion of the
facade
■ repeating the window patterns at an interval that equals the articulation
interval
• providing a porch, patio, deck or covered entry for each interval
■ providing a balcony or bay window for each interval
■ changing the roofline by alternating dormers, stepped roofs, gables or other
roof elements to reinforce the modulation or articulation interval
■ changing the materials with a change in the building plane
• providing a lighting fixture, trellis, tree or other landscape feature with each
interval
C-2: Architectural Concept and Consistency
Building design elements, details and massing should create a well-proportioned and
unified building form and exhibit an overall architectural concept.
Buildings should exhibit form and features identifying the functions within the
building.
In general, the roofline or top of the structure should be clearly distinguished from
its facade walls.
Explanation and Examples
This guideline focuses on the important design
consideration of organizing the many architectural
elements of a building into a unified whole, so that
details and features can be seen to relate to the
structure and not appear as add-ons.
The other objective of this guideline is to promote
buildings whose form is derived from its function.
Buildings which present few or no clues through their
design as to what purpose they serve are often
awkward architectural neighbors. For example, use of
expansive blank walls, extensive use of metal or glass
siding, or extremely large or small windows in a
residential project may create architectural confusion
MOM11 top
middle
base
Page 13 of 22
Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 86
2.1.i
or disharmony with its neighbors. Conversely, commercial buildings which overly
mimic residential styles might be considered inappropriate in some commercial
neighborhoods.
Often times, from an architectural design
perspective buildings will convey a visually
distinct base' and 'top'. A 'base' can be
emphasized by a different masonry pattern,
more architectural detail, visible plinth' above
which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a
combination. The top edge is highlighted by a
prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other
architectural element that creates a shadow line.
Other architectural features included in the
design of a building may include any number of
the following:
■ building modulation or articulation
■ bay windows
■ corner accent, such as a turret
top
base
■ garden or courtyard elements (such as a fountain or gazebo)
■ rooflines
■ building entries
■ building base
Architectural details may include some of the following:
■ treatment of masonry (such as ceramic tile
alternating brick patterns)
■ treatment of siding (such as wood siding
combined with shingles to differentiate
floors)
■ articulation of columns
■ sculpture or art work
■ architectural lighting
■ detailed grilles and railings
■ special trim details and moldings
■ a trellis or arbor
inlay, paving stones, or
Page 14 of 22
Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 87
2.1.i
C-3: Human Scale
The design of new buildings should incorporate architectural
features, elements and details to achieve a good human
scale.
Explanation and Examples
The term "human scale" generally refers to the use of
human -proportioned architectural features and site design
elements clearly oriented to human activity.
A building has a good human scale if its details, elements
and materials allow people to feel comfortable using and
approaching it. Features that give a building human scale
also encourage human activity.
The following are some of the building elements that may be used to achieve better
human scale:
■ pedestrian -oriented open space such as a courtyard, garden, patio, or other
unified landscaped areas
■ bay windows extending out from the building face that reflect an internal
space such as a room or alcove
■ individual windows in upper stories that
o are approximately the size and proportion of a traditional window
o include a trim or molding that appears substantial from the sidewalk
o are separated from adjacent windows by a vertical element
■ windows grouped together to form larger areas of glazing can have a human
scale if individual window units are separated by moldings or jambs
■ windows with small multiple panes of glass
■ window patterns, building articulation and other treatments that help to
identify individual residential units in a multi -family building
■ upper story setbacks
■ a porch or covered entry
■ pedestrian weather protection in the form of canopies, awnings, arcades or
other elements wide enough to protect at least one person
■ visible chimneys
C-4: Exterior Finish Materials
Building exteriors should be constructed of durable and
maintainable materials that are attractive even when viewed up
close. Materials that have texture, pattern, or lend themselves
to a high quality of detailing are encouraged.
Explanation and Examples
The selection and use of exterior materials is a key ingredient
in determining how a building will look. Some materials, by
their nature, can give a sense of permanence or can provide
texture or scale that helps new buildings fit better in their
surroundings.
Page 15 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 88
2.1.i
Materials typical to the northwest include:
■ clear or painted wood siding
■ shingles
■ brick
• stone
■ ceramic and terra-cotta tile
Many other exterior building materials may be appropriate in multifamily and
commercial neighborhoods as long as the materials are appropriately detailed and
finished, for instance, to take account of the northwest's climate or be compatible
with nearby structures. Some materials, such as mirrored glass, may be more
difficult to integrate into residential or neighborhood commercial settings.
D-1: Pedestrian Open Spaces and Entrance
Convenient and attractive access to the building's entry
should be provided. To ensure comfort and security, paths
and entry areas should be sufficiently lighted and entry
areas should be protected from the weather. Opportunities
for creating lively, pedestrian -oriented open space should
be considered.
Explanation and Examples
If a building is set back from the sidewalk, the space
between the building and public right-of-way may be
conducive to pedestrian or resident activity. In business
districts where pedestrian activity is desired, the primary
function of any open space between commercial buildings and the sidewalk is to
provide visual and physical access into the building and perhaps also to provide a
space for additional outdoor activities such as vending, resting, sitting or dining.
Street fronts can also feature art work, street furniture and landscaping that invite
customers or enhance the building's setting.
Where a commercial or mixed -use building is set back from the sidewalk a sufficient
distance, pedestrian enhancements should be considered in the resulting street front
Examples of desirable features to include:
■ visual and pedestrian access (including barrier -free access) into the site from
the public sidewalk
■ walking surfaces of attractive pavers
• pedestrian -scaled site lighting
■ areas for vendors in commercial areas
• landscaping that screens undesirable elements or that enhances the space
and architecture
• signage which identifies uses and shops clearly but which is scaled to the
pedestrian
• site furniture, artwork or amenities such as fountains, benches, pergolas,
kiosks, etc.
Examples of features to avoid are:
asphalt or gravel pavement
adjacent unscreened parking lots
adjacent chain -link fences
Page 16 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 89
2.1.i
■ adjacent blank walls without appropriate screening
The following treatment of entrances can provide emphasis and interest:
■ special detailing or architectural features such as ornamental glazing, railings
and balustrades, awnings, canopies, decorative pavement, decorative
lighting, seats, architectural molding, planter boxes, trellises, artwork signs,
or other elements near the doorway.
• visible signage identifying building address
■ Higher bay(s)
■ Recessed entry (recessed at least 3 feet)
• Forecourt
D-2: Blank Walls — See pages 8-9 from guidelines blank walls
Buildings should avoid large blank walls facing the street,
especially near sidewalks. Where blank walls are
unavoidable they should receive design treatment to
increase pedestrian comfort and interest.
Explanation and Examples
A wall may be considered "large" if it has a blank surface
substantially greater in size than similar walls of
neighboring buildings.
The following examples are possible methods for treating
blank walls:
• installing vertical trellis in front of the wall with
climbing vines or plants materials
■ setting the wall back and providing a landscaped
or raised planter bed in front of the wall, including
plant materials that could grow to obscure or
screen the wall's surface
■ providing art (mosaic, mural, decorative masonry
pattern, sculpture, relief, etc.) over a substantial
portion of the blank wall surface
• employing small setbacks, indentations, or other
means of breaking up the wall's surface
• providing special lighting, a canopy, horizontal
trellis or other pedestrian -oriented features that
break up the size of the blank wall's surface and
add visual interest
■ An architectural element not listed above, as
approved, that meets the intent
D-3: Retaining Walls
lighting fixture opaque glass
medallion windows
projecting cornice
masonry
belt course
metal canopy --
recess #
plinth
Blank walls shall be treated with architectural
elements to provide visual interest.
Retaining walls near a public sidewalk that extend higher than
eye level should be avoided where possible. Where higher
retaining walls are unavoidable, they should be designed to
reduce their impact on pedestrian comfort and to increase the
visual interest along the streetscapes.
Page 17 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 90
2.1.i
Explanation and Examples
The following are examples of methods to treat retaining walls:
■ any of the techniques or features listed under blank walls above
■ terracing and landscaping the retaining walls
■ substituting a stone wall, rockery, modular masonry, or special material
■ locating hanging plant materials below or above the wall
D-4: Design of Parking Lots Near Sidewalks
Parking lots near sidewalks should provide adequate security and
lighting, avoid encroachment of vehicles onto the sidewalk, and
minimize the visual clutter of parking lot signs and equipment.
Explanation and Examples
The following examples illustrate some considerations to address in
highly visible parking lots:
Treatment of parking area perimeter
the edges of parking lots pavement adjacent to landscaped
areas and other pavement can be unsightly and difficult to maintain.
Providing a curb at the perimeter of parking areas can alleviate these
problems.
Security lighting
■ provide the appropriate levels of lighting to create adequate visibility at night
Evenly distributed lighting increases security, and glare -free lighting reduces
impacts on nearby property.
Encroachment of cars onto the sidewalk
without wheel stops or a low wall, parked cars can hang over sidewalks. One
technique to protect landscaped and pedestrian areas from encroachment by
parked cars is to provide a wide wheel stop about two feet from the sidewalk.
Another technique is to widen a sidewalk or planting bed basically "building
in" a wheel stop into the sidewalk or planting bed. This is more durable than
wheel stops, does not catch debris and reduces tripping hazards.
Signs and equipment
• reduce sign clutter by painting markings on the pavement or by consolidating
signs. Provide storage that is out of view from the sidewalk and adjacent
properties for moveable or temporary equipment like sawhorses or barrels.
Screening of parking
screening of parking areas need not be uniform along the property frontage.
Variety in the type and relative amount of screening may be appropriate.
screen walls constructed of durable, attractive materials need not extend
above waist level. Screen walls across a street or adjacent to a residential
zone could also include landscaping or a trellis or grillwork with climbing
vines.
screening can be designed to provide clear visibility into parking areas to
promote personal safety.
Page 18 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 91
2.1.i
D-5: Visual Impacts of Parking Structures
The visibility of all at -grade parking structures or accessory parking
garages should be minimized. The parking portion of a structure
should be architecturally compatible with the rest of the structure"
and streetscape. Open parking spaces and carports should be IIII,, % r ■;
screened from the street and adjacent properties.
Explanation and Examples The following examples illustrate various methods of improving thehit
appearance of at -grade parking structures:
■ incorporating pedestrian -oriented uses at street level can
reduce the visual impact of parking structures in
commercial areas. Sometimes a depth of only 10 feet along the front of the
building is enough to provide space for newsstands, ticket booths, flower
shops and other viable uses.
■ setting the parking structure back from the sidewalk and installing dense
landscaping
■ incorporating any of the blank wall treatments listed in Guideline D-2
■ visually integrating the parking structure with adjacent buildings
■ continuing a frieze, cornice, canopy, overhang, trellis or other devices at the
top of the parking level
■ incorporating into the parking structure a well -lit pedestrian walkway,
stairway or ramp from the sidewalk to the upper level of the building
■ setting back a portion of the parking structure to allow for the retention of an
existing significant tree
■ using a portion of the top of the larking level as an outdoor deck, patio or
garden with a rail, bench or other guard device around the perimeter
D-6: Screening of Dumpsters, Utilities, and Service Areas
Building sites should locate service elements like trash dumpsters,
loading docks and mechanical equipment away from the street
front where possible while maintaining access to utilities. When
elements such as dumpsters, utility meters, mechanical units and
service areas cannot be located away from the street front, they
should be situated and screened from view and should not be
located in the pedestrian right-of-way.
Explanation and Examples
Unsightly service elements can detract from the compatibility of
new projects and create hazards for pedestrians and autos.
The following examples illustrate considerations to address in locating and screening
service areas and utilities:
■ plan the feature in a less visible location on the site
■ screen it to be less visible. For example, a utility meter can be located behind
a screen wall so that it is not visible from the building entrance.
■ use durable materials that complement the building
■ incorporate landscaping to make the screen more effective
■ locate the opening to the area away from the sidewalk.
Page 19 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 92
2.1.i
■ incorporate roof wells, utility rooms or other features to accommodate utility
and mechanical equipment needs.
D-7: Personal Safety and Security
Project design should consider opportunities for enhancing personal
safety and security in the environment under review.
Explanation and Examples k
Project design should be reviewed for its contribution to enhancing '
the real and perceived feeling of personal safety and security
within the environment under review. To do this, the question
needs to be answered: do the design elements detract from or do _
they reinforce feelings of security of the residents, workers,
shoppers and visitors who enter the area? }
Techniques that can help promote safety include the following: 4i
■ providing adequate lighting
■ retaining clear lines of site
■ use of semi -transparent security screening, rather than opaque walls, where
appropriate
■ avoiding blank, windowless walls that attract graffiti and that do not permit
residents or workers to observe the street
■ use of landscaping that maintains visibility, such as short shrubs and pruning
trees, so there are no branches below head height
■ creative use of ornamental grille as fencing or over ground floor windows in
some locations
■ absence of structures that provide hiding places for criminal activity
■ design of parking areas to allow natural surveillance by maintaining clear
lines of sight both for those who park there and for occupants of nearby
buildings
■ clear directional signage
■ encouraging "eyes on the street" through placement of windows, balconies
and street -level uses
■ ensuring natural surveillance of children's play areas.
E-1: Landscaping to Reinforce Design Continuity with
Adjacent Sites
Where possible, and where there is not another overriding concern,
landscaping should reinforce the character of neighboring
properties and abutting streetscape.
Explanation and Examples
Several ways to reinforce the landscape design character of the
local neighborhood are listed below:
Street Trees
If a street has a uniform planting of street trees, or a
distinctive species, plant street trees that match the
planting pattern or species.
Page 20 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 93
2.1.i
Similar Plant Materials
When many lots on a block feature similar landscape materials, emphasis on
these materials will help a new project fit into the local context.
Similar construction materials, textures, colors or elements
Extending a low brick wall, using paving similar to a neighbor's or employing
similar stairway construction are ways to achieve design continuity.
E-2: Landscaping to Enhance the Building and/or Site
Landscaping, including living plant material, special pavements,
approach, screen walls, planters, site furniture and similar
features should be appropriately incorporated into the design to
enhance the project.
Examples
Landscape enhancements of the site may include some of the
approaches or features listed below:
• Soften the form of the building by screening blank walls,
terracing retaining walls, etc.
• Increase privacy and security through screening and/or sharing.
• Provide a framework such as a trellis or arbor for plants to grow on.
■ Incorporate a planter guard or low planter wall as part of the architecture.
• Distinctively landscape open areas created by building modulation.
• Incorporate upper story planter boxes or roof planters.
■ Include a special feature such as a courtyard, fountain or pool.
■ Emphasize entries with special planting in conjunction with decorative paving
and/or lighting.
• Screen a building from view by its neighbors, or an existing use from the new
building.
E-3: Landscape Design to Address Special Site Conditions
The landscape design should take advantage of special on -site
conditions such as high -bank front yards, steep slopes, view
corridors, or existing significant trees and off -site conditions such
as greenbelts, ravines, natural areas, and boulevards.
Explanation and Examples
The following conditions may merit special attention. The examples
suggest some ways to address the issue.
High Bank Front Yard
Where the building's ground floor is elevated above a sidewalk
pedestrian's eye level, landscaping can help make the transition
between grades. Several techniques are listed below.
■ rockeries with floral displays, live ground cover or shrubs.
• terraces with floral displays, ground covers or shrubs.
• low retaining walls with raised planting strips.
■ stone or brick masonry walls with vines or shrubs.
Page 21 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 94
2.1.i
Barrier -free Access
Where wheelchair ramps must be provided on a street front, the ramp structure
might include a planting strip on the sidewalk side of the elevated portions of the
ramp.
Steep Topography
Special plantings or erosion control measures may be necessary to prevent site
destabilization or to enhance the visual qualities of the site in connection with a
neighborhood improvement program.
Boulevards
Incorporate landscaping which reflects and reinforces .
Greenbelt or Other Natural Setting
■ Minimize the removal of significant trees.
■ Replace trees that were removed with new trees.
■ Emphasize naturalizing or native landscape materials.
■ Retain natural greenbelt vegetation that contributes to greenbelt
preservation.
■ Select colors that are more appropriate to the natural setting.
On -site Vegetation
Retain significant vegetation where possible.
Use new plantings similar to vegetation removed during construction, when
that vegetation as distinctive.
Page 22 of 22 Revised by ADB 3/1/06
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 95
2/18/2021 Print Preview
Chapter 16.43
BD - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS
Sections:
16.43.000 Purposes.
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
16.43.020 Uses.
16.43.030 Site development standards.
16.43.035 Design standards - BD zones.
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
16.43.000 Purposes.
The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and
commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC:
A. Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated
businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a destination
for visitors from throughout the region.
B. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian
links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity.
C. Identify supporting arts and mixed -use residential and office areas which support and complement
downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at downtown's focal center while
providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this
retail core area.
D. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Arts
on small-scale retail, service, and multifamily residential uses. [Ord. 3918 § 1 (Att. 1), 2013; Ord. 3700
§ 1, 2008].
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
The "downtown business" zone is subdivided into five distinct subdistricts, each intended to
implement specific aspects of the comprehensive plan that pertain to the Downtown Waterfront
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 96
2/18/2021 Print Preview
Activity Center. Each subdistrict contains its own unique mix of uses and zoning regulations, as
described in this chapter. The five subdistricts are:
BD1 - Downtown Retail Core;
BD2 - Downtown Mixed Commercial;
BD3 - Downtown Convenience Commercial;
BD4 - Downtown Mixed Residential;
BD5 - Downtown Arts Corridor. [Ord. 3918 § 1 (Att. 1), 2013; Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008].
16.43.020 Uses.
A. Table 16.43-1.
Permitted Uses
BD1
BD1
GFSF���
BD2
BD3
BD4
BD5
Commercial Uses
Retail stores or sales
A
A
A
A
A
A
Offices
A
X
A
A
A
A
Legal/law firms
A
X
Financial
A
X
Advising
A
X
Mortgage
A
X
Banks (without tellers)
A
X
Accounting
A
X
Counseling
A
X
Architecture
A
X
Engineering
A
X
Advertising
A
X
Insurance
A
X
Fitness related business (yoga/pilates/gym/fitness club)
A
X
Service uses
A
A(2)
A
A
A
A
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 97
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
BD1
Permitted Uses
BD1
GFSF���
BD2
BD3
BD4
BD5
Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage
X
X
X
X
X
X
areas, such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of
a new car sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment
storage, sales or services
Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with
A
A
A
A
A
A
and on the same property as an art studio, art gallery,
restaurant, microbreweries/distilleries or food service
establishment that also provides an on -site retail outlet
open to the public
Automobile sales and service
X
X
A
A
X
X
Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only
C
X
A
A
A
X
nonflammable and nonexplosive cleaning agents
Printing, publishing and binding establishments
C
X
A
A
A
C
Public markets licensed pursuant to provisions in Chapter
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.90 ECCt
Residential
Single-family dwelling
A
X
A
A
A
A
Multiple dwelling unit(s) - must be located on second floor
A
X
A
A
A
A
or behind first 45 feet from sidewalk or rights -of -way
Other Uses
Bus stop shelters
A
A
A
A
A
A
Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020
A
A
A
A
A
A
Primary and high schools, subject to the requirements of
A
X
A
A
A
A
ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R)
Local public facilities, subject to the requirements of ECDC
C
C
C
C
A
C
17.100.050
Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community
A
A
A
A
A
A
parks with an adopted master plan subject to the
requirements of ECDC 17.100.070
Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted
B
X
B
B
B
B
use
Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility
B
X
B
B
B
X
otherwise permitted in this zone
Commercial parking lots
C
X
C
C
C
X
Wholesale uses
X
X
X
C
X
X
Hotels and motels
A
A
A
A
A
A
Amusement establishments
C
C
C
C
C
C
3
a�
M
t
a
00
x
w
c
m
E
z
U
0
r
Q
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl
PLN2 Packet Pg. 98
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
Permitted Uses
BD1
BD1
GFSF���
BD2
BD3
BD4
BD5
Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions
C
X
C
C
C
C
Drive-in/through businesses (businesses with drive
through facilities)
X
X
C
A
C
X
Laboratories
X
X
C
C
C
X
Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed
as a permitted use
X
X
X
C
X
X
Day-care centers
C
X
C
C
A
C
Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes,
sanitariums
X
X
C
C
A
X
Medical uses, e.g.,
A
X
Physicians
A
X
Dental
A
X
Optometrist (without retail)
A
X
Physical therapy (without retail)
A
X
Counseling
A
X
Other similar medical services
A
X
Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that
do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as
defined in ECDC 21.85.033
A
A
A
A
A
A
Zoos and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not
meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in
ECDC 21.85.033
C
X
C
C
C
A
Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for
current alcoholics and drug abusers
X
X
C
C
A
X
Regional parks and community parks without a master
plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070
C
C
C
C
C
C
Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use
D
X
D
D
D
D
Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC
X
X
D
D
D
D
A = Permitted primary use
B = Permitted secondary use
C = Primary uses requiring a conditional use permit
D = Secondary uses requiring a conditional use permit
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 99
2/18/2021 Print Preview
X = Not permitted
NOTES:
(1) BD1 Zone GFSF = Ground Floor Designated Street Frontage (first 45 feet measured from public rights-of-way/sidewalk or parks/plazas) as 3
defined under Edmonds Community Development Code Map 16.43-1: Designated Street Front for BD Zones. Buildings set back 15 feet or m
more from the sidewalk shall not be subject to the BD1 Zone GFSF requirements. y
(2) Services - by appointment uses not providing open door retail/dining/entertainment functions as a primary component of the business
are not allowed within BD1 GFSF (first 45 feet). Open door businesses, e.g., real estate offices, banks (with tellers and no drive-throughs), nail
and hair salons are allowed.
For conditional uses listed in Table 16.43-1, the use may be permitted if the proposal meets the
criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the following criteria are met:
1. Access and Parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular access
shall only be provided consistent with ECDC 18.80.060. When a curb cut is necessary, it shall be
landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and shall be located and designed
to be as unobtrusive as possible.
2. Design and Landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the street and
contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four feet in height
along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50 percent open, such as a lattice
pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable due to the nature of the use
shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the following:
a. Architectural features or details;
b. Artwork;
c. Landscaping.
B. Exception to the BD1 GSFS. The owner of a building in the BD1 zone may apply for an exception
from the restrictions on offices and medical uses within the designated street front for leasable space
meeting all of the following criteria:
1. The space is less than 500 square feet;
2. The space does not contain direct access to the street or sidewalk;
3. The previous use was a nonconforming use (e.g., not retail); and
4. The space has been vacant for a period of more than six months. [Ord. 3955 § 1 (Att. A), 2014;
Ord. 3932 § 6, 2013; Ord. 3918 § 1 (Att. 1), 2013; Ord. 3894 § 4, 2012; Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008].
16.43.030 Site development standards.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 100
2/18/2021 Print Preview
A. Table 16.43-2.
Minimum
Height of
Ground Floor
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
within the
Sub
Minimum Lot
Minimum
Street
Side
Rear
Maximum
Designated
District
Area
Lot Width
Setback
Setback'
Setback'
Heightz
Street Front4
BD15
0
0
0
0
0
30'
15'
BD25
0
0
0
0
0
30'
12'
BD35
0
0
0
0
0
30'
12'
BD43,5
0
0
0
0
0
30'
12'
BD55
0
0
0
0
0
25'
12'
1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and
structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to
residentially (R) zoned property.
2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in ECDC 16.43.030(C).
3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building
contains a ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 45 feet measured from
the street front of the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial
space requirement (e.g., an entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed
for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. See ECDC 16.43.030(B)(8) for further details.
4 "Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street -front" means the vertical distance
from top to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground floor located
within the designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground floor is the only floor
above street grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is
not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. "Floor finish" is the exposed floor surface, including
coverings applied over a finished floor, and includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-
wall carpet, and concrete, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows an example of a
ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the "finished" ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in
this example.
5 Site development standards for single-family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-
6 zone.
r
Q
Map 16.43-1: Designated Street Front for BD Zones
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 101
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
I� Designated Street Front r
ff
00.
■OTTU +'.
i
us _
MAPLE ST
Of
7 — I _.i I 17
� w
w AL-oER ST
X
HOyYELL WAY
i+7
LU
en;
7 ERBEN DR I�
Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 102
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
77
1
B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground floor of
buildings in the BD zones.
1. For all BD zones, the ground floor is considered to be that floor of a building which is closest in
elevation to the finished grade along the width of the side of the structure that is principally
oriented to the designated street front of the building (this is normally the adjacent sidewalk).
For the purposes of this section, the ground "floor" is considered to be the sum of the floor
planes which, in combination, run the full extent of the building and are closest in elevation to
one another. For the purposes of this chapter, the definition of "ground floor" contained in ECDC
21.35.017 does not apply.
2. Designated Street Front. Map 16.43-1 shows the streets that define the designated street front
for all properties lying within the BD zones. The designated street front is defined as the 45 feet
measured perpendicular to the street front of the building lot fronting on each of the mapped
streets.
3. Minimum Height of the Ground Floor within the Designated Street Front. The minimum height
of the ground floor specified in Table 16.43-2 only applies to the height of the ground floor
located within the designated street front established in subsection (13)(2) of this section.
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 103
2/18/2021 Print Preview
4. Access to Commercial Uses within the Designated Street Front. When a commercial use is
located on the ground floor within a designated street front as defined in subsection (B)(2) of
this section, the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within seven inches
of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. "Grade" shall be as measured at the entry location.
Portions of the ground floor outside the designated street front of the building need not comply
with the access requirements specified in this section.
S. When the designated street front of a building is on a slope which does not allow both the
elevation of the entry and ground floor within the designated street front to be entirely within
seven inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, as specified in subsection (13)(4) of this section,
the portion of the ground floor of the building located within the designated street front may be
designed so that either:
a. The entry is located within seven inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the
commercial portion of the ground floor located within the designated street front is within
seven inches of the grade level of the entry; or
b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground floor
combination is within seven inches of the grade of the sidewalk.
c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining
where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice for the
primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the BD5 zone, the
primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue.
6. Within the BD1 zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses,
except that parking may be located on the ground floor so long as it is not located within the
designated street front.
7. Within the BD2 and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only
commercial uses within the designated street front. Any permitted use may be located on the
ground floor outside of the designated street front.
8. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a building. One
option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements
detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in subsection (B)(7) of this section. As a second option, if
more residential space is provided so that the ground floor does not meet the commercial use
requirements described in subsection (13)(7) of this section, then the building setbacks listed for
the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street
setback shall be landscaped and no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four feet in height Q
above sidewalk grade unless it is at least 50 percent open, such as in a lattice pattern.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 104
2/18/2021 Print Preview
9. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space,
meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in subsection (13)(7) of this section.
When development of the ground floor does not conform to these requirements, then
development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following requirements:
a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. "Orientation to 4th Avenue" shall mean that:
i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue.
ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural details
and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add interest at the
pedestrian (i.e., ground floor) level.
iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be located
between the building and the street front.
b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone, and potential live/work space is
required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on -site.
i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall
incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to enable
building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or art/fabrication
use. "Live/work space" means a structure or portion of a structure that combines a
commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone with a residential living
space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing business, or the owner's
employee, and that person's household. The live/work space shall be designed so that a
commercial or fabrication or home occupation use can be established within the space.
Figure 16.43-2: BD5 Development
Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 105
2/18/2021 Print Preview
Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry oriented to e
street.
10. Exceptions and Clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in subsections
(13)(1) through (9) of this section apply with the following exceptions or clarifications:
a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is
allowed as a permitted secondary use.
b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single-family
use is the only permitted primary use located on the property.
c. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing height
of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height, so long as the addition or
remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by more than
25 percent. Permitted uses may occupy an existing space regardless of whether that space
meets the ground floor requirements for height.
d. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the
ground floor commercial use requirement within the designated street front (e.g., when the
first 45 feet of a building are within a designated street front in the BD1 zone, parking may
not be located within that 45 feet).
e. For properties within the BD2 or BD3 zone which have less than 90 feet of depth
measured from the street front, parking may be located in the rearmost 45 feet of the
property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first 45 feet of the building. In no
case shall the depth of commercial space as measured from the street front of the building
be less than 30 feet.
f. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 45 feet of the building as measured
perpendicular to the street consist only of commercial uses and permitted secondary uses,
then permitted multiple -family residential unit(s) may be located behind the commercial
uses.
g. Recodified as ECDC 22.43.050(B)(4).
h. Within the BD1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor within the
designated street front shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk.
C. Building Height Regulations.
1. The basic height limit for each BD zone is described in Table 16.43-2 (see definition of "height"
detailed in ECDC 21.40.030).
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 106
2/18/2021 Print Preview
2. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building meets
one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15 feet of the public
right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building
design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from the upper portions of the building
through the use of differences in materials, windows, and/or architectural forms.
a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the pitch of all
portions of the roof is at least six-by-12 and the roof includes architectural features, such as
dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the roof line into distinct segments.
b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in subsection (C)
(2)(a) of this section, a building step -back shall be provided within 15 feet of any street front.
Within the 15-foot step -back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above
grade at the property line (normally the back of the sidewalk) or 30 feet above the "average
level" as defined in ECDC 21.40.030. For corner lots, a 15-foot step -back is required along
both street fronts. If a building located on a corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e., less
than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it to provide the required step -back on both street fronts,
then the step -back may be waived facing the secondary street.
3. Height Exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in ECDC 21.40.030, the following
architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in this chapter:
a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower, may
extend a maximum of five feet above the specified height limit if it is designed as an integral
architectural feature of the roof and/or facade of the building. The decorative architectural
element shall not cover more than five percent of the roof area of the building.
b. Roof or deck railings may extend a maximum of 42 inches above the specified height limit
within any building step -back required under subsection (C)(2)(b) of this section; provided,
that the railing is constructed so that it has the appearance of being transparent. An
example meeting this condition would be a railing that is comprised of glass panels.
D. Off -Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here apply
specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the requirements of this
chapter and the provisions contained in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, Off -Street Parking Regulations, the
provisions of this chapter shall apply.
1. Within the BD1 zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main Street.
2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within the
BD1, BD2, BD4, and BIDS zones.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 107
2/18/2021 Print Preview
E. Open Space Requirements.
1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of
more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least five percent of the lot
area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions to existing
buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10 percent. Open space shall
be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space may be provided as
any combination of:
a. Outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for
restaurants or food service establishments);
b. Public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public;
c. Landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public.
2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story.
3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75 percent of the
depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e., width is measured parallel to the
street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line).
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 108
2/18/2021
Print Preview
Figw'e 16_43-5= Ru(lding Size, Width and Open Space
2.1.i
Example.,
■ Building is on four
lots. each 300 20
feet_
■ Buil-ling width is
120 Feet.
Open space is
FegUired due to
building width, and
due to lot area.
Opera Space
provided exceeds
the 5% of lol area
requirement.
------- tol Lino&
Qodcling Area
�_30'-G"--�
r---------------TT------------------------------ T---------------ti
1 1 ■ 1 1
i 1 i 1 F
, • 1
1 1 a 1 1
1 ■ 1 �
1 1 a 1 1
+ 1 ■ 1 1
Total Lot Area = 14,400 sq. ft.
1 1 1
1 1 1
+ +
i 1 i 1 F
+ +
{ Building Foelprini ' 13,650 sq. ft.
1 . 1
Open Space Required � 720 sq. ft;
! 1
1
1 1
1 +
� i
i
i ►
1 1
1 +
i 1
•
1 a
` $uilding Width parallel to SlreeVROW '
120+-D„
i
1 1
i
1
i 1
i
i
1
1
F
F
'
Open Space
+ +
1
750 sq. ft.
! 1
■
1
+
,
0
;n
Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings listed on the
Edmonds register of historic buildings.
1. If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds historic preservation commission
under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the staff may modify or
waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise apply to the expansion,
remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff shall be processed as a Type II
development project permit application (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC).
a. Building step -backs required under subsection (C)(2)(b) of this section.
b. Open space required under subsection (E) of this section.
2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed on the
Edmonds register of historic buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions involving building
expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in ECDC 17.50.070(C).
3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings is
retained on -site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses located on
the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to the city shall be
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 109
2/18/2021 Print Preview
recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic building and ensuring
that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and appearance so long as the
additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the property. The easement shall
continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or any interest in the property is sold
G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units.
H. Screening. The required setback from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground
cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall
or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback, except for that portion of the BD zone
that is in residential use.
I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign standards shall
be the same as those that apply within the BC zone.
J. Satellite Television Antennas. In accordance with the limitations established by the Federal
Communications Commission, satellite television antennas greater than two meters in diameter shall
be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of ECDC 16.20.050. [Ord. 4140 § 1, 2019; Ord. 3918 § 1
(Att. 1), 2013; Ord. 3865 § 1, 2011; Ord. 3736 § 10, 2009; Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008].
16.43.035 Design standards - BD zones.
Design standards for the BD zones are contained in Chapter 22.43 ECDC. [Ord. 3918 § 1 (Att. 1), 2013;
Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008].
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building,
except:
1. Public uses such as utilities and parks;
2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots;
3. Drive-in businesses;
4. Plant nurseries;
5. Public markets; provided, that when located next to a single-family residential zone, the
market shall be entirely within a completely enclosed building;
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 110
2/18/2021 Print Preview
6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC;
7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of ECDC 17.70.040;
8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC;
9. Motorized and nonmotorized mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12 ECC
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Property Performance Standards
C. Interim Use Status - Public Markets.
1. Unless a public market is identified on a business license as a year-round market within the
city of Edmonds, a premises licensed as a public market shall be considered a temporary use. As
a temporary use, the city council finds that any signs or structures used in accordance with the
market do not require design review. When a location is utilized for a business use in addition to
a public market, the public market use shall not decrease the required available parking for the
other business use below the standards established by Chapter 17.50 ECDC. [Ord. 3932 § 7,
2013; Ord. 3918 § 1 (Att. 1), 2013; Ord. 3902 § 1, 2012; Ord. 3894 § 5, 2012; Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008].
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 111
2/18/2021 Print Preview
Chapter 22.43
DESIGN STANDARDS
FOR THE BD ZONES
Sections:
22.43.000 Applicability.
22.43.010 Massing and articulation.
22.43.020 Orientation to street.
22.43.030 Ground level details.
22.43.040 Awnings/canopies and signage.
22.43.050 Transparency at street level.
22.43.060 Treating blank walls.
22.43.070 Building HVAC equipment.
22.43.000 Applicability.
The design standards in this chapter apply to all development within the BD1, BD2, BD3, and BD4
downtown zones, except for multifamily buildings in the BD4 zone. [Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord
3697 § 2, 20081.
22.43.010 Massing and articulation.
A. Intent. To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings, and articulate the building
form to a pedestrian scale.
B. Standards.
1. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized by a
different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which the wall rises,
storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice,
projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 112
2/18/2021 Print Preview
Buildings should convey a distinct base and top.
to
rM
bay C
The base can be emphasized by different material(s).
2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building exceeds the
historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as a combination of
materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional building widths. [Ord. 3918
§ 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
22.43.020 Orientation to street.
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 113
2/18/2021 Print Preview
A. Intent. To reinforce pedestrian activity and orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street
through building design.
B. Standards.
1. Building frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a parking
lot or alley.
2. Entrances to buildings in the BD1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street and
accessible from the adjacent sidewalk.
3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of the
following elements:
a. Higher bay(s);
b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet);
c. Forecourt and entrance plaza.
Buildings shall be oriented to the street.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 114
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
--MMEM1pp�
Entrances shall be given visually distinct expression.
[Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
22.43.030 Ground level details.
A. Intent. To reinforce the character of the streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual
interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets.
B. Standards.
1. Ground -floor, street -facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall incorporate
at least five of the following elements:
a. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets;
b. Medallions;
c. Belt courses;
d. Plinths for columns;
e. Bulkhead for storefront window;
f. Projecting sills;
g. Tile work;
h. Transom or clerestory windows;
i. Planter box;
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 115
2/18/2021 Print Preview
j. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent.
2.1.i
2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the sidewalk, as
provided for in ECDC 16.43.030.
WW10Ac
Ground floor details encourage visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian
streets.
[Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
22.43.040 Awnings/canopies and signage.
A. Intent.
1. To integrate signage and weather protection with building design to enhance business
visibility and the public streetscape.
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 116
2/18/2021 Print Preview
2. To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to improve way -finding for
visitors.
3. To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered, and to minimize distraction from overuse
of advertisement elements.
B. Standards.
1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not provided,
then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a metal or other
framework.
2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage. Front
valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns.
3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted.
4. Retractable awnings are encouraged.
5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame storefronts, and
should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies should be hung just
below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists.
6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale
and position, but need not be identical.
Open -sided nonstructural awning with front valance.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 117
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
Open -sided structural canopy.
J
7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials.
Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are
not permitted.
8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Combinations of
sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while minimizing the size of
individual signs.
9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements
are preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or less are permitted
and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage permitted for a business in
Chapter 20.60 ECDC. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one of the required elements
under ECDC 22.43.030(B).
10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering.
11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to
only display lettering and symbols or graphic design.
12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or contributes to the
historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or
on a city council -approved historic survey.
13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An historic sign
may be used to meet this standard.
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 118
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
Retractable and open -sided awnings allow signage to be visible.
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl
Atta
N2 Packet Pg. 119
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
[Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
22.43.050 Transparency at street level.
A. Intent. To provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building.
B. Standards.
1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front shall have
transparent windows covering a minimum of 75 percent of the building facade that lies between
an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade.
Attar"
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 120
2/18/2021 Print Preview
2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit
visibility between the street and interior.
3. Where transparency is not required, the facade shall comply with the standards under ECDC
22.43.060.
Ground level facades of buildings should have transparent windows between two to 10 feet above
grade.
Windows shall provide a visual connection between activities inside and outside the building, and
therefore should not be mirrored or use darkly tinted glass.
4. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and
unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior
from public view from the sidewalk.* [Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
*Code reviser's note: Subsection (B)(4) of this section was formerly codified as ECDC 16.43.030(B)(10)(g).
22.43.060 Treating blank walls.
A. Intent. To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 121
2/18/2021 Print Preview 2.1
B. Standards.
1. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where windows
are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under ECDC 22.43.050). At 3
least five of the following elements shall be incorporated into any ground floor, street -facing
a�
facade:
a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative 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. Decorative tile work;
f. Medallions;
g. Opaque or translucent glass;
h. Artwork or wall graphics;
i. Lighting fixtures;
j. Green walls;
k. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent.
nyr" Jifwe OpWLWffletwffl
"m
plzoa�vcrxn+c*
7V��\
btu Ovumi
merar�anapy�- � - --
8larrk wad's MJ be Nated wNh afoVsctural
0MVIAds10pmwidevisudF#Vomsf.
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 122
2/18/2021
Print Preview
2.1.i
Buildings shall not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street.
[Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
22.43.070 Building HVAC equipment.
A. Intent. To ensure that HVAC equipment, elevators, and other building utility features are designed
to be a part of the overall building design and do not detract from the streetscape.
B. Standards.
1. Rooftop HVAC equipment, elevators and other rooftop features shall be designed to fit in with
the materials and colors of the overall building design. These features shall be located away
from the building edges to avoid their being seen from the street below. If these features can be
seen from the adjoining street, building design shall use screening, decoration, plantings (e.g.,
rooftop gardens), or other techniques to integrate these features with the design of the building,
2. When HVAC equipment is placed at ground level, it shall be integrated into building design
and/or use screening techniques to avoid both visual and noise impacts on adjoining properties
Rooftop equipment should be screened from view.
[Ord. 3918 § 2 (Att. 2), 2013; Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008].
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 123
2/18/2021 Print Preview
3
O
m
t
d
co
t
K
W
C
N
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Atta
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/cgi/menuCompile.pl PLN2 Packet Pg. 124
2.1.i
Urban Design
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 integrated into the natural environment helps create the community's special
characteristics and contribute to the quality of life in Edmonds.
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. Views, especially
views from public corridors and public places, are an important community asset.
However, unsightly development — of poor quality or design — does exist in the City. Aging buildings
in some parts of the City can create an aesthetic problem if they are not maintained. Retaining
historic buildings can positively reinforce the character of an area such as downtown. The strip type
of development along Highway 99 has often resulted in economic underdevelopment of private
properties that end up being aesthetically displeasing.
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
excessive or of 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 can be better integrated with the landscape.
Urban Design Goals & Policies
The general design objectives provided with this goal are intended to provide general guidance, while
the subsequent design objectives (Goals B, C and D) for specific locations or situations are intended
to supplement the general objectives and add more guidance for those specific situations.
Each key goal in this element (or section) is identified by an alphabet letter (for example, "D").
Goals are typically followed by associated policies and these are identified by the letter of the goal
and a sequential number (for example, "D.2")
General Design Goal A. Design goals and objectives are intended to provide a set of tools for the
City to use to guide future development to result in high quality, well -designed, and sensitive
projects that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. The goals and related objectives
contained in this section are intended to:
• improve the physical appearance and character of Edmonds,
• improve retail and pedestrian circulation options,
Community Culture and Urban Design 122
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 125
2.1.i
• improve business opportunities,
• protect natural environments using sustainable design practices,
• protect and enhance the residential character of Edmonds.
General Design Objectives
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.
A.1 Vehicular Access. Reduce the numbers and width of driveways (curb cuts) in order
to improve pedestrian, bicycle and auto safety.
A.2 Layout of Parking. Locating buildings in proximity to the street to facilitate direct
pedestrian access and help define the street edge. Parking should be placed to the
side and rear.
A.3 Connections On- and Offsite. Design site access and circulation within and
between sites to encourage linkages for pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles. Special
attention should be paid to providing and improving connections to transit.
A.4 Building Entry Location. Building entries should be configured to provide clear
entry points to buildings, be oriented to pedestrian walkways/pathways, and
support the overall intent of the streetscape environment. Space at the entry for
gathering or seating is desirable for residential or mixed use buildings.
A.5 Setbacks. Create and maintain the landscape and site characteristics of each
neighborhood area and provide a common street frontage tieing each site to its
neighbor. Setbacks should be appropriate to the desired streetscape, providing for
transition areas between public streets and private building entries where a variety
of activities and amenities can occur.
A.6 Open Space. For residential settings, create green spaces to enhance the visual
attributes of the development and provide places for interaction, play, seating, and
other activities.
A.7 Building/Site Identity. Improve pedestrian access and way -finding by providing
variety in building forms, colors, materials and individuality of buildings.
A.8 Weather Protection. Provide covered walkways and entries for pedestrian weather
protection.
Community Culture and Urban Design 123
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 126
2.1.i
A.9 Lighting. Provide adequate and appropriate illumination in all areas used by
automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians — including building entries, walkways,
parking areas, circulation areas and other open spaces — to support activity and
security.
A.10 Signage. Encourage signage that provides clear information and direction for
properties and businesses while preventing the streetscape from becoming
cluttered. Encourage the use of graphics and symbols in signage to support the
city's emphasis on uniqueness and the arts.
A.11 Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical Systems. Minimize the noise, odor
and visual impacts of utility systems using such features as landscaping, building
forms, or integrated design.
A.12 Integrating Site Features. Integrate natural landscape features and unique landforms
— such as rocky outcroppings or significant trees — into site design whenever
possible.
A.13 Landscape Buffers. Use landscaping and/or other features such as fences to
maintain privacy and create a visual barrier between incompatible uses. These
buffering techniques should also be used to soften hard edges (such as the
perimeters of parking lots) and reinforce pedestrian ways and circulation routes.
Native plants and rain gardens should be promoted as alternatives to lawns and
runoff retention areas.
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.
A.14 Building Form. Encourage new construction to avoid repetitive, monotonous
building forms.
A.15 Massing. Reduce the apparent bulk and mass of buildings by encouraging human
scale elements in building design and/or by subdividing building masses vertically
or horizontally.
A.16 Roof Modulation. Use roof forms to help identify different programs or functional
areas within the building and support differentiation of building form and massing.
Roof design, in combination with wall modulation, can allow for additional light to
enter buildings or pedestrian spaces.
A.17 Wall Modulation. Variation in materials, decorative elements, or other features
should be employed to support pedestrian scale environments and streetscapes, or
to help break up large building masses to keep in scale with the surrounding
environment.
Community Culture and Urban Design 124
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 127
2.1.i
Design Objectives for Building Facade. 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 and demonstrates the strong sense of place and integrity valued by the residents of
the City of Edmonds.
A.18 Building Facade Design. Encourage building fagades that reinforce the appearance
and consistency of streetscape patterns while supporting diversity and identity in
building design.
A.19 Window Variety and Articulation. Use window size and placement to help define
the scale and character of the building. Use the organization and combinations of
window types to reinforce the streetscape character or to provide variation in a
facade, as well as provide light and air to the building interior.
A.20 Variation in Facade Materials. Employ variation in materials, colors or design
elements on building fagades to help define the scale and style of the structure.
Variation in facade materials can help reduce the apparent bulk of larger buildings
while allowing variety and individuality of building design.
Urban Design Goals & Policies for Specific Areas
In. addition to the general design goal and objectives described above under Goal A, supplemental
design objectives are outlined below for specific areas or districts within the city.
Each key goal in this element (or section) is identified by an alphabet letter (for example, "D").
Goals are typically followed by associated policies and these are identified by the letter of the goal
and a sequential number (for example, "D.2")
Urban Design Goal B: Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. Design objectives and
standards should be carefully crafted for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center to encourage
its unique design character and important place -making status within the city.
B.1 Vehicular Access and Parking. Driveways and curb cuts should be minimized to
assure a consistent and safe streetscape for pedestrians. When alleys are present,
these should be the preferred method of providing vehicular access to a property
and should be used unless there is no reasonable alternative available.
Configuration of parking should support a "park and walk" policy that provides
adequate parking while minimizing impacts on the pedestrian streetscape.
B.2 Pedestrian Access and Connections. Improve pedestrian ,
access from the street by locating buildings close to the
street and sidewalks, and defining the street edge. Cross
walks at key intersections should be accentuated by the
use of special materials, signage or paving treatments.
Transit access and waiting areas should be provided where
appropriate.
Community Culture and Urban Design 125
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 128
2.1.i
B.3 Building Entry Location. Commercial building entries should be easily
recognizable and oriented to the pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk
grade.
IM
Building Setbacks. Create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to
tie each site to its neighbor. Encourage the
creation of public spaces to enhance the �1 '
visual attributes of the development and
encourage outdoor interaction. hi the
Waterfront area west of the railroad,
buildings should be set back from the
waterfront to preserve and provide a buffer
from existing beach areas. In the
Waterfront area, 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.
Building/Site Identity. In the downtown area, retain a connection with the scale and
character of downtown through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms,
masses or building elements. Encourage
new construction to use designs that 4�r
reference, but do not replicate historic '
forms or patterns.
B.6 Weather Protection. Provide a covered
walkway for pedestrians traveling along
public sidewalks or walkways.
B.7 Signage. Lighting of signs should be indirect or
minimally backlit to display lettering and symbols or
graphic design instead of broadly lighting the face of the
sign. Signage using graphics or symbols or that
contributes to the historic character of a building should
be encouraged.
Art and Public Spaces. Public art and amenities such as
mini parks, flower baskets, street furniture, etc., should
be provided as a normal part of the public streetscape.
Whenever possible, these elements should be continued
in the portion of the private streetscape that adjoins the public streetscape. In the 4'
Avenue Arts Corridor, art should be a common element of building design, with
greater design flexibility provided when art is made a central feature of the design.
B.9 Building Height. Create and preserve a human scale for downtown buildings.
Building frontages along downtown streetscapes should be pedestrian in scale.
B.10 Massing. Large building masses should be subdivided or softened using design
elements that emphasize the human scale of the streetscape. Building fagades
should respect and echo historic patterns along downtown pedestrian streets.
Community Culture and Urban Design 126
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 129
2.1.i
B.11
Building Fagade. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long facades into
defined forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant spaces in
commercial and mixed use areas. Avoid blank, monotonous and imposing building
facades using design elements that add detail and emphasize the different levels of
the building (e.g. the top or cornice vs. the pedestrian level or
building base).
B.12 Window Variety and Articulation. In the downtown retail and
mixed commercial districts, building storefronts should be
dominated by clear, transparent glass windows that allow and
encourage pedestrians to walk past and look into the
commercial space. Decorative trim and surrounds should be
encouraged to add interest and variety. Upper floors of
buildings should use windows as part of the overall design to
encourage rhythm and accents in the fagade.
Urban Design Goal C: Highway 99 Corridor. Additional Design Objectives for the Highway
99 Corridor should support its function as a locus of commercial and potential mixed use activity,
building on the availability of multiple forms of transportation and its proximate location to
surrounding neighborhoods.
C.1 General Appearance and Identity. Design of buildings and spaces along Highway
99 should encourage a feeling of identity associated with different sections of the
highway.
C.2 Site Design. Site design should allow for vechicular access and parking as well as
safe access and circulation for pedestrians. Whenever possible, sites should provide
connections between adjacent businesses and between businesses and nearby
residential neighborhoods.
C.3 Landscaping and Buffering. Landscaping, fencing or other appropriate techniques
should be used to soften the street front of sites and also used to buffer more
intensive uses from adjoining less intensive use areas (e.g. buffer commercial from
residential development).
Urban Design Goal D: Neighborhood Commercial Areas. Design in neighborhood
commercial areas should seek to support the function of the neighborhood center while paying
close attention to its place within the neighborhood setting.
D.1 Landscape and Buffering. Special attention should be paid to transitions from
commercial development to surrounding residential areas, using landscaping and/or
gradations in building scale to provide compatible development.
Community Culture and Urban Design 127
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 130
2.1.i
of EDA,
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal: Pine Park 614 is a proposal for three buildings and site improvements at 614 and 616
5th Ave. Six live/work units would be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5th Avenue (Buildings A and B) while
an eight -unit building would be behind the live/work buildings and face west (Building Q. Drive aisles west of the
buildings would load from the private alley south of the site. To accommodate the new project, the existing
improvements on the site will be removed.
Proponent: Jacob Young
Location of proposal, including street address if any: 614 & 616 5th Avenue South and adjacent private alley
(Tax ID #: 27032600100900, 27032600102900 & 27032600102300)
Lead agency: City of Edmonds
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse
impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) 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.
The City of Edmonds 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.
There is no comment period for this DNS.
This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no
further comment period on the 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 February 23, 2021.
Project Planner: Mike Clugston, Senior Planner (michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov)
Responsible Official: Rob Chave, Planning Manager (rob.chave@edmondswa.gov)
Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 1 425-771-0220
Date: February 9, 2021 Signature:
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 March 2, 2021. 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 February 9, 2021, at the Edmonds Public Library and Edmonds Public Safety
Building. Published in the Everett Herald. Emailed to the Department of Ecology SEPA Center
(SEPAunit@ecy.wa.gov). Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site.
XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies below.
Page 1 of 2
SEPA DETERMINATION PLN2020-0053 Attar"
2i4i2I.SEPA - PLN2 Packet Pg. 131
2.1.i
Information on this development application can be obtained online at http://edmondswa.gov/public-notices-
text/development-notices.html under the development notice for application number PLN2020-0053, by emailing
the listed City contacts, or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220.
Distribution List: This DNS and SEPA checklist were distributed to the following:
❑X Applicant
❑X
Dept. of Ecology
❑ City of Everett
❑X Parties of Record
❑
Dept. of Ecology - Shorelands
❑
City of Lynnwood
❑
Dept. of Natural Resources
❑
City of Mountlake Terrace
❑ US Army Corps of Engineers
❑
Dept. of Commerce
❑
City of Mukilteo
❑ US Fish and Wildlife
❑
WSDOT
❑
City of Shoreline
❑
WSDOT— Ferries
❑
Town of Woodway
❑X Puget Sound Energy
❑
Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
❑X Snohomish PUD
❑
Dept. of Health — Drinking Water
❑
Snohomish Co. Public Works
❑X Olympic View Water & Sewer
❑X
Dept. of Arch. & Historic Pres.
❑
Snohomish Co. PDS
❑ Alderwood Water District
❑
Dept. of Parks and Rec. Commission
❑
Snohomish Co. Health Dist.
❑ Edmonds School District
❑ Port of Edmonds
❑X
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
❑
King County - Transit
❑X South County Fire
❑
Puget Sound Regional Council
❑
King County— Environ. Planning
❑ Swedish Hospital
❑
Puget Sound Partnership
❑ Community Transit
❑X
Tulalip Tribe
❑
Other
pc: File No. PLN2020-0053
SEPA Notebook
Page 2 of 2
SEPA DETERMINATION PLN2020-0053 Atta
2i4i2I.SEPA - PLN2 Packet Pg. 132
OF EDAf
O
#P%1
2.1.i
Purpose of Checklist.
CITY OF EDMONDS
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental
impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help
you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to
help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this
checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer
the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer
the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if
a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may
avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if
you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of
land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you
submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there
may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
For nonproject proposals complete this checklist and the supplemental sheet for nonproject actions (Part D). the lead agency may
exclude any question for the environmental elements (Part B) which they determine do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of
the proposed nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be
read as "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Pine Park 614
2. Name of applicant:
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
10 Dravus Street
Seattle, WA 98109
206.535.7908
4. Date checklist prepared: December 10, 2020
5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds
Revised on 9116116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e I o 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 133
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): It is anticipated that this project will be constructed
starting in the summer of2022. Phased construction is not anticipated at this time.
(STAFF
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this
proposal? If yes, explain.
No
(STAFF COMMENTS)
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related
to this proposal.
A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and a Hazardous Building Materials Survey for the subiect properties were
completed by a prior owner. No additional studies are proposed as part of this project.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting
the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
A land use code amendment has been proposed which would permit unit lot subdivsions in the subject parcel's zone. The
proposed project includes townhouses, and it is possible that a ULS would be pursued if this amendment is approved bX
the City.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 2 of 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 134
2.1.i
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
The project will require district -based design review, a boundary line adjustment, a demolition permit, a right-of-way
construction permit and several building permits in addition to environmental review.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site.
There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You
do not need to repeat those answers on this page.
The project consists of three buildings containing a total of 14 townhouses. Two buildings would be located adjacent to
the 5' Avenue S rikht-of-way with the third building located toward the rear (west) of the subject. The two easterly
buildings would contain, in agzregate, six live/work townhouses. Each live/work townhouse would contain a
commercial suite on the at -grade story with two residential stories above. Parking for the live/work townhouses would
be located behind them and accessed via a drive aisle connected to the private alley south of the subiect. The westerly
building would contain ei hhtt purely residential townhouses, each containing three stories. Parking for these units
would be located in private ages on the lowest story. This parking would be accessed via a drive aisle near the
westerly_property line and connected to the private alley south of the subiect.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your
proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal
would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the
agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist.
The project site consists of two legal parcels identified by the Snohomish County Assessor as APN 270326-001-009-00
and APN 270326-001-029-00. These parcels are located on the west side of 5' Avenue S near its intersection with
Howell Way. The proiect's address is 614-616 Yh Aveue S.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 3 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 135
2.1.i
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other:
The site contains both steep and flat terrain. Please refer to the topographic survey for details.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The steepest slope is an apj2arently artificial embankment located near the center of the subiect. This embankment
supports the existing parking lot and appears to have a maximum slope of 88%, more or less.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, and muck)? If you
know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long term
commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils.
Per the project geotechnical report, the subject is generally underlain by "medium dense to very dense silty sand
with varyingproportions of silt and gravel. " (Zipper Geo Associates, p. 3) The report also notes that the native
soils are covered by a fill laver of varying thickness.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
The geotechnical report describes no such soils on the subiect, and City GIS does not show any known landslide
events in the immediate vicinity.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 4 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 136
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling,
excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Grading activities are expected to affect the entire subject (17.160 s to vag de rg ees. Approximately 450 cyf
excavation will be required to construct the westerly building. Additional excavation may also be required to
reach structurally competent soils beneath the easterly buildings, though the amount of excavation needed in this
area cannot be predicted at this time. If structural, fill is needed, it will be imported from a vendor. Excavated
native soils are to be used for non-structural fill.
The drive aisle between the buildings is to be regraded. It is anticipated that the cut and fill volumes for this work
will be approximately equal. The westerly drive aisle is expected to require relatively little rg ading though some
will be needed to prepare it for pavement installation.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
While erosion is always a possibility during construction, it is not anticipated that this project will result in
greater risks for erosion that are typical.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)?
Approximately 95%.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
Best mana em�ent practices (BMPs) will be employed to mitigate the risk and will be selected at a later date.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 5 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 137
2.1.i
2. AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and
industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe
and give approximate quantities if known.
Construction emissions will include those generated by construction equipment, particularly during the earthwork
phase. Dust may be generated during earthwork if it takes place duringthe dry season. Construction emissions
are expected to taper oe(' in later phases. The completed project is not anticipated to generate significant
emissions due to its primarily residential nature.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
No significant odor or emission sources are known in the vicinity.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the air, if any:
During construction, best management practices will be used to help reduce the amount of dust and other
emissions generated. BMP selection will take place at a later date. As a primarily residential development,
siznificant long-term emissions and odors are not anticipated. No mitigation measures are expected to be
necessary.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
3. WATER
a. Surface:
(1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and
seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If
appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
No.
(STAFF C
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 6 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 138
2.1.i
(2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface
water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill
material.
None.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? if so, note location on the site plan.
No.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the
type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 7 of 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 139
2.1.i
b. Ground:
(1) Will ground water be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a
general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well
Will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities if known.
No.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if
any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural;
etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be
served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
None.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
(1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any
(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If
so, describe.
Stormwater runoff will be generated by the proposed buildings and drive aisles. This water will be
collected via inlets and/or catch basins and routed to an infiltration gallery, detention system or other
Stormwater infrastructure. Overflows are anticipated to be discharged to the public storm main. The design
of these systems will be developed as part of the proiect's civil construction permit. No discharge to open
waters is anticipated.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta e 8 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 140
(3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so,
describe.
Approximately 60% of the subject is currently developed with impervious surfaces. Per the site survey, it
appears that runoff from the existing parking lot is collected by an inlet and conveyed to the public storm
main in 5' Avenue S. The existing structures appear to discharge their runoff via downspouts. It is unclear
whether the downspouts are connected to the public storm drain. As discussed in Item 3.c.1, the proposed
improvements may utilitize infiltration to keep stormwater on site or detention to slow its entry into the
public storm drain. These ,features will reduce the site's impact on public storm infrastructure, helping
mitigate the increased impervious area. No direct impacts on nearby offsite drainage patterns are
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if
any:
As noted in Item 3.c.1, the protect is expected to include infiltration, detention or another onsite storm drainage
facility for this purpose.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: (3) street trees and (2) others. Species unknown.
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other:
X shrubs Various types of shrubs were observed, though species are unknonw a this time.
X grass Portions of the subject near the westerly boundary line
pasture
crop or grain
Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other:
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other:
other types of vegetation:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ge 9 of 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 141
2.1.i
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Most or all onsite vegetation will be removed during construction.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site,
if any:
A landscape bud er is proposed along the westerly boundary line. It is anticipated that these plantings will be
selected for their compatibility with local conditions, helping ensure survival and reducing the necessiU for long-
term irrigation. Street trees and frontage plantings will also be provided as required by City standards.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 10 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 142
2.1.i
5. Animals
a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near
the site. Examples include: None observed.
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The site is not known to be part of a migration route.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
None proposed.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 11 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 143
2.1.i
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed
project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
The project will primarily rely upon electrical energy. Naturalgas may be used for cooking and water heating. A
final determination on the use of natural gas will be made as part of the building permit documents.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
The nronosed improvements are most likelv to affect the use of solar energv by the northerlv neighboring parcel.
As relevant zoning permits zero -lot -line development, shading_of the southerly_ portions of this lot will occur in the
vicinity of the proposed buildings. However, the northerly portions of the neighboring lot will likely be unaffected
due to the low height limit. It is likely that careful siting of solar facilities on the northerly neighboring lot will
allow future projects to take advantage ofsolar energy despite the shading produced by this proiect. For example,
it may be possible to locate future solar facilities on rooftops, raising them out of the shaded area.
The westerly neighboring parcel may also experience some shading during the morning hours. However, the
neighboring parcel has placed a parking lot in its easterly portions. Thus, shading produced by this proiect is
likely to ,fall on the parking lot rather than the south -facing roof planes of the existing buildings on the
nei hag lot. These roof planes are likely the best location for future solar facilities on the neighboring lot;
thus, the impacts of the current proiect are minor.
The easterly neighboring parcels are on the opposite side of 5t1i Avenue S, a 60 ft wide right-of-way. This distance
appears to be sufficient to avoid any shading of those parcels.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed
measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
The proiect will be designed to the 2018 Washington State Energy Code, which includes numerous energy
conservation requirements. Specific compliance measures will be determined as part of the building permit
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 12 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 144
2.1.i
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe.
The project includes primarily residential ,floor area with some commercial space. While any combustible
construction presents a degree otfire risk, it is expected that this proiect will not involve any unusual hazards. No
use of hazardous materials is anticipated. Any existing hazardous materials discovered during demolition will be
disposed of according to standard practices.
(STAFF
(1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
A hazardous materials survey of the subiect discovered several asbestos-bearink materials in both existing
structures. Lead -based paint was also found. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment determined that a
dry cleaner was historically located at 622 Srh Avenue S, and it is possible that the subiect has been
contaminated by this facility. The ESA also found small quantities of chlorinated solvents stored in the
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design.
This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the
project area and in the vicinity.
Per the site survey, a natural gas main is located in the Srh Avenue S right-of-way approximately 12 ftfrom
the subject's easterly boundary line.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the
project's development or constructions, or at any time during the operating life of the project.
As noted in Item 7.a.1, small quantities of chlorinated solvents were found in the existing structures.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 13 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 145
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None anticipated.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Existing hazardous materials will be disposed of according to standard practices. No unusual measures are
expected to be necessary at this time.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Noise
(1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment,
operation, other)?
5`h Avenue S is a busy arterial, resulting in traffic noise. The northerly and southerly neighboring parcels
contains several restaurants, possibly resulting in additional noise concerns. Other nearby parcels are
residential in character and unlikely to generate significant noise.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or
a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
would come from the site.
Short-term noise is to be expected throughout construction during standard work hours (lam to 6pm
Monday -Friday and 10am to 6pm Saturday). No significant long-term noise is anticipated in this primarily
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 14 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 146
2.1.i
(3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Short-term impacts will be mitigated through limiting work hours to those permitted by City ordinance.
Long-term mitigation is not anticipated to be necessary.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on
nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.
The subiect is currently developed with two low-rise commercial buildings and a shared parking lot. The existing
buildings are presently vacant but have been recently occupied as office space and an ice cream parlor. No
impacts on nearby or adjacent land uses are anticipated.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much
agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result
of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest
land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use?
The subiect has been developed with nonfarm and nonforest uses for several decades. The proposal retains this
nonfarm, nonforest character.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business
operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If
so, how:
No.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 15 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 147
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Describe any structures on the site.
Two low-rise, CMU masonry structures are present on the subiect. The northerly structure is a sin leg�sto
building most recently occupied by an ice cream parlor. The southerly structure contains one above -grade story
and one basement. It was most recently occupied by several office uses.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Both existing structures will be demolished.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
BD-3
(STAFF COMMENTS)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Downtown Convenience
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site?
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 16 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 148
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
h. Has any part of the site been classified critical area by the city? If so, specify.
The entire subject is shown to be part of a seismic hazard area in Edmonds' GIS. The steggly-sloped area near the
middle of the subject is also shown as a landslide hazard and severe erosion hazard in the GIS.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Aproximately 42 people Lper townhouse).
(STAFF COMMENTS)
j•
k.
Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None. The subiect is not currently developed with residential uses.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
No displacement.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if
any:
The proiect proposes primarily residential uses, and existing residences are located to the east and west of the
subiect. Commercial uses are located to the north and south, and provision of live/work units along 5' Avenue S
continues this pattern of commercial uses ad
iacent to the arterial.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 17 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 149
2.1.i
In. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial
significance, if any:
Not applicable in this location.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income
housing.
Fourteen units are proposed. These are likely to be middle -to -high income housing.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income
housing.
None.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
None needed as no units will be removed.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principle
exterior building material(s) proposed?
The structures are restricted to a maximum of 30 ft above average trade. Exterior materials have not vet been
selected but may include brick, fiber cement panel, metal and glass.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 18 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 150
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Views from the parcels on the opposite side of 5' Avenue S will be altered by the construction of the new
buildings. As the affected parcels are located above the subiect, this is partially mitigated by existing topography.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
The project is subiect to district -based design review, and aesthetic impacts will be considered during that
process.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
The proposal includes expanses of glazing on the east and west facades of all buildings. Interior lighting thus
could spill onto the sidewalk and the parking lot on the westerly neighboringparcel. As a primarily residential
project, this is most likely to occur during morning and evening hours. Light will also be produced by vehicles
entering and leaving the subiect.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
Safety hazards due to light or glare are not anticipated. Impacts to views are expected to be minor due to the
small scale of the project and lack of pole -mounted lighting. Its primarily residential nature also results in
minimal 24-hr lighting. While it is anticipated that the 5`h Avenue S sidewalk will be lit throughout the night, much
of the subiect will be darkened once residents zo to bed.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Street lighting in the 5t1i Avenue S right-of-way may affect the interior environment of the easterly buildings.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 19 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 151
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Parking is located between and behind the buildings, reducingits is impacts on nei hb�oringparcels and the ri hh
of -way. The proposed landscape bue(fer along the westerlyproperty boundary_ further reduces the impact of ligh
on the westerly nei h�gparcel.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
The subiect is two blocks from Edmonds City Park. It is also adjacent to several eating and drinking
establishments. The subiect is approximately Y2 mile from downtown Edmonds and the various recreational
opportunities there.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe.
No.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be
provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Roof decks are proposed on the westerly building to provide a passive, onsite recreation opportunity. The project
is also required to contribute parks impact fees, helpinggate any effects of increased demand on Edmonds
City Park to the west.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 20 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 152
2.1.i
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in, or
eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe.
Both existing structures are over 45 years old. They have not been included in preservation registers.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may
include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural
importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such
resources.
Per the WISAARD database, there is a high to very high risk of encountering archaeological artifacts in the
general vicinity. The database also notes that the area is considered a Tribal Area of Interest for the Tulalifl,
Swinomish, Suquamish, Snogualmie, Sauk Suittle Tribe, Samish Indian Nation and Muckleshoot peoples. No
archaeological studies of the subiect parcel are known to have been conducted, and no evidence of cultural
resources has been observed.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the
project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the Department of Archeology and Historic
Preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS date, etc.
The WISAARD and Edmonds Re is�of Historic Places databases have been consulted.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources.
Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
None anticipated.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 21 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 153
2.1.i
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area, and describe proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The subiect is served by 5' Avenue S. It is also served by a privately -owned alley.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not,
what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
Yes, the subiect is served by Community Transit via Sah Avenue S. The nearest stop is located at the intersection of
5`h Avenue S and Howell Way.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or nonproject proposal have? How
many would the project or proposal eliminate?
The proposal includes a total of 20 new parking spaces. The existing parking, lot contains 15 spaces and is to be
removed. Thus, the proposal results in a net ainot the spaces.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state
transportation facilities not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private).
During the pre -application conference. City staff indicated that the project will be required to construct frontage
improvements on the west side of the Srh Avenue S right-of-way. These improvements include sidewalk, planter
strip and street trees, driveway access to the private alley, curb and nutter.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 22 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 154
2.1.i
e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If
so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and
passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates?
Per the ITE Manual, midrise multi amily development in a general urban or suburban context generates
approximately 0.44 trips per unit. Also per this manual, small office spaces (such as those provided in the
live/work units) typically generate 2.45 trips per 1000 sf gross floor area. Using these values, the project is
expected to generate approximately 14.3 trips per day. No truck traffic is anticipated due to the primarily
residential nature of the proiect.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products
on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
Not anticipated in this urban area.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
In addition to the frontage improvements discussed above, the project is required to provide transportation impact
fees. Thise undin_ may be used by the City as necessary to mitigate impacts to the transportation network.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 23 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 155
2.1.i
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police
protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The proiect increases the number of residential units on the sub'el ct, generating a corresponding increase in the
need for public services. As the proiect is relatively small, the impact is expected to be minor.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any:
Not anticipated to be necessary for this small-scale proiect.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone,
sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
All listed utilities are already available to the subiect.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general
construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed.
Electricity: Snohomish PUD. Underground connections from a common vault are anticipated.
Natural Gas:Puvet Sound EnerQv. New service lines will be needed.
Water: City of Edmonds. New service lines will be needed.
Refuse Service: Sound Disposal. Collection area(s) to be designed at a later date.
Communications: Various purveyors. It is anticipated that telephone, cable and Internet will be provided.
Sanitary Sewer: City of Edmonds. New side sewers will likely be needed.
Storm Drainage: Qty ofEdmonds. New onsite drainage improvements are proposed with overflow to the main.
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta P =e 24 of 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 156
2.1.i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. SIGNATURE
I declare under penalty of perjury law110
that the above answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that the lead agency is re ing on them make its decision.
12.10.2020
Date Submitted
Revised on 9119116
SEPA Checklist.doc
Atta ' P e 25 0 25
PLN2 Packet Pg. 157
2.1.i
CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING and
SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pine Park 614 is a proposal for three buildings and site improvements at 614 and 616
5th Ave. Six live/work units would be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5th Avenue
(Buildings A and B) while an eight -unit building would be behind the live/work buildings
and face west (Building C). Drive aisles west of the buildings would load from the
private alley south of the site. To accommodate the new project, the existing
improvements on the site will be removed.
The project site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial (BD3). District -based
design review projects that require a SEPA determination are Type III -A decisions,
which require a two-phase public hearing and decision by the Architectural Design
Board (ADB).
PROJECT LOCATION: 614 & 616 5th Avenue South and adjacent private alley (Tax ID #: 27032600100900,
27032600102900 & 27032600102300)
NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
REQUESTED PERMITS: District -based design review, SEPA determination
COMMENTS ON
PROPOSAL DUE: March 3, 2021
PUBLIC HEARING
INFORMATION: Due to COVID-19, Phase 1 of the two-phase virtual public hearing will be held by the
Architectural Design Board on March 3, 2021 at 7 p.m. Join the Zoom meeting at:
https://zoom.us/i/95360544929?pwd=ZmdOREFORkE3RkRaeVdBRmpkNUxMZz09
Or via phone by dialing 253-215-8782
Meeting ID: 953 6054 4929
Password: 818962
The hearing will be continued to a date certain for Phase 2 of the public hearing during
the March 3 meeting.
Any person has the right to comment on this application during public comment period,
receive notice and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the
application. The City may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the
record of an open record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision
hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit.
Information on this development application can be found at
http://edmondswa.gov/public-notices-text/development-notices.html under the
development notice for application number PLN2020-0053, by emailing the City contact
listed below, or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220. Please refer to the
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 158
2.1.i
application number for all inquiries. A copy of the staff report will be available at least
seven days prior to the hearing.
SEPA DETERMINATION: Notice is hereby given that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of
Nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340 for the above project.
DATE OF ISSUANCE: February 9, 2021
SEPA COMMENTS DUE: Comments regarding the SEPA determination are due February 23, 2021.
SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by filing a written appeal citing the specific
reasons for appeal with the required appeal fee no later than March 2, 2021 by 4:00
p.m. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an
administrative appeal.
CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
425-771-0220
ri .
/1 BUILDING C VIEWED FROM WEST
uxe nee
BUILDING A VIEWED FROM EAST
s uc nu
BUILDINGS A & B VIEWED FROM NORTHEAST
E -
n PROJECT VIEWED FROM SOUTH
�nc.,�cR.rts
n POJECT VIEWED FROM SOUTH
�a BUILDINGS A & B VIEWED FROM EAST
sw�• .ns
Packet Pg. 159
city
of Edmonds Adjacent Property Owner List
'ri4
-;1 -1 9' 2 410
•110
97 i
13 -1 43
N 4 5 r
1_
_ J — _ WALNUT-sT-
4:3
---� -- = l 50,
6 t
5'•4 �
417 `I
1 _
51 l ----
- :tip I�i
Q13 405
3`3 1 40i 550 31
43c � 525 L
r5
4 , F11. 1 . J -
I � I
3i$
5i1
i1S `17 I� — L—•
LL! 5, LL1 �-
1 55 1 b
6C3
Ln
Q -I
5or' Gut
- 611
r 5-ii 502 �` _
504 (0
r.
7117V DR -
518 5z
`,7' 541.E-
5 4�
5< )54
511 _ - - 504 7
706 V7
Li.
�-
M
J
V) _7 534
`r T P
541 554
W
I I
-
f` - ----------...--
54�6ZL
I - - - -- ---- - ---- of 7
5=5 654
555 654 I t
I bit 614
- -.
ERBEWDR
I 515-
9ix1
-0 70_
iit3
1 = _ nH+viGlaV' 1r rrL Y:
7,19 710
S2i r Sd9 5e 902 90B
I
RKS
F.°,
727
525 529
DEPT
916
i21
51`. 527 s "• �• 6I1
�
I
PINE ST
,
1: 3,031
�,
N. Z ,
.
�. .c. _
410
d
0 252.60 50S.2 Feet 376.2 This ma is a user generated static output from an Internet ma
4, 514 P g P Aping site and is fo
reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate
WGS-1 984-Web-M ercator-Auxil ia ry-Sp here current, or otherwise reliable
© City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTIOP
l.y°- IL
YL
iounUak• �
l7ettace
l�
Legend
Notes
300' Property Owner Addresses for
PLN2020-0053
A Packet Pg. 160 1
2.1.i
00409600200200
533 EDMONDS LLC
23520 WOODWAY PARK RD,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00477300000500
BAKKEN JAN 0
516 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00906500030000
BC 300 LLC
PO BOX 1044,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032600102300
BK INVESTMENT GROUP LLC
557 ROY ST STE 125,
SEATTLE, WA 98109
00906500040200
BRADLEY DRAKE R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 402,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101904
CHALMERS GINA LIVING TRUST
318 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4118
00720000110700
CHAN MAN HOI
4380 E MARSHALL COURT,
GILBERT, AZ 85297
00906500040400
DAHLSTROM TIMOTHY & MURPHY
DONNA
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 404,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
00409600101500
DOWD-TIMONEN PATRICIA TRUST
534 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
27032500210500
APPLE TWO LLC
14227 EVERGREEN WAY,
STANWOOD, WA 98292
00880600010100
BANKSTON JOHN K & SHERILYN M
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 101,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000000400
BEDDALL BRADLEY
19515 27TH N W,
SEATTLE, WA 98177
00409600101903
BOZE TIMOTHY A & TAM R
314 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4118
00409600100300
BURKCAROL
515 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500010300
CHAN DAVID & NAKAGAWA JANE
1758 43RD AVE,
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94122
27032500215300
COLUMBIA CITY PARTNERS LLC
4201 6TH AVE S,
SEATTLE, WA 98108
00477300001501
DAWSON WES C
539 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00409600101400
DRULLINGER MARK A
544 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
00649300200100 00872700051400
FAIRCHILD FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING FARMER JAMES R & PATRICIA W
TRUST 514 4TH AVE S,
519 4TH AVE S UNIT A, EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4138
00720000120800
ARCHER KEVIN W & KIMBERLY D
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 208,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3453
27032500207900
BARRETT STEVEN P
510 HOLLY DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000301900
BIGLER LINDA
25449 S KINGSTON RD NE,
KINGSTON, WA 98346
00843900030400
BRADBURY WARREN E
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 304
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00880600020100
CARROLL WENDY
400 HOWELL WAY #201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500020400
CHAN DAVID C & NAKAGAWA JANE R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 204,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619
27032500210400
CURTIS CHESTER B & DOLORES B
PO BOX 1087,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00477300001800
DOLAN MICHAEL W & MARY K
515 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
27032600102500
EDMONDS CENTER LP
403 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00843900020100
FIRMANI LINDA
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 201
EDMONDS, WA 98020
Attar'
PLN2 Packet Pg. 161
2.1.i
00409600200100
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC
624 ELM PL,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4646
00872700051800
GRIGNON DIANE H
518 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
00880600020200
HAYTEMA PIETER D & NORMA J
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 202,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00906500040100
HOFFMAN SHERRY R
654 5TH AVE S U NIT 401,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
00477300001702
HUDLOW KARMEN L
523 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00649300100200
JOCHIMSEN LAVERE E & KATHRYN C
517 4TH AVE S UNIT B,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4137
00720000120500
KIRK MARY ELLEN
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 205,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3453
00843900030300
KWAK KUM TRUST
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 303
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120100
LANIGAN BILLIE THON
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120300
LEESE WAYNE
PSC 477 BOX 29,
FPO AP, 96306
00720000110100
FRANCIS ROGER A
630 5TH AVE S # 101,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120400
HAMMRICH GREGORY F
630-5TH AVE S # 204,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120200
FUREY DANIEL J & ANNE M
116 CLALLAM BAY ST,
SEQUIM, WA 98382
00880600010200
HANLEY ROBERT S & BETTY J
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 102,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00906500020300 00720000110500
HEINS LANE REVOKABLE FAMILY TRUST HEVERAN JANET
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 203, 630 5TH AVE S UNIT 105,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101901 00720000110300
HOGGINS DALE E & DONNA L HUDDLESTON JEAN MARIE
21826 95TH AVE W, 630 FIFTH AVE S UNIT 103,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120600
00649300100300
HUGHES DAVID & BELINDA
JERMULOWSKE JEFFREY S/WHEELER
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 206,
ALISHA K
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3453
517 4TH AVENUE SOUTH #C,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00477300000600
00409600100900
KETTEL RICHARD G & SARA E
KILLIN JONATHAN & SELENA
524 HOMELAND DR,
543 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4103
00906500020200
00880600010300
KRUEGER JOHN & JEAN REVOCABLE
KURTH RLT
TRUST
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 103,
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 202,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619
00906500040300
00409600200400
LALLY ANN M
LANG JACK A
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 403,
5414TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4189
00409600101300 00409600100800
LARSON GREGG & DARCIE LARSON HELMA A
554 4TH AVE S, 541 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110 EDMONDS, WA 98020-4103
00649300100100 00409600101200
LORAH SHANNON R & EDWARD LORETTE ALLAN R & SALLY B
517 4TH AVE S UNIT A, 558 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
Packet Pg. 162
2.1.i
00880600020300 00843900030200
LYLE THEODORE & HUMPHREYS-LYLE LYONS JOHN A L & CAROL S
JOAN P TR 19828 47TH AVE NE,
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 203, LAKE FOREST PARK, WA 98155
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00477300000300
MARZANO MICHIAH J & ANTHONY
510 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00843900020200
MCKAY GRETA / LIGHTFOOT LINDA
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 202
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500208000
MT OLYMPUS HOLDINGS LLC
533 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600200500
PAULSON GILLIAN
547 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4189
00906500020100
PERRY PAMELA ELIZABETH
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101100
PICKETT RONALD
654 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-7226
00477300000100
POOLE CECELIA A
537 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3458
00409600100102
RAMM GARY/RAMM CHARLENE
5011 19TH AVENUE NE,
SEATTLE, WA 98105
00906500010100
MATTHEWS SUSAN R
14111 55TH AVE W,
EDMONDS, WA 98026
00409600100400
MAHONEY SUSAN A
5213RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98026
00720000110800
MCINTYRE JESSAMYN A
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 108,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3448
00649300200200 00409600101600
MIZE LISA M TTEE MT BAKER ASSOCIATES LP
7001 SEAVIEW AVE NW UNIT 160-808, PO BOX 1329,
SEATTLE, WA 98117 EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032600100300
OLYMPIC & SOUND VIEW LLC
12625 4TH AVE W STE 200,
EVERETT, WA 98204
27032600100800
PAYNE R G
8827 29TH AVE NW,
SEATTLE, WA 98117
27032500218300
PETERSON JEFFREY J & MCKIMMIE
HEATHERL
527 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600201200
PK REAL PROPERTY LLC
2724 98TH AVE NE,
BELLEVUE, WA 98004
00477300000200
POWER LEE A & MELANIE L
511 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00477300000400
RICHARD RITA
609 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3452
00843900030100 00906500010200
SCHIPPERS JOHAN M & ANTONETTHA G SCOTT LAMAR & CATHY L
504 HOLLY DR UNIT 301, 8745 GREENWOOD AVE N APT 315,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3498 SEATTLE, WA 98103
00720000110200
PAINE SUSAN
1005 5TH AVE S UNIT 102,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00649300100400
PEDERSON NANCY CHERMAK
517 4TH AVE S UNIT D,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4137
00409600101700
PHIPPS THOMAS E & GAYLE M
22929 108TH AVE W,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-5189
00409600200300
PNT PROPERTIES LLC
9792 EDMONDS WAY #225,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600100101
PUGSLEY KEVIN & KORYNN
308 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500215200
RODRIGUES ADLER F & MERCEDES F
521 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500218400
SHAPPACHER THOMAS & MELISSA A
539 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 163
2.1.i
00649300200300 00409600100500
SIMPSON JEAN H SPARKS ALAN J
519 4TH AVE S UNIT C, 527 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4138 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600100600 00720000110600
STOULIL RYAN COREY STRAUSS LAURA
PO BOX 841, 630 5TH AVE S UNIT 106,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500040500 00843900010000
SWINDLER KATHRYN E TOBY1 LLC
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 405, PO BOX 13393,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617 MILL CREEK, WA 98082
00720000100100
00649300200400
VANDER LINDEN JOY M
WILKENING ROBERT
630 5TH AVE S #1A,
519 4TH AVE S UNIT D,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600200600 00720000120700
WILSON LINDA M ZEILE LOUISE A
555 4TH AVE S, PO BOX 15620,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 SEATTLE, WA 98115
00409600100700
STEINLE PAMELA
112 ST ANDREWS PL,
TULLAHOMA, TN 37388
00906S00040600
SURPRENANT VALERIE A & LEWIS
DAVID R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 406,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500208200
URSINO DANIEL A
17814 73RD PL W,
EDMONDS, WA 98026-5520
00720000110400
WILLIAMS BENJAMIN
630 5TH AVE S 104,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
Attar'
PLN2 Packet Pg. 164
2.1.i
File No.: PLN2020-0053
Applicant: Jacob Young Pine Park 614 District based design review,
Notice of Hearing and SEPA Threshold Determination
DECLARATION OF MAILING
On the 9th day of February, 2021 the attached Notice of application and virtual
public hearing as prescribed by Ordinance to property owners within 300 feet of
the site that is the subject of this application.
I, Michelle Martin, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 9th day of
February, 2021 at Edmonds, Washington.
Signed: 41'
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 165
2.1.i
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
Applicant: Pine Park 614 (Jacob Young)
DECLARATION OF POSTING
On the 9th day of February, 2021, the attached Notice of Public Hearing and
SEPA Determination was posted at the subject property, City Hall, and Public
Safety buildings. It was not posted at the Edmonds Public Library because it is
still closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
I, Michael Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of
the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 9th day of
February, 2021, at Edmonds, Washington.
Signed:
�&&
(BFP747893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ )
Atte
PLN2 Packet Pg. 166
2.1.i
Everett Daily Herald
Affidavit of Publication
State of Washington }
County of Snohomish } ss
Dicy Sheppard being first duly sworn, upon
oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal
representative of the Everett Daily Herald a
daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal
newspaper by order of the superior court in the
county in which it is published and is now and
has been for more than six months prior to the
date of the first publication of the Notice
hereinafter referred to, published in the English
language continually as a daily newspaper in
Snohomish County, Washington and is and
always has been printed in whole or part in the
Everett Daily Herald and is of general
circulation in said County, and is a legal
newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99
of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter
213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal
newspaper by order of the Superior Court of
Snohomish County, State of Washington, by
order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed
is a true copy of EDH919435 PLN2020-0053 as it
was published in the regular and entire issue of
said paper and not as a supplement form thereof
for a period of 1 issue(s), such publication
commencing on 02/09/2021 and ending on
02/09/2021 and that said newspaper was
regularly distributed to its subscribers during all
of said period.
The amount of the fee for such public ion is
$91.0
q___I IV
Subscribed and sworn bef a me on this
v/ day of
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington.
City of Edmonds -LEGAL ADS 114101416
MICI IELLE MARTIN
y Linda Phillips
Natery Public
Stateof VVaOingtoo
MyAppomtmentExpjr" agrn aZl
AAAAAnas_.
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 167
2.1.i
w Ckissified Proof
City of Edmonds
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND
SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pine Park 614 Is a proposal for three
buildings and site Improvements at 614 and 616 51h Ave. Six
live/work units would be contained in two buildings adjacent to
5th Avenue (Buildings A and B) while an eight -unit building
would be behind the INetwork buildings and face west (Building
C). Drive alsles west of the buildings would load from the private
alley south of the site. To accommodate the new project, the
ezlsting Improvements on the site will be removed.
The project site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial
(BD3). District -based design review projects that require a SEPA
determination are Type Ill -A decisions, which require a two-
phase public hearing and decision by the Architectural Design
Board (ADS),
PROJECT LOCATION: 614 & 616 5th Avenue South and adjacent
2ftvate lley(T x 10 p:27032600100900, 27032600102900 &
NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
REQUESTED PERMITS: District -based design review, $EPA
determination
COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: March 3, 2021
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION: Due to COVID-19, Phase 1 of
the two-phase virtual public hearing will be held by the
Architectural Design Board on March 3, 2021 at 7 p.m. Join the
Zoom meeting at:
https://zoom.us/j/953605449297pwd=ZmdOR E FORkE3RkR aeV
dBRmpkNUxMZz09
Or via phone by dialing 253-215-8782
Meeting ID: 953 6054 4929
Password,818962
The hearing will be continued to a date certain for Phase 2 of the
public hearing during the March 3 meeting.
Any person has the right to comment on this application during
public comment period, receive notice and participate In any
hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application.
The City may accept public comments at any lime prior to the
closing of the record of an open record predecision hearing, If
any, or, If no open record predecision hearing is provided, prior
to the decision on the project permit.
Information on this development application can be found at
http://edmondswa.gov/public-nollces-texgdeve lopme nt-
notices.hlml under the development notice for application
number PLN2020.0053, by smelling the City contact listed
below, or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220.
Please refer to the application number for all Inquiries. A copy of
the staff report will be available at least seven days prior to the
hearing.
SEPA DETERMINATION: Notice is hereby given that the City of
Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance under
WAC 197-11-340 for the above project.
DATE OF ISSUANCE: February 9, 2021
SEPA COMMENTS DUE: Comments regarding the SEPA
'determination are due February 23, 2021.
SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by
filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with
the required appeal fee no later than March 2, 2021 by 4:00 p.m.
Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06,020 have
standing to initiate an administretive aal.
CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICPppe
, Sernor
m ich a el. c luggsto n@ a dmondswa.go
425-77111220
Published: February 9. 2021. EOH919435
Proofed by Sheppard, Dicy, 02/09/2021 11:36:14 am Page: 2
Attar"
PLN2 Packet Pg. 168
2.1.i
CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
`/IC. 18`J\J
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pine Park 614 is a proposal for three buildings and site improvements at 614 and 616
5`h Ave. Six live/work units would be contained in two buildings adjacent to 5th Avenue
(Buildings A and B) while an eight -unit building would be behind the live/work buildings
and face west (Building C). A drive aisle would be in between the buildings which would
load from the private alley south of the site. To accommodate the new project, the
existing improvements on the site will be removed.
The project site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial (BD3). District -based
design review projects that require a SEPA determination like this are Type III -A
decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and decision by the Architectural
Design Board (ADB). A separate notice of the public hearing will be issued once a
hearing date has been selected.
PROJECT LOCATION: 614 & 616 51h Avenue South and adjacent private alley (Tax ID #: 27032600100900,
27032600102900 & 27032600102300)
NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
DATE OF APPLICATION: December 21, 2020
DATE OF COMPLETENESS: January 11, 2021
DATE OF NOTICE: January 25, 2021
REQUESTED PERMITS: District -based design review, SEPA determination
OTHER REQUIRED Building permits
PERMITS:
REQUIRED STUDIES: None at this time
EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTS: SEPA checklist, critical area checklist, traffic impact analysis
COMMENTS ON
PROPOSAL DUE: February 8, 2021
CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
425-771-0220
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 169
2.1.i
City of Edmonds
409
07 j�
Pine Park 614
530
54b
HOLLY DR
r
Legend
403. r i
0
Site of proposed
M60E.GlSST11ELT C[NT[IIEINE'
— .sax,,.,,...
Plne Park 614 project
•
JIM
e..
a,nra
uj
HOMELAND
531
in
533.
HEMLOCK
is
0 1:1,516 O
Notes
7v6, F.
2,257 16C1 Rn xaraa.nx Max+110 xxk aepllrow an inaxnH n.ypry lM aM aFx
'�'� a"�' �xa Men ihx aacex onme..ao marw�a
ri pwo -mj s
Ik kN2070-005]
wG5_19ta wab Fararw wMa
1• ./7_SpMro
owwwr �.a+w
G Cdl' of [JnonJi
THIS MNF' IS VOI TO [E USED FOR OLSGN OR CONS1RtIC{M
3
r
IL
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 170
;. City of Edmonds Adjacent Property Owner List
(n
N
4.1 —.LJ WALNUT ST LU
a)3 = Q A.
}
41a412-41Q 4M I 10
120
424
74640
:C3 u3 550 I 525------- 536
13C4t71 -----
131 4J. S1E `.71 540
533 5•r
53l 551
.300
511 - 5;t _ _ 564
1517UJ
Qt-EI�ID
5834 531-
1
Q : 6 c7 _ _s?4.— 1 S it f j 7?n
�
M 533 534 l - ' ! 127 539 r
�-- 5;: , _
o � . t 5 35
Zr
=HEMLOrK l�X
511 S51
5-,-
-- SA
513 f 17 . I 6
5=5 65. 555 6;; 1 2 614
631
tf&EN-DR J T ! 515 T T -
960
703 712 7f3 a�MiLtvi-V' i ' iai 9U-
0 710 -----d 51XI S70 , 549 5" 902 908
71• �•
715 716 - — 558 916
Ft°,kNS 7.7 P 525 529 1;
DEPT 7t! 0 918
--- - 30 u. N ;;; 51, 527
611
,,, PUM S -- I 1 — --- --.
PINE
fJ
91 ?I
0 252.60 505.2 Feet 376.2 This ma Is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is fo
4,514 p B p pp B
reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate
WGS-1984-Web-Mercator-Auxiliary_Sphere current, or otherwise reliable
© City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION
I 2.1 A I
f
r�
7 y
i
C
�
L
O
F�ma+ds
,rc
L
Y
Y
t, . ! 7
bipunflrki
v_
3
a
N
d
W
a
d
C
U
0
C
d
t
V
M
Q
C
M
1r
O
Q
d
M
co
d
N
M
s
a
00
•s
x
W
r
Notes
V
300' Property Owner Addresses for
PLN2020-0053 Q
I
Atta
Packet Pg. 171
lke Avery Tem®J
00409600200200
533 EDMONDS LLC
23520 WOODWAY PARK RD,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00477300000500
BAKKEN JAN 0
516 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00906500030000
BC 300 LLC
PO BOX 1044,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032600102300
BK INVESTMENT GROUP LLC
557 ROY ST STE 125,
SEATTLE, WA 98109
00906500040200
BRADLEY DRAKE R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 402,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101904
CHALMERS GINA LIVING TRUST
318 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4118
00720000110700
CHAN MAN HOI
4380 E MARSHALL COURT,
GILBERT, AZ 85297
00906500040400
DAHLSTROM TIMOTHY & MURPHY D
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 404,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
00409600101500
DOWD-TIMONEN PATRICIA TRUST
534 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
27032500210500
APPLE TWO LLC
14227 EVERGREEN WAY,
STANWOOD, WA 98292
00880600010100
BANKSTON JOHN K & SHERILYN M
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 101,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000000400
BEDDALL BRADLEY
19515 27TH N W,
SEATTLE, WA 98177
00409600101903
BOZE TIMOTHY A & TAM R
314 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4118
00409600100300
BURKCAROL
515 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500010300
CHAN DAVID & NAKAGAWA JANE
1758 43RD AVE,
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94122
27032500215300
COLUMBIA CITY PARTNERS LLC
4201 6TH AVE S,
SEATTLE, WA 98108
00477300001501
DAWSON WES C
539 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00409600101400
DRULLINGER MARK
544 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
00720000120800
ARCHER KEVIN W & KIMBERLY D
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 208,
EDMONDS, WA 99020-3453
27032500207900
BARRETT STEVEN P
510 HOLLY DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000301900
BIGLER LINDA
25449 S KINGSTON RD NE,
KINGSTON, WA 98346
00843900030400
BRADBURY WARREN E
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 304
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00880600020100
CARROLL WENDY
400 HOWELL WAY #201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500020400
CHAN DAVID C & NAKAGAWA JANE R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 204,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619
27032500210400
CURTIS CHESTER B & DOLORES B
PO BOX 1087,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00477300001800
DOLAN MICHAEL W & MARY K
515 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
27032600102500
EDMONDS CENTER LP
403 HOWELL WAY,
,EDMONDS, WA 98020
00649300200100 00872700051400 00843900020100
FAIRCHILD FAMILY REVOCABLE L TRUST FARMER JAMES R & PATRICIA W FIRMANI LINDA
519 4TH AVE S UNIT A, 514 4TH AVE S, 504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 201
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4138 EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110 EDMONDS, WA 98020
EtigUettes d'adresse Easy Peel
Repliez a la hachure afin de reveler le reborcl Pop-up i
r�
AIlez a a%iPrv.ca/aabarits !
2.1.i
00409600200100
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC
624 ELM PL,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4646
00872700051800
GRIGNON DIANE H
518 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
00880600020200
HAYTEMA PIETER D & NORMA J
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 202,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00906500040100
HOFFMAN SHERRY R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 401,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
00477300001702
HUDLOW KARMEN L
523 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
b0649300100200
JOCHIMSEN LAVERE E & KATHRYN C
517 4TH AVE S UNIT B,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4137
00720000120500
KIRK MARY ELLEN
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 205,
EDM0NDS, WA 98020-3453
00843900030300
KWAK KUM TRUST
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 303
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120100
LANIGAN BILLIE THON
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120300
LEESE WAYN-E
PSC 477 BOX 29,
FPO AP, 96306
00720000110100
FRANCIS ROGER A
630 5TH AVE S # 101,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120400
HAMMRICH GREGORY F
630-5TH AVE S # 204,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120200
FUREY DANIELJ & ANNE M
116 CLALLAM BAY ST,
SEQUIM, WA 98382
00880600010200
HANLEY ROBERT S & BETTY J
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 102,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00906500020300 00720000110500
HEINS LANE REVOKABLE FAMILY TRUST HEVERAN JANET
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 203, 630 5TH AVE S UNIT 105,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101901
NOGGINS DALE E & DONNA L
21826 95TH AVE W,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000120600
HUGHES DAVID & BELINDA
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 206,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3453
00477300000600
KETTEL RICHARD G & SARA E
524 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
009065000202GO
KRUEGER JOHN & JEAN REVOCABLE
TRUST
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 202,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3619
00906500040300
LALLY ANN M
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 403,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617
.00409600101300 _ __
LARSON GREGG & DARCIE
554 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
00649300100100
LORAH SHANNON R & EDWARD
517 4TH AVE S U NIT A,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00720000110300
HUDDLESTON JEAN MARIE
630 FIFTH AVE S UNIT 103,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00649300100300
1ERMULOWSKE JEFFREY S/WHEELER
ALISHA K
517 4TH AVENUE SOUTH #C,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600100900
KILLIN JONATHAN & SELENA
543 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4103
00880600010300
KURTH RLT
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 103,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00409600200400
LANG JACK A
5414TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4189
00409600100800
LARSON HELMA A
541 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4103
00409600101200
LORETTE ALLAN R & SALLY B
558 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110
091S 01 VJdU)Jl%IbAV i of)P3 cln-dud Jscxixn 01 Jwl fA101P JA08
; slagej ssaaPPV laad Ase3
)S (I
sajejCILU0j/LU0D7,.I0Ae
O}
OE
2.1.1
00880600020300 00843900030200
LYLE THEODORE & HUMPHREYS-LYLE LYONS JOHN A L & CAROL S
JOAN P TR 19828 47TH AVE NE,
400 HOWELL WAY UNIT 203, LAKE FOREST PARK, WA 98155
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4190
00477300000300
MARZANO MICHIAH J & ANTHONY
510 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00843900020200
MCKAY GRETA / LIGHTFOOT LINDA
504 HOLLY DR, UNIT 202
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500208000
MT OLYMPUS HOLDINGS LLC
533 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600200500
PAULSON GILLIAN
547 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4189
00906500020100
PERRY PAMELA ELIZABETH
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 201,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600101100--
PICKETT RONALD
654 4TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-7226
00477-300000100
POOLE CECELIA A
537 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3458
00409600100102
RAMM GARY/RAMM CHARLENE
5011 19TH AVENUE NE,
SEATTLE, WA 98105
00906500010100
MATTHEWS SUSAN R
14111 55TH AVE W,
EDMONDS, WA 98026
00409600100400
MAHONEY SUSAN A
5213RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98026
00720000110800
MCINTYRE JESSAMYN A
630 5TH AVE S UNIT 108,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3448
00649300200200 00409600101600
MIZE LISA M TTEE MT BAKER ASSOCIATES LP
7001 SEAVIEW AVE NW UNIT 160-808, PO BOX 1329,
SEATTLE, WA 98117 EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032600100300
OLYMPIC & SOUND VIEW LLC
12625 4TH AVE W STE 200,
EVERETT, WA 98204
27032600100800
PAYNE R G
8827 29TH AVE NW,
SEATTLE, WA 98117
27032500218300
PETERSON JEFFREY J & MCKIMMIE
HEATHER L
527 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600201200
PK REAL PROPERTY LLC
2724 98TH AVE NE,
BELLEVUE, WA 98004
00477300000200-
POWER LEE A & MELANIE L
511 HOMELAND DR,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4026
00477300000400
RICHARD RITA
609 5TH AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3452
00843900030100 00906500010200
SCHIPPERS JOHAN M & ANTONETTHA G SCOTT LAMAR & CATHY L
504 HOLLY DR UNIT 301, 8745 GREENWOOD AVE N APT 315,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3498 SEATTLE, WA 98103
00720000110200
PAINE SUSAN
1005 5TH AVE S UNIT 102,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00649300100400
PEDERSON NANCY CHERMAK
517 4TH AVE S U NIT D,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4137
00409600101700
PHIPPS THOMAS E & GAYLE M
22929 108TH AVE W,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-5189
00409600200300
PNT PROPERTIES LLC
9792 EDMONDS WAY #225,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
004096001001-01
PUGSLEY KEVIN & KORYNN
308 HOWELL WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500215200
RODRIGUES ADLER F & MERCEDES F
521 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
27032500218400
SHAPPACHER THOMAS & MELISSA A
539 HEMLOCK WAY,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
091, 01PIdu1,11 Ai:JAV osfl I o6P3 do-d0,{ osodx) of owI 6u01P pu.)fl
sajelduloj/ul0:)'AJ@ne 0109 ; sloclel ssaippV load [(se3 , �9 �''Packet Pg. 174
2.1.1
00649300200300 00409600100500
SIMPSON JEAN H SPARKS ALAN J
519 4TH AVE S UNIT C, 527 3RD AVE S,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-4138 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600100600 00720000110600
STOULIL RYAN COREY STRAUSS LAURA
PO BOX 841, 630 5TH AVE S UNIT 106,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020
00906500040500 00843900010000
SWINDLER KATHRYN E TOBY1 LLC
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 405, PO BOX 13393,
EDMONDS, WA 98020-3617 MILL CREEK, WA 98082
00720000100100
00649300200400
VANDER LINDEN JOY M
WILKENING ROBERT
630 5TH AVE S #1A,
519 4TH AVE S UNIT D,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
EDMONDS, WA 98020
00409600200600 00720000120700
WILSON LINDA M ZEILE LOUISE A
555 4TH AVE S, PO BOX 15620,
EDMONDS, WA 98020 SEATTLE, WA 98115
00409600100700
STEINLE PAMELA
112 ST ANDREWS PL,
TULLAHOMA, TN 37388
00906500040600
SURPRENANT VALERIE A & LEWIS
DAVID R
654 5TH AVE S UNIT 406,
EDMONDS, WA-98020 -
27032500208200
URSINO DANIEL A
17814 73RD PL W,
EDMONDS, WA 98026-5520
00720000110400
WILLIAMS BENJAMIN
630 5TH AVE S 104,
EDMONDS, WA 98020
mPacket Pg. 175
2.1.i
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
Applicant: Pine Park 614 (Jacob Young)
DECLARATION OF POSTING
On the 25th day of January, 2021, the attached Notice of Application was
posted at the subject property, City Hall, and Public Safety buildings. It was not
posted at the Edmonds Public Library because it is still closed due to the COVID-
19 pandemic.
I, Michael Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of
the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 25th day of
January, 2021, at Edmonds, Washington.
Signed: lad
{13PP747893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
Attarl-
PLN21 Packet Pg. 176
2.1.i
File No.: PLN2020-0053
Applicant: Pine Park 614 Jacob Young
Notice of Application
DECLARATION OF MAILING
On the 25th day of January, 2021, the attached Notice of application and virtual
public hearing as prescribed by Ordinance to property owners within 300 feet of
the site that is the subject of this application.
I, Michelle Martin, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 25th day of
January 2021 at Edmonds, Washington.
VVl Signed: Q
5-
Attarl-
PLN2 Packet Pg. 177
2.1.i
Everett Daily Herald
Affidavit of Publication
State of Washington }
County of Snohomish } ss
Dicy Sheppard being first duly sworn, upon
oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal
representative of the Everett Daily Herald a
daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal
newspaper by order of the superior court in the
county in which it is published and is now and
has been for more than six months prior to the
date of the first publication of the Notice
hereinafter referred to, published in the English
language continually as a daily newspaper in
Snohomish County, Washington and is and
always has been printed in whole or part in the
Everett Daily Herald and is of general
circulation in said County, and is a legal
newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99
of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter
213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal
newspaper by order of the Superior Court of
Snohomish County, State of Washington, by
order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed
is a true copy of EDH918262 PLN2020-0053 as it
was published in the regular and entire issue of
said paper and not as a supplement form thereof
for a period of 1 issue(s), such publication
commencing on 01/25/2021 and ending on
01/25/2021 and that said newspaper was
regularly distributed to its subscribers during all
of said period.
The amount of the fee r such publication is
$50.
Subscribed and sworn efore me on this
day of
1
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington.
City of Edmonds -LEGAL ADS 114101416
MICHELLE MART N
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 178
2.1.i
Ciassified Proof
CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pine Park 614 is a proposal for three
buildings and site improvements at 614 and 616 5th Ave. Six
livelwork units would be contained in two buildings adjacent to
51h Avenue (Buildings A and B) while an eight -unit building
would be behind the (Network buildings and face west (Building
C). A drive aisle would be in between the buildings which would
bad from the private alley south of the site. To accommodate
the new project, the existing improvements on the site will be
removed.
The project site is zoned Downtown Convenience Commercial
(BD3). District -based design review pprojects that require a SEPA
determination like this are Type III- A decisions, which require a
two-phase public hearing and decision by the Architectural
Design Board (ADB). A separate notice of the public hearing will
be issued once a hearing date has been selected.
PROJECT LOCATION: 614 & 616 5th Avenue South and adjacent
private alley (Tax ID #: 27032600100900, 27032600102900 &
27032600102300)
NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young
FILE NO.: PLN2020-0053
DATE OF APPLICATION: December 21, 2020
DATE OF COMPLETENESS: January 11, 2021
DATE OF NOTICE: January 25, 2021
REQUESTED PERMITS: District -based design review, SEPA
determination
OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Building permits
REQUIRED STUDIES: None at this time
EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: SEPA checklist,
critical area checklist, traffic Impact analysis
COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: February 8, 2021
CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Senior Planner
micha el. c lugston@e dmo ndswa. go v
425-771-02g0
Published: January 25, 2021. EDH918262
Proofed by Sheppard, Dicy, 0 1/26/202103:36:15 pm Page: 2
Atta
PLN2 Packet Pg. 179
2.1.i
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE
12425 Meridian Ave S., Everett WA 98208
tel (425) 551-1200 • fax (425) 551-1249
www.southsnofire.org
Cities of Brier, Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace
Department of Fire Prevention
Fire Comments
DATE: 12/28/2020
JOB NAME/ADDRESS: Pine Park 614
614 — 616 5t" Ave S. Edmonds, WA
CONTACTS: Citizen Design
Jacob Young 206-853-8055 jyoung(a�collaborativeco.com
FIRE COMMENTS:
1. Noted 13D fire sprinklers in all units.
2. Need 20 feet wide 13 foot 6-inch-high clear access in drive isle.
3. Turning radii will adhere to South County Fire standards, 25 inside 45 outside
turning radii and show on drawings.
4. Drive isle will be signed, stripped or both with "NO PARKING FIRE LANE".
5. All vaults will adhere to South County Fire standard of a minimum of HS20. (To
achieve 75,000# point load)
6. Separate permits for 13D Fire Sprinkler systems
7. Building addressing 12 "numbering on contrasting background". Suite
identification is 6-inch numbers or letters beside the door in a contrasting color.
Thank you,
Karl Fitterer CF1, FPE
Assistant Fire Marshal
Fire Prevention Services
121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020
0: (425)771-0213 VM: (425)551-1980
kfitterer(cD-southsnofire.org
SERVING SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY • BRIER • EDMONDS • LYNNWOOD • MOUNTLAKE TERRACE
Page 1 of 1
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 180
2.1.i
MORANDUM
Date: January 22, 2021
To: Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
From: JoAnne Zulauf, Engineering Technician
Zachary Richardson, Stormwater Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Subject: PLN2020-0053 —Design Review
Pine Park 614-616 5tn Ave S
The comments provided below are based upon review of the application and documents submitted for the
subject application. Additional information is requested from the applicant at this time. Please ask the
applicant to respond to the following.
Utility Engineer Review:
The following comments are provided by the City Utility Engineer, Mike Delila. Please contact Mike
directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at mike. delilla@edmondswa.gov with any specific questions you
may have regarding his comments.
Please submit the following information.
1. To determine whether existing water and sewer systems provide sufficient capacity for the
proposed development, the applicant will need to submit a request for Water -Sewer Availability
determination. To request a Water and Sewer availability determination, please email
Engineeringpermits@edmondswa.gov with the address(s) to start the process.
2. The utility engineer has sent the subject proposal out to a consultant to determine what upgrades (if
any) would be needed within the City's system. It is unlikely that any upgrade is necessary in this
case but you will receive the determination within the next two weeks to confirm that or outline the
upgrade that would be needed. No action is needed at this time.
General Engineering Review:
The following comments are provided by the Engineering Technician, JoAnne Zulauf. Please contact at
Joanne.zulauaedmondswa.gov with any specific questions you may have regarding these comments.
Page 1 1
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 181
2.1.i
Please make the following revisions to the plans.
1. Frontage Improvements and Access:
a) Call out the width of the drive aisles on site. Two way drive aisles shall be a minimum of 24 ft in
width.
b) Parking stalls shall be 8.5 x 16.5. If you can demonstrate that sufficient parking area is available
to provide all required parking spaces at the full width dimensions, then if desired, a maximum of
fifty percent of the total required parking spaces may be sized at reduced width per the parking
space dimensions, 8 x 16.5. See ECDC 18.95.020 for full requirements.
c) Provide a plan showing frontage improvements along 5ffi Ave S to determine if there are conflicts,
or other issues barring feasibility:
i. 7-10 foot wide sidewalks required (width determined by available ROW).
ii. Proposed power pole relocations. Work with PUD to determine new locations.
iii. Show location of street trees with 3' x 3' tree grates along the curb to ensure adequate
spacing from utilities, etc.
iv. Show flower pole on plan. Relocating if necessary.
2. Trash and Recycling; show how trash and recycling will be handled on the site. Please contact Sound
Disposal, 425-778-2404, for requirements.
Stormwater Engineer Review:
No further action necessary for design review approval.
Stormwater items to address prior to building, permit submittal:
No soils report or Geotech report was received therefore no verification of sizing of system, etc.
Infiltration is shown at less than typical setbacks (west building may even have footings in the
infiltration area). Confirm that Geotech has reviewed the plans and submit extra documentation
to show that the design is acceptable.
Also, the first two stretches of connecting pipe are only 8" so the capacity will need to be checked
though depending on infiltration rates may not be an issue.
Transportation Engineer Review:
No further action necessary for design review approval.
A Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet was provided indicating the project would create less than
25 peak -hour trips; therefore, a traffic study is not required. Specific mitigation fees will be
further reviewed during the building permit phase of the project.
Page 1 2
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 182
2.1.i
From:
Cluaston, Michael
To:
ed lorah
Subject:
RE: Questions for review re: 614-616 5th Ave South project
Date:
Monday, February 8, 2021 11:20:10 AM
Hi Ed,
Thank you for the comments. As I mentioned in the other thread, you are now a party of record to
this project. I've inserted responses below to the best of my ability — your concerns will be added to
the record and others more knowledgeable than myself will be able to better respond going
forward.
If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Mike
Michael Clugston, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Edmonds
425-771-0220 x 1330
michael. cl uaston (@ ed mondswa. aov
CITY HALL IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
Services will continue to be provided by email, phone and by appointment as necessary.
Apply for a Building Permit or Critical Area Determination at: https://mybuildingpermit.com/
For planning permit inquiries, email: plan ningpermits(@edmondswa.gov
For all other permit inquiries, email: devserv.adminl@edmondswa.gov
Handouts, codes, plans, and Web GIS: http://www.edmondswci.00vlhandouts.html
From: ed lorah <mswedlorah@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 7:47 AM
To: Clugston, Michael<Michael.Clugston@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Questions for review re: 614-616 5th Ave South project
Hi Mike -
Our Parkview Twin HOA Board met last night (seven of eight owners were present) to review and
discuss the proposed development for 614-616 5th Ave South. Here are the main questions and
concerns that we defined.
1. Drainage. We believe from reviewing the plans that grey water and sewage will connect to a
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 183
2.1.i
system beneath the existing alley on the south boundary of our property and the new development,
and run down to 4th Ave South. We also understand that the alley will be paved as part of the
project.
Our concerns have to do specifically with ground flow from rain water. Right now we have a green
belt behind our property that absorbs much of the water cascading down from the ridge and streets
above us. In heavy rainstorms the alley acts as a conduit for the water not absorbed by the (current)
vacant lot. We are concerned that the destruction of the green belt and the paving of the entire
parcel of land behind us may result in direct runoff into our parking lots and homes. Has the city
conducted a hydrology survey regarding these concerns?
The project must be designed to manage all of its stormwater onsite. During design review, the
City's Stormwater Engineer will review the project to determine whether it is feasible from that
perspective. Assuming it is, at the building permit phase, the Engineer would review the civil
improvement plans to ensure compliance with the Stormwater code in Chapter 18.30 of the
Edmonds Community Development Code.
2. In addition to the onsite parking planned for the development will there be room for guest
parking, or will visitors find on -street parking? Will the city allow vehicles to be parked in the alley?
Presently, Barkada, our neighborhood restaurant, has delivery vehicles making short stops to
offload. We recently had aid cars come to our condo and they require access 24/7. Would the city
install "No Parking" signage?
As proposed, each of the residential units in the west building would have one off-street space as
required by code. Each of the six live -work units would have two off-street spaces (one required for
the 'live' use plus one required for the 'work' use). No other guest parking is required or proposed
onsite so any further parking would be on the street. The need for parking signage will be evaluated
by the Engineering Division and Fire District.
3. What are the plans for exterior outside lighting? Will there be exterior lights on garages, stairways,
etc;? Are there limits to the number of lights allowed and restrictions on brightness at night? This is
a big question as the eight town house will be facing our bedroom windows at Parkview.
Looking at the current renderings, it appears there are small wall sconces around the buildings but
further information about that can be obtained for the 2nd phase of the design review hearing.
4. What is the estimated timeframe for completion of the project once begun?
According to the information provided by the applicant, they anticipate starting construction in the
summer of 2022. How long the construction process takes depends on many factors but 12 months
is probably a reasonable ballpark.
S. Is this project intended as a "condo complex" with an HOA or will it be private owners, each
responsible for his/her own unit?
The applicant would like to use the City's unit lot subdivision process to create individually -owned
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 184
2.1.i
lots for each of the 14 units. The unit lot process is similar to doing condos in that each unit lot is
separately owned and maintained and then there is an HOA to manage jointly -owned elements. The
code currently does not allow that process to be used in the Downtown Business zones, however, so
the applicant has applied for a separate code amendment to add the Downtown Business zones to
where the unit lot process could be used. The process has been used successfully in other areas of
Edmonds so it would stand to reason that it could work in the BD zones as well. The Planning Board
will start to look at the proposed code change this Wednesday and will eventually hold a public
hearing on the topic and then forward it to the City Council for their review. If the Council did not
approve the code change, the Pine Park project could be rentals or more likely made into condos.
Thanks. We are planning to attend the public hearings and will undoubtedly have more questions as
things move ahead.
Sincerely,
Ed Lorah for Parkview Twin Condominiums
517-519 4th Ave South
Edmonds WA 98020
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 185
2.1.i
Clugston, Michael
From: Paul McCulloh <paulmcculloh@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 3:16 PM
To: Clugston, Michael
Subject: Re: Comment on File No PLN2020-0053
Hi Mike,
Thank you for your quick and comprehensive reply to my question, as well as for the attached project files.
Looks like Edmonds is in good hands. I look forward to watching the project progress.
Regards,
Paul
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021, 8:09 AM Clugston, Michael<Michael.Clugston@edmondswa.gov> wrote:
Hi Paul,
Thank you for the comment. You are a party of record to this application and will receive a copy of the eventual
decision and have the right to appeal should you find that necessary. Notice for the public hearing for the project will
be issued today with the first phase of the hearing on Zoom on March 3.
Onsite parking would be provided for the residential and commercial uses in accordance with the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Each of the eight units in the west building would have one stall per unit while each of the six units
in the two eastern buildings would have two stalls — one for the 'live' use and one for 'work' use (see Sheet 1 of the
attached). No guest parking is required by the code and none would be provided so other visitors to the site would
have to use the on -street spaces during their visits.
If you have any other questions or concerns, please let me know.
Mike
Michael Clugston, AICP
Senior Planner
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 186
2.1.i
City of Edmonds
425-771-0220 x 1330
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
CITY HALL IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
Services will continue to be provided by email, phone and by appointment as necessary.
Apply for a Building Permit or Critical Area Determination at: https://mybuildingpermit.com/
For planning permit inquiries, email: planningpermits@edmondswa.gov
For all other permit inquiries, email: devserv.admin@edmondswa.gov
Handouts, codes, plans, and Web GIS: http://www.edmondswa.aovlhandouts.html
From: Paul McCulloh <paulmcculloh@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 2:45 PM
To: Clugston, Michael<Michael.Clugston@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Comment on File No PLN2020-0053
Hello Mr. Clugston,
I am a resident of 630 5th Avenue South, the property nearly adjacent to the proposed building site for the above -
referenced file number. In addition to being adjacent to the project site, our building makes use of the private alley
south of the site, which would also be used by the proposed buildings.
The project description that we received does not make mention of parking, or local impact on parking, in connection
with this proposed project. I am hopeful that the City of Edmonds is requiring new buildings to have on -property
ground level or below -ground parking. As I'm sure you are aware, during normal working times parking along this
portion of Fifth Avenue is generally full during working hours. The impact to the area of an additional 10 to 20 cars
requiring street parking would be, at the least, detrimental.
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 187
2.1.i
I am making this comment before the end of the comment due date so that it can be on file for this project. In addition,
if you would be so kind as to let me know the current status of parking for this project, I would very much appreciate it.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Paul McCulloh
206-291-7822
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 188
.,,r. 1�14V
PERMITTING & DEVELOPMENT
ENGINEERING
DIVISION
121 5th Avenue N
P: 425.771.0220
www.edmondswa.gov
Name of Proposed Project:
Owner/Applicant
Name
APPENDIX 2.1.1
Page 1 of 2
Transportation Impact Analysis
Worksheet
Applicant Contact Person:
Name
Street/Mailing Address Street/Mailing Address
City State Zip City
Telephone: Telephone:
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis (if applicable):
Firm Name
Telephone:
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Location - Street address:
Contact Name
E-mail:
State Zip
(Attach a vicinity map and site plan.)
b. Specify existing land use:
c. Specify proposed type and size of development:
(# of residential units and/or square footage of building)
d. Date construction will begin and be completed:
e. Define proposed access locations:
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 189
2.1.i
APPENDIX A
Page 2 of 2
f. Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations:
2. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts.
Traffic impact fee shall be calculated from the attached Impact Fee Rate Tables and as identified
in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECDC
18.82.130.
❑ CHANGE IN USE
Fee for prior use shall be based on fee established at the time the prior use was permitted. If
the previous use was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (effective date:
09/12/04), the 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be used.
Units in
ITE Land Use Category Per Unit square feet,
Fee Rate # of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
New Use $ X
Prior Use $ X
Fee
t
New Use Fee: $ 1 - I Prior Use Fee: $ 1 =
$
❑ NEW DEVELOPMENT
Units in
ITE Land Use Category Per Unit square feet,
Fee Rate # of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
New Use $ X
❑ OTHER
MITIGATION FEE RECOMMENDATION:
INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATION: $240.00 + consultant fee
$
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE
$
City of Edmonds, Engineering Division Approval
Date
' No impact fees will be due, nor will a credit be given, for an impact fee calculation resulting in a net negative.
Attac
PLN2 Packet Pg. 190
2.1.i
CITIZEN
DESIGN
COLLABORATIVECO.COM DATE March 1, 2021
206.535.7908 TO Edmonds Design Review Board
121 5th Avenue N
Edmonds, WA 98020
WE ARE FAMILY
DESIGNING INSPIRED SPACE PROJECT Pine Park 614
TO CREATE COMMUNITY Citizen Design appreciates this opportunity to provide additional information
regarding the proposed entitlements for the Pine Park 614 project. This project is
Located at 610-614 5th Avenue S and is currently under board design review.
As currently envisioned, the project includes several interrelated entitlements. In
chronological order, these include a short subdivision, board design review, several
building permits, a land use code text amendment and a unit lot subdivision. As of
this writing, applications have been submitted for design review [PLN2020-0053]
and the code text amendment [AMD2020-0003]. Due to unforeseen circumstances
discussed below, the short subdivision has not yet been submitted.
At the beginning of this project, the development team was led to believe that the
project site consisted of two legal parcels. This would have resulted in the project
requiring a boundary line adjustment rather than a short subdivision to create the
desired lot lines. The project team submitted this boundary line adjustment under
record number PLN2021-0005. During initial review of this application, City staff
determined that these parcels were in fact tax lots and had never been formally
subdivided. Therefore, it was determined that a boundary line adjustment was
not the appropriate vehicle for establishing the desired lot lines. Upon further
discussion with City officials Rob Chave and Mike Clugston, it was determined that
the project would instead move forward using a short subdivision.
The proposed short subdivision achieves several key project goals. The first of
these is to reduce the lot depth from 130 ft to 58.5 ft. This reduces the required
commercial depth from 45 ft to 30 ft, which allows for the front buildings' required
parking. It also establishes two parcels containing less than 12,000 sf each. This
restores the original understanding [based on the tax lots] that open space would
not be required due to the size of the subject parcels. Finally, the subdivision creates
a boundary between the front and rear buildings. Should the unit lot subdivision
code amendment be rejected, this allows for greater flexibility in the sale, rental
and/or condomiumization of the buildings.
Having determined that the project is able to move forward by replacing the
requested boundary line adjustment with a short subdivision, the project team
chose to move forward with design review for this project. We welcome the board's
comments and look forward to working together as the project continues.
Citizen Design
Pine Park 614 1 Memorandum 12021
Packet Pg. 191
2.1.j
O� EDA
O
� ill
hC
a
Packet Pg. 192
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 193
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 194
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 195
4th venue cuth
I_-
--All I
2.1. j
CN
ME
4� :x -
-Alp v�
J.
CL
lie
!R
K 4)
Sth Avenue So m
4r' _. 'fit w �j: x
W
lb
ka i 7
m 0
0
! A Packet Pg. 196
OP
;4"
tkin
fAN t. aA;
lie
2.1.j
East Buildings (A & B)
Six Live
ork Units
BUILDINGS A & B VIEWED FROM NORTHEAST
SCALE: NTS
N
a A
'IL
a
IL
a�
c
a
m
�a
a
T-
N
A
A
m
.
Q
Packet Pg. 199
West Building (C)
4.* ;r
k ..-
BUILDING C VIEWED FROM WEST
SCALE NT
2.1.j
L~
Packet Pg. 200
2.1.j
N
d
N
M
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
U
N
H
d
IL
L
IL
a�
c
a
m
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
x
W
C
d
E
L
v
R
Q
Packet Pg. 201
2.1.j
N
d
N
M
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
U
N
H
d
IL
L
IL
a�
c
a
m
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
x
W
C
d
E
L
v
R
Q
Packet Pg. 202
It a ■
FOOTFfMNT AW-A�IBM. 6FMOE� � MO7rIMi 11REJL , [1n: 9F
ACLI+}UM 0 MAJ I r
I'/IF�14K BYI7F. Sph 9F {F.Aj I wwr WI", Yea w IEAF I r
II N.y_ Irmi i r 20.7. ITA'MI r
2+ - _ :gar , -fir •Is ---1- 3,.t� ±! sr'1 , .1'.. }� 1 ;, .,�'1.• .L'�' .+ •1 1
.J � •y`,*+ �,� _ }-'• Lar• _•, �a jj..�+�•', � - k+`[ r. .# _ -�''�' _ J; } �►' 'rr fr '�'w'"�•, ;t w 4 # - � *1 ,1'- R' ��''7 .+1r �'■ R � � •� ��••*- '�" 'r *•`_x�+�''S 51�'1..�. `J. r{M '• +r l,,. �'_ r•r •�
�Z� •+�+� �-�'—• 13"}''.;�•�i{ _�. ,-• '��•ia •*•,�: ,� �y r a'i'1 _�-i1Ja"t• F'�a �'•,"".�'M� •�
I' I. i'+eI�RE+IM6 frr.lr•. ...E ,{' `! 'f� I '? 'w' }�' �4.. •i' 1 i •_ r
F •�..41. ,'+ •, 1 1
•LA#4YVreW,��.: 74�}fj _s .r ��,sf J.i,L�i•-.r�F'tiF•i' 'w�i`r'f' ���'. ,.�
. `*� J '�• •� _ Yi ''M` ''•r•• i-i , r*• ir '•i*a• •'! •, '•• •r� •t , -'"r� 1. '-1 �•' .�
-x •3j f;^•l # '`t: +ti: f+• ,. tt �fr. t '!.' : y`, L,. L. ',•'re5•.�ar#;� :+[',y i«: .a_ . .i
",+ S '-y rr• r - WELCAfE'�5r4�l4fiM1E+1WUST4FJft , `Y''."•' 'ti +� .a '} ;•'' * + _
r ' ire •f'+}••�� r.:r fi r�� "t r� �r•.� �',.� �`� r•L4� ;' ,
41
41.
i�F'`'�. 'r. :±. •i; _ a � .. .. a r '� ��� N e'r�'• y ar'� r' l- •r •..' s �-4"'
114jL # � ., L•. i ! 4 S" Y' • •} � Ir _ .. ' . •J• . � r '-' i ''J�� �� • ri_�, �� � rr la � - ' �+'�
5 •�� •'.l�L �•''4'•: '�'' r'� ••:_. ••4+. r, � +. " r - '-.•'� r �. .+r '- ■"5 t' ti i .1` r r:Fr •' L � f �
I I I I I •I I
pW OkaC
��__, � r—==�..- � r—_-1 I �- ma¢rarr,'T••�iuc onar, -1 I r-- � r---, I r---,
1 —d ' -x
1 I I 1 1 I 1 .r" 00V"
0%W
�+
.. ►'�-' � .r� --5 a:,�.'. "#-',t' �r ,' .'y- +!i• •.'*+ r -. .i� �'r �.• '�• -.rr, ;_1-�'K .� :�'1 ." ^' �''.i.�i - r',� ..
' '1~ � �2 •r i . O;{5ti.'f' �i wx. r., r•. :�_ �' •r '� •�x*..i•i � r'� Y � .
±7. r'r 3+�'•`+4•'+�, f« F— -,•:'.� '..:`r'an ti•a:'tir�"1 .�•'JL R• `�•R-�*•• .•f:7}.y •a••r rJ+`'�ir`V,•-�'.!-.'� � _+i
?r, - +yam '.'r .•-R.v •� '..' ir' •.►',•� .•�+. a.: .Y�r... ,.� ,+'•'.,, _
(JLYO'.E.,I f �i'�. • . ' r, : � f
•� �.'.a F' •�• ti k •; + r 1•'rJ "�, ,'±- � y-N�pliQ .*Yt •.+'.'S•• � r ;,. i.��-:. .. • T ,t,`
`'rr•�•rrii.� x rr'�•-1 � ,v _� � 'J'; _'t `.' Jfa, R- �, .. yy •f iy •' �: �- �a � 'S•*r'r�.%' }#
, _Y.. .. •W,'r�'� +{ �•K F fr +rIZ!•• `+rye �r--t
r
d"AMSA,H uuslai It "
1 2.1.j
yl—
..--L Packet Pg. 203 k
BUILDING A It
— •
— • — • BUILDING A HT LIMIT: 113.3'±
-
N
o
�
FFE: 104.0'f
to
O
_
- 4
t
a
°'
FFE: 95.0'±
C
-
COMM. FFE: 83.0'±
C
— —
BUILDING A AVG GRADE 83 3'±
O
_
U
rn
d
co
BUILDING B R
a
BUILDING BHT LIMIT a 3.4'
1
co
FFE:104.9'±
m
a
-
cc
c
•IL
°0
FIFE 96.4'±
c
Q
to
t
_
N
d
COMM. FFE: 84.4'±
N
BUILDING B AVG GR. A ':: &
'L
m
BUILDING C
a
11D
'
�T LIMIT: 106,0'±
ROOF: 101. ±
z
100
x
_
LLJ
0' FFE:92.0't
d
90
E
1
�
FFE: 82.5'±
%J
a
80
G GRADE:
76.0'± —.
°D— FFE: 74.0'± — -
70
Packet Pg. 204
2.1.j
s
u
Packet Pg. 205
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 206
2.1.j
M
4
i
m
i 61'±
BUILDING A'.
(3) 3-STORY LIVEIWORK TH _
FOOTPRINT AREA: 1830t SF
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.3't ;
AGLA: 1735t SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 500t SF (EA)
~ I I I
20.3't (TY-
J � J.t.
•y I'• � �,+, �, � ••+ i.' Ir.'I •,�•J A�,x 'p� - F•,r'�
..� . BUILDING (ABOVE)
..,� •, j
• ` z d ++ I
I� 4 I. `r' •4'•ir F� • fir. 'I]a 4 'I+' Sd.l•
—''-...`�-,•,-"_fie •�-���.
f4rIF
RELOCATE t VIA LOT LINE ADJUSTMI
Ir - a 4 + s r•
IL
m
c
BUILDING A o
C
CAI
Comm
Packet Pg. 207
4
i 61't
I f
I �
BUILDING B:
3 3-STORY LIVE'ti1VORK TH `
FOOTPRINT AREA 1830t SF I
AVG (E) GRADE: 83.4t
AGLA: 1220t SF (EA)
WORK SUITE: 6001 SF (EA) I
I
I
20.3't (TYp)
, .�a
�
'• I,: .•, , I•
' rl •
' .� 4. + F - • d•I' . aS
I 'd'd , ' . I ' -
I,•
re '*'
,.
4' • •, ' -�� .�
. EGJFG = 7£Bl±
2.1.j
N
N
BUILDING B a
m
c
r
FFE. 104.9120
`=
(�
H
a
a
cc
' L
FFE. 96.4 cu
d
N
a
COMM. FFE: 84.4 M
� � Q
t
K
Lu
L
u
r
Q
Packet Pg. 208
.10
PARK PLACE EY91u10NDS, A CONDO— f ONE BALLARD LL 2.1.j
400 HO1�IELL WAY J 6iD 5TH AVE S
a — -Mjoc — — CONCRETE w —
N94 A'a4"w e—
ONE STORY BUILDING
614 5TH AVE, S,
FFE-84,05' N
f � I , _- - a
I CB RIM -82,2
° I ; 10" CON 'W IE .42. 0
4" CONC 'E IE 62' I 0
' I ASPHALT PARKING t �_
m _ fA
crass PARA a
a d
I L
IL
6 I I I I i I d
[)
R05T
ASPHALT
N OVERLAPS `. CONC. WALK y g f
kY OF 4TH STREET �� — d
a_%I r
o N
I ch
2 STORY CONC. BLOCK BUILDING _ M
EW TWIN, A CONDOMINIUM o 616 5TH AVE- S. m
5-26' MAIN
H AVE S 6 CCN S61E67,84 F E-FFE�78.59' ALLEY Q
lloo�
❑ +�
W
hl�t9"y4"44" o
, PFiALT ALLEY S�IH RIM -69-68 +
CTR CI IAE N=63.0$ is ss
EASEMENT 7603100239
— SEE EXCEPTION A ssa�s'ax"E
I I i '
k PK REAL PROPERTY LLC
TH STREET APARTMENTS LLC 622 5TH AVE S
04 AVE S Packet Pg. 209
CB RIM
fi" CON N IEIE-67-04
It a ■
FOOTFfMNT AW-A�IBM. 6FMOE� � MO7rIMi 11REJL , [1n: 9F
ACLI+}UM 0 MAJ I r
I'/IF�14K BYI7F. Sph 9F {F.Aj I wwr WI", Yea w IEAF I r
II N.Y_ Irmi i r 20.7. ITA'MI r
2+ - _ :gar , -fir •Is ---1- 3,.t� ±! sr'1 , .1'.. }� 1 ;, .,�'1.• .L'�' .+ •1 1
.J � •y`,*+ �,� _ }-'• Lar• _•, �a jj..�+�•', � - k+`[ r. .# _ -�''�' _ J; } �►' 'rr fr '�'w'"�•, ;t w 4 # - � *1 ,1'- R' ��''7 .+1r �'■ R � � •� ��••*- '�" 'r *•`_x�+�''S 51�'1..�. `J. r{M '• +r l,,. �'_ r•r •�
�Z� •+�+� �-�'—• 13"}''.;�•�i{ _�. ,-• '��•ia •*•,�: ,� �y r a'i'1 _�-i1Ja"t• F'�a �'•,"".�'M� •�
I' I. i'+eI�RE+IM6 frr.lr•. ...E ,{' `! 'f� I '? 'w' }�' �4.. •i' 1 i •_ r
F •�..41. ,'+ •, 1 1
•LA#4YVreW,��.: 74�}fj _s .r ��,sf J.i,L�i•-.r�F'tiF•i' 'w�i`r'f' ���'. ,.�
. `*� J '�• •� _ Yi ''M` ''•r•• i-i , r*• ir '•i*a• •'! •, '•• •r� •t , -'"r� 1. '-1 �•' .�
-x •3j f;^•l # '`t: +ti: f+• ,. tt �fr. t '!.' : y`, L,. L. ',•'re5•.�ar#;� :+[',y i«: .a_ . .i
",+ S '-y rr• r - WELCAfE'�5r4�l4fiM1E+1WUST4FJft , `Y''."•' 'ti +� .a '} ;•'' * + _
r ' ire •f'+}••�� r.:r fi r�� "t r� �r•.� �',.� �`� r•L4� ;' ,
41
41.
i�F'`'�. 'r. :±. •i; _ a � .. .. a r '� ��� N e'r�'• y ar'� r' l- •r •..' s �-4"'
114jL # � ., L•. i ! 4 S" Y' • •} � Ir _ .. ' . •J• . � r '-' i ''J�� �� • ri_�, �� � rr la � - ' �+'�
5 •�� •'.l�L �•''4'•: '�'' r'� ••:_. ••4+. r, � +. " r - '-.•'� r �. .+r '- ■"5 t' ti i .1` r r:Fr •' L � f �
I I I I I •I I
pW OkaC
��__, � r—==�..- � r—_-1 I �- ma¢rarr,'T••�iuc onar, -1 I r-- � r---, I r---,
1 —d ' -x
1 I I 1 1 I 1 .r" 00V"
0%W
�+
.. ►'�-' � .r� --5 a:,�.'. "#-',t' �r ,' .'y- +!i• •.'*+ r -. .i� �'r �.• '�• -.rr, ;_1-�'K .� :�'1 ." ^' �''.i.�i - r',� ..
' '1~ � �2 •r i . O;{5ti.'f' �i wx. r., r•. :�_ �' •r '� •�x*..i•i � r'� Y � .
±7. r'r 3+�'•`+4•'+�, f« F— -,•:'.� '..:`r'an ti•a:'tir�"1 .�•'JL R• `�•R-�*•• .•f:7}.y •a••r rJ+`'�ir`V,•-�'.!-.'� � _+i
?r, - +yam '.'r .•-R.v •� '..' ir' •.►',•� .•�+. a.: .Y�r... ,.� ,+'•'.,, _
(JLYO'.E.,I f �i'�. • . ' r, : � f
•� �.'.a F' •�• ti k •; + r 1•'rJ "�, ,'±- � y-N�pliQ .*Yt •.+'.'S•• � r ;,. i.��-:. .. • T ,t,`
`'rr•�•rrii.� x rr'�•-1 � ,v _� � 'J'; _'t `.' Jfa, R- �, .. yy •f iy •' �: �- �a � 'S•*r'r�.%' }#
, _Y.. .. •W,'r�'� +{ �•K F fr +rIZ!•• `+rye �r--t
r
d"AMSA,H uuslai It "
1 2.1.j
yl—
..--L Packet Pg. 210 k
I j_
PARK PLACE EDMONDS, A CONDO I
ONE B►�LLARD LL
400 HO�hELL WAY 6tO 5TH AVE S 2.1.j
_--a?.�..^ —�s CONCRETE w —
TT- ONE STORY BULDING
i 614 5TH AVE, S. a
I ` FIFE—84.05'
04
In
I B RIAI -a2-27 r .,
° 0' CON -W IE ,42;
CONC E IE.62. Lj
kin
--
ASPHALT PARI(IWG GN1
su sa a GRASS
. 4 a
Y
!! {y
o .n ( T
a
ASPHALT �' d
i
�IPT10N OVERLAPS
DF WAY OF 4-TH STREET
ARKUIEW TWIN, A CONDOMINIUM
17 4T H AVE S.
131.J7-
s+o• PI-IALT ALLEY
60 s
JE�E0-7r EASEMENT 76031100239 _
SEE EXCEPTION 4
FOURTH STREET APARTMENTS LLC
531 ATH AVE S
} CONC. WALK
n
�
!4
a
2 STIDRY CONC. BLOCK BUILDING
M --
IF
616 5TH AVE- S.
M
-C RIM -69.54 g
FFE=85-26' MAIN
m
61
f1 CON S IE-67.8A
FFE-76.59' ALLEY
00
r
�
on
r
�RIM -69.68
PARCEL B
�
a WssMH
PK REAL PROPERTY LLC
622 5TH AVE S
CS RIM =%29
Packet Pg. 211
6" CON N IE-67.04
4n" .n le w kc—&c
rih
2.1.j
N
d
N
M
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
U
N
H
d
IL
L
IL
a�
c
a
m
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
x
W
C
d
E
L
v
R
Q
Packet Pg. 212
2.1.j
Packet Pg. 213
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 214
2.1.j
N
N
N
R
t
IL
m
c
r
c
0
u
0
N
N
H
a
IL
Y
L
a
a�
c
a
m
c�
a
N
M
M
m
Q
t
K
W
C
0
E
t
v
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 215
2.1.k
Clugston, Michael
From: PK Real Property <pkrealproperty@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 7:54 PM
To: Clugston, Michael
Subject: Re: Pine Park Hearing
Hello Mike,
We are the owners of the property adjacent to South side of the building site for the proposed Pine Park development
(PLN2020-0053). Our property has two buildings. A commercial building, currently occupied by the Barkada restaurant,
and a 3-unit apartment building. After reviewing the project documents, we have a few concerns that may not yet have
been addressed.
1. Building A/B Parking
a. There may be a safety concern regarding drivers exiting the parking. It appears that visibility may
be obscured by Building C to the West and a retaining wall to the East. Both vehicle and pedestrian
traffic should be considered.
b. Since the parking access is located directly across from the entrance of our apartment entrance, we
are concerned about headlights shining into our units while exiting.
2. Construction
a. Construction will always result in noise, dust, and disruptions, but to the extent possible we hope
that these can be minimized.
b. Since the private driveway is the only means of access for our apartment units and for restaurant
deliveries, we would request that it remain available throughout the construction project.
Thanks for your consideration and appreciate being kept informed regarding this project.
Sincerely,
Patrick Allain
620/622 5t" Ave S
Edmonds, WA 98020
On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 10:16 AM Clugston, Michael<Michael.Clugston@edmondswa.gov> wrote:
Hi Patrick,
Here's a link to the agenda memo for the ADB's meeting on Wednesday.
Mike
Exhibit 10 - PLN20
Packet Pg. 216
2.1.k
Michael Clugston, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Edmonds
425-771-0220 x 1330
(cell: 425-967-2634)
michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov
CITY HALL IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
Services will continue to be provided by email, phone and by appointment as necessary.
Apply for permits at: https://mybuildingpermit.com/
For all other permit inquiries, email: devserv.admin@edmondswa.gov
Handouts, codes, plans, and Web GIS: http://www.edmondswa.gov
From: PK Real Property <pkrealproperty@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 10:12 AM
To: Clugston, Michael<Michael.Clugston@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Pine Park Hearing
Hi Mike,
I received a notice regarding Pine Park (PLN2020-0053), but I could not locate any documents on the website
(Development Notices). Are any available for review prior to the meeting tomorrow?
Thanks,
-Patrick
Exhibit 10 - PLN20
Packet Pg. 217
2.1.1
O-V
E Djj,
a
0
A
.r
a
Packet Pg. 218
2.1.1
N
d
N
Cu
t
d
3
C
C
O
U
N
a�
.N
H
d
d
L
IL
a�
c
a
N
d
N
R
t
d
N
L6
L6
m
El
.r
a
Packet Pg. 219
9-k
Im
T. t 4p4w,-
MIN
it
I!t d"Um
5th Avenue South
&win
N Nil
Packet Pg. 22
rd , Gr
1 • iD 211FF dVi,
'"T so ru {Gal flflY
rrsay.R+t1 �+rUYI.Y IFl7
pXE pip PEILpTr CrU
d.
it,FLC4RJ% J.[ n
><OPEaMh
4
}.
h �
d7ALIN A 4• TIEND F ' -
CQaG iCRIAYII JIOM[TQi} +•
era
..
�'� Y. #r• '�' lam!' ..
�I I
�
I I
NuG,L3■
IrLwirwinrnas�-
+
iJtb �s6
I
r
Y17RT��Y Zw r
aMQ�l9LNL7t 1i4 Yi
I
-
4
A40n�@Mill alxr
11
■ 7sv1P[LWYIl
Wooft 5LdTr omm R�sl
I
Alf
Al i
y L I. 1. L 'F
1 I.. {' S1 ,. r N-• �ti s� } L F �• h I"�r I I' J 1 r
�� � � .� } +� ■.-I "er44�aat'Mo"cl : 1 M. • • Y Y -•- ± Z �I lei,
,�'
` r fr'•`.�'•Ir}''tr :.i ti.+'#••„YS.AS
� ��1 +y rYr'+'.•�±` •:: _•, _ ��,�_�_ ter' •' '-�,a�„ .'J- - _,I L__� -�T-1
F—A
i •8•.-•' i•�'S +M1J ,it1Y •+f �,'• Ff. •'4 •'J''. C... L�-. +if ti•'' t ..d �`'-`{'1 iy tijr,�•.r .- • '. - •
.. fin+ •'F *a4 •►e1 a± •'�_,-Yr�-iC,;".w- tit { s�•••'���e-{� i.•,p! • _ - -
• +
— '- F ' -,Ii �'�'a'w'.`.+air � *fit Y,i Z III+�,�,�F7" � ' �.�,..' .�4? �1•�� *+•�— � t �
- '���' •'=iy`"�. i,71 }:.�•� yh _ ' . i [.. •' � ^S L"r: •rr •',,,, _ ..�' �'�,r_g:. + ._ .-' :' r .`:. y..
•�s.~•y ',i: •.r .'� •'•l•JL' , - ,. •ti •_ ry ,,+•tiR' i. f ti�`i'4 ,j} Tf Mi.r i J •'}{ rr
4. : �P. r "yr ti"f';,--. + y !.. S:i:,a- �•+�,7 �,. Via"' .�...} ,�#iF1�Lr.d�.�L=y .. 11 ,,
J ! 1 YAiP Lr�_
—I— I— -F � I f � I
Y I r I I I ,rFZ4�aA6fliAl i r r I I I +
rs I I r I I. 1 I pwyagslrpal, +ws e. Ire 1 1 I I r r I I
I r r I I I I r I 1 I 1 r I
;P ++ s
r iy ••,4 a%f+.• G•'•�`' �•' I f _r'•.T. � - ij s�.. 1 ,-,i►�-. ��'� T�y .
.. ". ":.�',s.'.t;J: ;L--{i •-'+�:_'�-"+�+.:+.Y •A }t,aY,+l J-`�• �.-�` . .r'. •�'.'..r:•;'"Y.
•, = '�t 4' i•+r+ti-`i.y•'',� � F ►-s'--f'. i �:; y�-, . +• ,=' •• I "• ,1 * ,�1 '�a .. ; -
r+�+�+;fir �L. T, �. F'y•T.�]]'� YY'^�4:��.�-•i�'P ..•� .�„�5f•� tr. �— f�
..' I:".�rl 'lL:: �* : • "' r•, ....-Sy '.'3-, '+: ,. °"i .N. S'F'. .l , R•i'�-
�• , tr ;iLaZ ` :r .rrt+ v = y`.rF„k+ . f, -� *}•� = +bL --" -^ I
+ :� �. I+lFihpi=Fa+FiS` r FIwOCIlrty,Ctl•- �.,�,-r `koenwa
" r,i•S- , Y sappR+'#r1/i inF "r I'' f�t1 Lti{'JMT -
-: �-- L � __. - �`=�.r ate--'�_1-- . - 1.• ._S.'Y ',w_ �- _. .. ,.. • 1 � �.,. I
:
I
1
I
2.1.1
Packet Pg. 221
:
I
1
I
2.1.1
Packet Pg. 221
t r■
' ICI a7wr # rPr�
•0 iD rug CRr,1E
P .� ]
it, FL r4J,l
n
POI LICAPI fTW Of,L
pEl\Y ff U
P�It pJ<p PEILpTr CrU
d.
44RJ%
TO PEYM►•
4
}.
h
�
'"�; 1 '
r+'
rL�rM€d70WIF�4• IAiF
CQ+GiRMYII JIO�[TQi}
�. F '
+•
MAGIY 81Jtdmw
Y #L•�'�'
alb! ..
! II II
II fuLC•,t3■ I
I
rh+Qtt19111ILL C4 'ii AOLJ! PMrs41+1
II I
rl I
MMP
� I �
p + i.,Lfll•s6
Ob JS7GSrt4LNh,i{T1,
�
I bTi
. 1mr it �
r9A*pt,1
1
K&
4 A407� �@Mill aJ'r'r
AQ.• ,ro•er*jL�
V+oft 5LRL oz. w am +
4
'
1
,r,. -WIr
� ••''F',`fa•��'st i-�.4i•r{, - .i [.. r' i �Sl•'r. 'r�, ''rr ,�'.�+�_r, :+•+ •* .. �.;, r t•�. •, 4,�-• FF 'S w+: -,~ .• ,3, � • - „t~ '_ rs ,,+•tiR' i. fa.ti i��r "L +i} T +i.r��' y J • 4•rl.•.. +', �' y
J I ! 1 YALP Ire_ I I
,r---�--1 r- -- F r-- r----t r---�
I I I
1 I 1 I I I ,tia.aaa.cr+ul i I I I I I +
I 1 1 —+ I I- I
i i i I i i I i i I i i i i i I i i I
- �• r •y •. �y.r{'�- c«'. •+i .. �lr'r -:f _s�.: , -+i►�-� are. ,t �ty, -
+rti '.''}ram-r' f.i �•.+• /�•,,. 1-*'�,'�a ;
4 k1 .+,:� `, ,i T'r ,�Cit •'F ;�J 7�' ]'�R rr'+s.-.1,': tiP+ ' ��.�-•a �>•r . .::{ sf •� .--r. — ' -- �—
*gg ;•r�:: V "■•'7,Y,..-S•'•"3-,,•�r++.M11LGLyr y10YCI .r., =F •-', P'+•• '�r r - -
i�. ;r�'r;ivaa'`:r��.rrt+v Yrl_i•++�„+ i- ^r`7'w"r"".'^ I
_ .eL 1r. NI CIh (•ei=Fo aPiS`'•.r /IIM,GC{i►HICCI-•- i.,� -r '`i .`ORrwfF4w•e _
"� r,i•s- � _� sr�R+'#rJ/ilnr' rr I'' t'lJllti{'�PT - '§�� T . ,; ._ l - • �.� I
- i-• a I
«-r l �, .�rr ;� •� ,-� ••r� ,•rA .•� •-ra .-� �, .. ram. a ,.� .•JA•
rr r y� • +r
I— --.,—I—`
I
1
i
• � l
11
2.1.1
a
Packet Pg. 222
2.1.1
N
d
N
R
t
d
3
C
C
O
U
N
a�
.N
H
d
d
L
IL
a�
c
a
N
d
N
R
t
d
N
L6
L6
m
El
.r
a
Packet Pg. 223
Phase 1
s BUILDINGS A & B VIEWED FROM NORTHEA► PacketPg.224
Al SCALE NIS
i
I P
Ima
Drip-ntation tr
`PA
_ �. r•�. Oron
p- L --
mr
Activate street front
■ Entrances with distinct expressions
got #
2.1.1
Ground Level Details & Canopies
A4,A7
f . -
EAST RENDERED ELEVATION
— FIBERGLAti
` i1N
AND DOOR
a LA
a -
DETAIL BAr
LIC
m
a
a�
c
BRICK
a 4EE
N
— METAL CAr
d
y {I
a
— WALL SCOT
:
N
— DECORATII
"2 AE[
DETAILED
o ICF
Q
r
L
X
W
r
C
d
E
t
v
r
.r
a
Packet Pg. 227
All % SCALE: NTS
2.1.1
Transparency at Street
EAST RENDERED ELEVATION
FIBERGLAS
n PIN
IN
AND DOOR
a
EAh
LIC
a
CD
c
BRICK
a 4EE
N
METAL CAr
d
Y {
a
WALL SCOI
N:
DECORATI1
'? AE[
DETAILED S
o ICF
Q
r
L
X
W
r
C
d
E
t
v
r
.r
Q
Packet Pg. 228
All % SCALE: NTS
SOUTH RENDERED ELEVATION
SCALE: NTS
LES AND RAILS
ED FOR DEPTH
EARTH TONES)
PANEL SIDING (LIGH
DETAIL BAND (LIGHT
BRICK VENEER SIDII
(EARTH TONES)
WALL SCONCE
CONCRETE PLINTH
RETAINING WALL (G
�4:) NORTH RENDERED ELEVATION
A3.1) SCALE: NTS
Packet Pg. 129
AL
1 Lr.7
as rr � r
IMP!; o OWN
BRIT.. r
WON
)•��s�I:iIIc�i�r��►�i� --- �a�a�a��r�a�a��r-.� � •. T. �.• _.. _ ._ i
s
M
a
IL
IL
a�
c
IL
N
(D
U)
m
IL
N
L6
m
0
a
x
W
a
Packet Pg. 230
f q
■ 4 +
v ' r q ■,
V b v
a
COMPAC r ,[I [)PHFA[]
ttyDgMk'.FA :MP j
5
cd
z
I I I I I I I I I
. 1 4 .v
J e.
+ 9 r
• q
■
• 1
+ v
COAIPRCI AlCr'1EW
}iYpRANf�{A lTYP f
Q. 1
+
II
A
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
L__—J L_—_J L___J L___J L___J
s .4. , ,a
I I
1 I
1
I I
I l
1 1
I I
MAPEE•
. �r.1 .' • r� : .1..! 4 i :i.,.:. I L ��. - r• I� . . is ['' r C'•' L•
'•'19 Jl�h�'.1 i'%r'
2.1.1
Packet Pg. 231
2.1.1
CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN
All SCALE: kk
N
d
N
Cu
t
d
3
C
C
O
U
a�
H
d
d
L
a
a�
c
a
N
d
N
R
L
d
N
L6
L6
m
El
.r
a
Packet Pg. 232
2.1.1
�—'
5th Avenue South
t
M16
F+
r A
4th Avenue South �.
Packet Pg. 233
pn srNrsr rrsEvnrn REMOVE [E}ORIVEYlAT AwO IEJ FLOH'ER POLE �
s'-Or t u 7ME GRATt RESTORE -11. PER GRT STD TOREM AMN
PER L'SCAPE tTYP. GF ]) .yµ
2.1.1
REPLACE JEI DRIVEWAY W17Mt G Txi f • a - '. nPOVSF S�TAGi+1
CCNC SIDEWALK AND EXTEND i.•. �_ _ _ _
TO PER Crry! WIRI
` I. - . a r ... •. {, � _ � - a . r ..ter � "�{ •,i . . � - ;ti -�L : _ � ' Ji�I
•r • � f � • - i • � �Ng7CR Cg1Ri I .'_ I
I I I I I r l I
suLBWC
� ` _, I r__—, r---�
g I I �.•-'1 — —I� —1—�— 1— F007r'Rf'T AAVG II GRADE. 76.9f
I 1 1 1 I ! I GAiuAOLGEm—w; sF'tEAI I I 1 I I i .l'
sAiC ae�e 5F IEAI I I I I I I I I 1
- f !—_I �I� I— I 1 �I� I�—� —• 1
I { .I I_ � � � .Y._— - � t' � I I —I � t- -I�1 I I 1 I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1
j r
—r�+
• r t ._+ 6111C,N(3 [FIICfYLI
■ e .
•A T
W! TREE INPCR DUFAREA
111�' PER C&CAPE MP OF 161
INj YAXID PENCE mm
- PER LSGAPE
`• ORN6WAY
-
...
_ •'.Y,M��! .r.i._
�1L.i•
�L.�J. •'f.�.,.•iw.i'.__-
wdi. .ad.l w_ LM:s..
..i.N..: _ .i'4...
'�:iaN..��•t �.id4'_
51'57- siF A-.'finUE 5
NM39VeE'.V rv;,1k03N.C,
rr•N cuwy14a19
v
0
Packet Pg. 234
[]]
AIS R,I STREET TREE WITH REMWEIEI ORNMAT AND MFUDWER POLE \ . A,: 2•1 •1
r-or SC TREE ORATE
RESTORE WRB PEFE CITY 5r0 rC [aplAai
PER I. SCAPE iTYP. OF 3I •ry y y
t _ X —REFUSE STAGING
RFP[ACE% l ORWEWAr WITH • I; — �----
. •'1'r I; ,• y - «. CORC 30MALk AND EXTEND F+'•'
TO ! PER CITY STANCARO
r II y w T —• —F N
a e,',
_-
1 d
1 1 DNILD[!•iA I = I 5MVING
19119TGRT LIVENKIRI(7H I ` r I 113STORY LIVEAVORI[ TH
1 FpOTPRNiAREA'1$O! 3F y FOOTPRNi AREA fEjpf SF
AvG[E,ORADE-l37s �� a AV9 SEI GRADEAGLA_ 17M� sr "I A3A's �j
1 I WORK 5GiE WO, %F MA) I '�' I MAK surl`E owe S IEy
11 I l i I I o
_ 7z u
2.,_ [TYPi I I I 2C 3E FIYP} I
j+ b I ;s'._ ..■■ r : �- r' r i. �' , I" a: I 1 to
I s r f k-1+:•c: `.�; .i
q 1 L 1'•{{ '1 Y� :L :L*, •J I ,. d
Y i' :I' ..I wwEi • •r .4 .r • i . .+� •..j-. 1' 'I r •i's
ma I I' %�•�:•:pp• i.: 1.• e: �'':,;I' ' _ I• 1 -.4, ..i.�`, � :1 ! 1 I I I i � Y
SIC 7 L.A— w r: � +.�ar__�+.a. E_ �1 �� __L ca
�i i77
•• '•' '_ , _. it d
4° �f •>r• �_ �uDroaovl]Rr � #y,' •� •�._i r7 a C d
I.�•.` •.. .�'• ''TAPLLSS#i 1N'N [A SHGRTSUSOV� •t ''• •• !- ••'• T�- _ .. •,' S a
'ya' �r•L�r ,1i51<PAl"Pt•I'A1'4 'r •�'_ '��yFr''"ir'._ 4• i N
I.L
r
Ire
I I 1 I I f l In
I 1 SWLDMQ I I I - m
—r` — r---1 r---7 r- coot M7A�loaDi� SF -, r-- r----1
A_ — �— AYG IFIGRADE. TRs�
I I I 1 I AOLA• 990H SF IEAI I I 1 I I 1 f F
73 I I I I I_ I I I I GARAGEMSMT: 496[ SF iEAI I I I _ I_ I I - r I I I r
LLI
-
I
t
4,.. E G G G C L •G •., G ..
'� a •J— iN, TREE N DVFSER AREA . -+ INIj WC)[50 PfcNC€ [�y •?
T .. PER L'SCAM IrVP OF,61 ..PERLSOIPE - _•� `•ORNEWAr •"�' I J
i<r 1 AQ iS• '�. • L2. r, .• tTS '' •'• • T�• 'Ir • ifr' Al] : T l
PARNYIEO Packet Pg. 235 -
1 APFI POB49346+0 I
2.1.1
N
d
N
Cu
t
d
3
C
C
O
U
N
a�
.N
H
d
d
L
IL
a�
c
a
N
d
N
R
t
d
N
L6
L6
m
El
.r
a
Packet Pg. 236
2.1.1
N
d
N
R
t
d
3
C
C
O
U
N
a�
.N
H
d
d
L
IL
a�
c
a
N
d
N
R
t
d
N
L6
L6
m
El
.r
a
Packet Pg. 237
2.1.m
CITY OF EDMONDS
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Minutes of Virtual Meeting
May 5, 2021
Chair Strauss called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 7:12 p.m.
Board Members Present Board Members Absent Staff Present
Lauri Strauss, Chair Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Bruce Owensby, Vice Chair
Kim Bayer
Joe Herr
Maurine Jeude
PUBLIC HEARING: PINE PARK 614 — PHASE 2 DESIGN REVIEW (FILE NUMBER PLN2020-0053)
Chair Strauss reviewed that the public hearing for the Pine Park 614 design review proposal, which began on March 3,
2021, is still open. At that meeting, the Board took a first look at the project (Phase 1), received initial testimony, and
prioritized the Design Guideline Checklist for the applicant to make improvements to the proposal. At this hearing
(Phase 2), the Board will review the applicant's revisions and take additional testimony from staff, the applicant, and the
public. Should the Board require additional information with which to make a decision, a specific request will be made
to the applicant and the public hearing will be continued again to a date certain. However, if the Board finds that the
record is complete, the public hearing will be closed and the Board will begin deliberations and make a decision on the
proposal. She emphasized that anyone who wants an opportunity to speak at any future appeal of the matter and did not
testify on March 3'd or submit written comments, would need to testify at this hearing. She invited those who wanted to
testify for the first time to affirm that their testimony would be the truth. (Note: Those who testified at the Phase 1
hearing did not need to be sworn in again)
Mr. Clugston explained that because the project is located in the Downtown Business (BD3) zone, a 2-phased public
hearing is required for projects that require State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. At the Phase 1 hearing on
March 3'd, the applicant presented the conceptual design, and the Board prioritized the Design Guideline Checklist and
continued the hearing to May 51. The applicant has responded to the guidance from the Phase 1 checklist, and at this
hearing, the Board will review the design for consistency with zoning, the Comprehensive Plan, and the Design
Guideline Checklist. The Board may ask for additional information or close the hearing, deliberate and issue a Type III -
A Decision.
Mr. Clugston shared an aerial photograph of the project site, noting there is a mixture of multifamily and commercial
development to the north, south and west, and primarily single-family development to the east across 5' Avenue S. He
reviewed that multifamily, live/work, parking and loading are all allowed uses in the BD3 zone. However, the
designated street front requirement along 5'' Avenue S triggers ground floor height and depth requirements, as well as
other design standards. The Development Code requires a 15-foot setback from the west property line, which is adjacent
to a multifamily -zoned parcel, and the maximum building height is 30 feet. Off street parking is required, and each of
the units in Building C would have one parking stall. Each of the three units in the two buildings on 5'' Avenue S have
two parking stalls, one for the live portion of the use and another for the work portion.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Pagel of 8
Packet Pg. 238
2.1.m
Mr. Clugston reviewed that the two proposed buildings facing 5' Avenue S (Buildings A and B) are about 60-feet wide
and 30-feet deep, and Building C, which is located further into the site, would be 30-feet deep and about 120-feet wide.
As discussed at the Phase 1 hearing, the layout is compliant, but only if a subdivision is approved to create a lot line in
between Buildings A and B and Building C. The parcel needs to be subdivided to allow the two eastern buildings to
have the reduced street -front depth. Typically, the depth requirement is 45 feet, but if the site is less than 90-feet deep,
the requirement can be reduced to 30 feet, which is what the applicant is proposing for Buildings A and B. With the
subdivision, no open space would be required because Buildings A and B would be less than 120 feet long, and both of
the lots would be less than 12,000 square feet. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to ensure that the
subdivision happens.
Mr. Clugston reviewed the design elements in the design guidelines and Design Guideline Checklist, the design
guidance in the Comprehensive Plan, and the design standards in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
22.43. As noted in the Staff Report, the design guidance from the Comprehensive Plan and Design Guideline Checklist
was generally met when the project was presented for the Phase 1 hearing, so he will focus on the design standards in the
ECDC. He reviewed the standards as follows:
Massing and Articulation. Pictures were provided to compare the Phase 1 submittal to the Phase 2 submittal.
The intent is to have a top and a base, and then mimic the historic building widths in the area. Typically, the
older buildings in Edmonds are between 50 and 60-feet wide, and the two buildings facing 5' Avenue S
(Buildings And B) will be 60-feet wide, and they will be further divided into 20-foot-wide units through the use
of windows, canopies, etc. There is a cornice at the top to provide a definite edge, and the base of the buildings
is identified via the storefronts and different materials. Although the design standards would not apply to
Building C on the west side of the property, the proposed building provides differentiation for each of the units.
The applicant is proposing a top deck area, and the bottom area would be set off by some recessed garages. He
noted that the exterior stairs that were shown on the Phase 1 drawing were not included in the Phase 2 drawing,
so the applicant will need to advise on how the rooftop decks will be accessed.
• Orientation to the Street. The intent of this standard is to activate the street front, and the buildings that front
on 5' Avenue S (Buildings A and B) will be built right to the eastern edge of the property line. The entrances
should have a distinct expression, and the applicant is proposing a forecourt in the area beneath the canopies.
• Ground Level Details and Canopies. The applicant is required to use a minimum of five design elements
from the list provided, and the applicant is proposing to use detailed concrete, sconces, planters, medallions, etc.
The entrances will be immediately accessible from the sidewalk, and canopies are proposed over each one.
• Transparency at Street Front. The code requires that the space between 2 and 10 feet on the street -front
fagade must be at least 75% transparent. Based on a quick calculation, it doesn't appear that the proposed
design would meet this requirement, and the applicant will need to address this issue.
• Blank Walls. The applicant is not proposing any blank walls on the fagades facing east (5' Avenue S) and
west, and there will be some interest on the walls that face the alleys through the use of banding and different
materials, as well as lighting along the alleyway.
• HVAC and Utilities. A transformer will be located at the northeast corner of Building C, and he isn't sure
where the other utility equipment will be located. However, it will all need to be screened or camouflaged, and
staff is recommending a condition of approval to make sure that happens as part of the Building Permit
application.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 2 of 8
Packet Pg. 239
2.1.m
Landscaping. The site will be fairly well built out, and there won't be a lot of landscaping. The applicant is
proposing several street trees, as well as planters adjacent to the storefronts. There will also be some small
planters in the area between Buildings A and B. In addition, Type I Landscaping (two rows of evergreens,
fence, shrubs, and groundcover) will be required on the western property line adjacent to the multifamily
development to the west. The applicant is proposing one row of mixed canopy (deciduous and evergreen), as
well a fence, shrubs and groundcover. The code allows the Board to deviate from the exact Type I Landscape
requirements if they feel the proposal meets the screening intent. In this case, it probably does since the adjacent
site to the west is developed with multifamily and the subject parcel will be developed primarily with
multifamily, too.
Mr. Clugston reviewed that, at the Phase 1 hearing, Ed Lorah spoke on behalf of residents of the Park View Twin
Condominium Homeowner's Association, which is located just west of the subject parcel. He voiced concern about
drainage and parking, as well as lighting. While the code primarily addresses the buildings that face 5' Avenue S, they
were hoping the applicant would also address the western fagade. Drainage will be dealt with per code, and each of the
units will have required parking on site. The applicant has provided a lighting plan for the Phase 2 submittal, which
includes low cut-off lights and sconces on each side of the building. Because the site will be developed as primarily
residential, there won't be any big parking lot lights.
Mr. Clugston advised that a written comment was received on May 4' from Patrick Allain, the property owner to the
south of the subject parcel. He read the comment letter (Exhibit 10) into the record as follows:
We are the owners of the property adjacent to the south side of the building site for the proposed Pine Park
development. Our property has two buildings, a commercial building that is currently occupied by the Barkada
Restaurant and a 3-unit apartment building. After reviewing the project documents, we have a few concerns that
may not have been addressed yet:
Buildings A and Parking
a. There may be a safety concern regarding drivers exiting the parking. It appears that visibility may
be obscured by Building C to the west and a retaining wall to the east. Both vehicle and pedestrian
traffic should be considered.
b. Since the parking access is located directly across from our apartment entrance, we are concerned
about headlights shining into our units while exiting.
2. Construction
a. Construction will always result in noise, dust and disruptions, but to the extent possible, we hope
that these can be minimized.
b. Since the private driveway is the only means of access for our apartment units and for restaurant
deliveries, we would request that it remain available throughout the construction project.
Mr. Clugston responded that because the proposed buildings will be located at the property line on the alley side, the
Traffic Engineer agrees that mirrors or some other mitigation will be required to ensure safe access from the two
driveways into the alleyway. There isn't a lot that can be done to address concerns about headlights shining onto
adjacent properties. However, there are performance, noise and sediment/erosion control standards that apply to all
construction projects to address potential impacts. These standards will be monitored throughout building construction.
There may be some temporary disruption to the alley, but the Engineering Department will require a traffic control plan,
and flaggers may be required at the 5'' Avenue S and alley entrances to ensure that traffic can get through during
construction.
Mr. Clugston said staff also has a few remaining concerns about the proposed project:
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 3 of 8
Packet Pg. 240
2.1.m
• The Building C roof access that was shown in the Phase 1 submittal was omitted from the Phase 2 submittal.
The applicant will need to show how the rooftop will be accessed.
• It doesn't appear that the proposed design meets the requirement of 75% Transparency along 5' Avenue S.
• Staff is proposing an additional condition of approval to require the applicant to provide and identify pedestrian
pathways.
• It is the applicant's understanding that trash service would be provided by Sound Disposal at the 5'' Avenue S
curb. If that is the case, there should be some pedestrian markings on the alleyway to make sure that people in
Building C can get up to the street. Another option would be to locate a trash receptacle on the alley at the
southwest corner of the site. In the downtown area, most of the trash is picked up from the alley.
Mr. Clugston said staff is recommending approval of the project with the nine conditions outlined in the Staff Report, as
well as an additional condition to address alley access safety.
It was noted that a wrong link to the Zoom meeting was published on the agenda memorandum that was posted on the
City's website. However, a courtesy notice was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the subject parcel with the
correct link. Council Member Olsen voiced concern that people who relied on the City's website had the wrong link to
the meeting.
Augustus Bukowski, Edmonds, said his company owns the subject property and is the applicant for the proposed
project. They purchased the property with the thought that it would be a great place to develop live/work units that allow
self-employed people, like himself, to live and work in the community. Instead of developing one large square structure
that houses commercial or office uses with limited parking, they are proposing to develop the site with three small
buildings. He noted that his company owns the parcel that is the alley, as well. He said his company, Seattle Luxury
Homes, is known for developing very nice, high -end housing in Seattle, and they want to share their great product with
the Edmonds community. He emphasized that the project is designed to meet all of the code requirements. If they
wanted to maximize the site, they would have proposed a larger building with more units.
Craig Pontius, Citizen Design Collaborators, said his company designed the project. In response to the concerns
raised by staff, he advised that the design team has spoken with Sound Disposal regarding the trash/recycling facility,
and they indicated that both the 5' Avenue S and alley locations would be acceptable to them. The design team would
be willing to work with the location that is deemed best for the community. Rather than doing exterior stairs to provide
rooftop access on Building C, the applicant is proposing an internal stairway with a hatchway on the roof. Due to the
height limits, a full -height penthouse would be problematic, but there are a number of products available to provide a
mechanically -operated hatch that rolls back to provide safe rooftop access. This results in a much lower profile on the
roof. Mr. Pontius concluded that Mr. Clugston did a good job of explaining the modifications that were made in
response to the direction provided at the March 3' Phase 1 hearing.
Ed Lorah, Park View Twin Condominium Homeowner's Association, requested clarification about what is being
proposed for the 15-foot setback on the western side of the property. Mr. Clugston displayed the site plan, noting that
the required 15-foot setback from the west property line can be development with pavement or a driveway, but no
building can be located there.
Bob, a resident of the Park View Twin Condominiums voiced concern about stormwater runoff and potential flooding
on adjacent properties as a result of the proposed development. Mr. Clugston answered that stormwater from the site
will be managed in accordance with current stormwater code. All stormwater must be dealt with on site through low -
impact development technology, retention vaults, etc. He shared the utility plan, noting that the applicant is proposing
two infiltration vaults to deal with all of the stormwater generated by the site. Mr. Pontius added that the driveways
would be permeable, so the water can soak through them. The retention vaults will be tanks with no bottom, filled with
rocks. As they fill with stormwater, the water will slowly percolate into the ground through the rocks. There will be an
overflow that allows stormwater to flow into the City's stormwater system during significant storm events. Chair
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 4 of 8
Packet Pg. 241
2.1.m
Strauss asked if there would be roof drains that flow into the retention vaults or if the roof runoff would just spill off onto
the ground. Mr. Pontius said the roof drainage would be collected and routed into the collection tanks.
Chair Strauss closed the public portion of the hearing.
Board Member Bayer expressed her belief that the proposed project would add a lot to the area. She said several citizens
have voiced their concern to her that, if the property is subdivided, no open space would be required as part of the
project. She noted that other projects in Edmonds are providing even more open space than what the code requires.
Chair Strauss voiced concern that the proposed project does not meet the design objectives for site design. The design
objectives talk about:
• The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscape features as an integral part of how a
building interacts with its surrounding site and environment.
• Open space for residential settings and creating green spaces enhances the visual attributes of the development
and provides places for interaction, play, seating and other activities.
• Site utility storage addresses trash, mechanical areas, noise minimization, etc. Locating the trash receptacles
from 14 units on 5' Avenue S is not workable in her mind.
• Landscape buffers that integrate natural landscape features and unique land forms. The applicant is proposing a
single line of trees along the western property line rather than a double line.
Mr. Bukowski explained that because the lot slopes, the building footprints need to be located as proposed in order to get
the three stories necessary for the project, which is lower density than what is allowed in the zone. If open space is
required, they would close off the oversized walkway that goes through the middle of the building and there would be no
see -through light. Instead, there would be a long fagade facing 5' Avenue S. Also, because the site is not being
developed to its maximum density, there will actually be more outdoor space for residents to the south, west and north if
the project is done in three separate buildings with an approximately 24-foot setback between the structures. He
concluded that there will be a lot of open space for the actual residents of the development, as well as those who
surround the property, a lot more than would be afforded with a 5% open space provided at the building entries. He
doesn't believe it would be better for the residents to do a singular structure, and the proposed design will result in a
more appealing, residential feel to the neighborhood while blending with other residential development in the area.
Mr. Bukowski advised that, due to the parking and backup distance requirements, the only other site design that would
work would be a large multifamily project that would have much more parking and lot coverage. From a top -down
perspective, the project will only cover about 50% of the site, and the code would actually allow up to 70% coverage.
He pointed out that the design incorporates planters, trees and a variety of design elements. He expressed his belief that
the proposed building would most likely have as much or more greenspace as the existing storefronts in the area.
Chair Strauss disagreed and observed that the intent of the residential code is to create not only open space, but green
space. It feels like the proposed design is really crowded with a lot of blacktop, and there is no intent to create any green
space on the site. Mr. Bukowski asked if she would have that same concern if the blacktop were replaced with building,
which would be allowed per the code. Chair Strauss answered affirmatively and pointed out that the area is residential.
Mr. Bukowski clarified that the property is located in the BC zone, which is the highest density zoning in the entire City.
The property is not zoned residential, but the project would add a residential component to the commercial space. He
referred to an aerial view of the surrounding properties, noting that many of them are developed with large building
footprints and significant blacktop. The proposed project will have a lower footprint than a large, multifamily
condominium. Based on the pictures provided, he pointed out that the adjacent properties have no greenspace in front,
where the proposed project would have trees. If they were to do an alternative design aside from the proposed
townhome concept, the buildings would have a larger impact on the lot. He said he would support the argument for
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 5 of 8
Packet Pg. 242
2.1.m
more green space if the property were zoned residential, but it is zoned commercial. The property already doesn't have a
lot of greenspace, and they are proposing more than what is provided on surrounding properties.
Chair Strauss commented that no one lives on the properties that are developed as commercial, but Mr. Bukowski
previously mentioned the goal of providing affordable residential units for small business owners and their families.
Absent open space, it isn't likely that the units will be desirable to families.
Board Member Herr cautioned that the code would allow the applicant to develop a bigger, more dense building on the
site. The Board is asking the applicant to do something that he doesn't have to do, and he is trying to be creative with his
site planning by mixing it up with more than one building. The applicant could decide to develop the site to its full
potential, and the City could end up with a worse project that is completely code compliant.
Mr. Bukowski commented that there are already a number of requirements the project must meet, and if additional
requirements cause even one of the units to be eliminated, the project might not be feasible. He noted that construction
costs have increased significantly over the past year, as well. If the project is not approved, the next best option would be
to construct a two-story commercial office space, which was formally approved by the Board for the banks. He said he
would rather do a commercial/residential project, as it would be better for the community and fit with the integrity of the
area.
Vice Chair Owenby agreed with Board Member Herr. He expressed his belief that the proposed project would result in
good background buildings. While it won't stand out or make a statement, it will be a pleasant building to walk by. He
noted that most of the development in downtown Edmonds is right up to the property line, and many of the buildings are
bland and plain. As a commercial development, the project could be a lot worse. However, he suggested a few minor
changes could bring a little more green into the project. For example, something narrow and tall, such as bamboo, could
be planted along the walkway between the two buildings. Grass and a tree could also be planted between the two
parking areas to create more depth.
Mr. Bukowski noted that the existing structures on the property abut the street frontage with no articulation, and the
neighboring properties have no greenery, either. He shared a drawing of the proposed new buildings, noting that there
would be planters in front of each of the units, as well as in the area between the two buildings. There will be a pathway
between the two buildings, as well as a pathway behind Building C. The pathways will be constructed of some type of
stonework. In addition, staff has recommended that the project be approved based on the condition of adding more
pedestrian walkway. For example, they could add a pedestrian walkway in front of Building C to create a courtyard feel.
He noted that the intent is to incorporate planters into that space, as well.
Board Member Bayer asked Mr. Bukowski to share more information about the proposed landscaping on the western
property line. Mr. Bukowski said Type I Landscaping is intended to screen adjacent residential development from the
potential impacts associated with a large commercial development. However, in this case, the proposed development (8
residential units) is similar to what is developed on the adjacent property. Therefore, he believes they can accomplish the
goal of separating the two similar building types by tightly packing the trees with ground cover and shrubs, as proposed.
He said he would rather plant nice trees for the adjacent residents to enjoy rather than pack the space with conifer bushes.
Board Member Bayer asked Mr. Clugston to share his perspective on the proposed landscaping. Mr. Clugston explained
that the intent of Type I Landscaping is to create a dense buffer, typically between disparate land -use districts, such as
commercial and residential. In this case, the proposed use multifamily residential, which isn't any different than the use
on the adjacent property. The landscape code allows the Board to alter the standards if they think what is being proposed
still meets the intent of providing a buffer screening.
Because the wrong Zoom information was published on the Board's meeting agenda, Mr. Clugston suggested it would
be best to continue the public hearing again to either May 19' or June 2" d to make sure that all who want to comment
about the project have an opportunity to do so before the Board takes action.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 6 of 8
Packet Pg. 243
2.1.m
Chair Strauss expressed her belief that providing individual trash receptacles for each of the units will be a problem. She
suggested the applicant consider providing a single, large container near where the transformer will be on the north
property line. Mr. Bukowski said he would continue to work with Sound Disposal to incorporate the trash plan they can
best accommodate, but it is important to recognize that the locating a trash/recycling facility is prohibited by other
zoning requirements. If the City prefers a single, large container, it may require leeway to reduce the parking or setback
requirements, but that is outside of the Board's purview to do. He noted that other residential units in the vicinity have
their trash picked up individually.
Chair Strauss said she lives in Edelweiss, which has one large trash receptacle and one large recycling container for all of
the units to use. Mr. Bukowski pointed out that Edelweiss is a larger building (17 units). If the proposed project was
larger, it would be easier to put a trash/recycling facility inside the parking area. Their project is intended to be fee -
simple townhomes, where the people own both the land and the building and there is no homeowner's association. He
commented that the site is difficult to develop given the slope and the City's height restrictions. If they can't build the
project as proposed, the property will likely be developed with a single, large building that will eliminate a lot more open
space and push the building towards commercial. He would prefer to stick with the current design and work to find
solutions. For example, they could talk to Sound Disposal about potential options for locating a large container or
picking up the individual containers from the alley instead of 5' Avenue S. Board Member Jeude said she would prefer
to not have the trash collected from 5' Avenue S., too.
Board Member Bayer noticed that the color of the proposed s changed to a lighter grey. She said she preferred the dark
color that was presented at the Phase 1 hearing. Mr. Bukowski said many people thought the darker color was ominous.
The lighter color is an attempt to brighten the buildings for the community.
Board Member Jeude asked how the applicant proposes to address the requirement of 75% transparency on the 5'
Avenue S facade. Mr. Pontius responded that this calculation will be done as part of the final elevation review. Mr.
Bukowski said the intent is to meet the transparency requirement, and it may require wider windows or additional doors.
Mr. Pontius said the building articulation is intended to differentiate the three separate units in each of the buildings, but
some adjustments may be needed to meet the requirement. They are trying to maximize as much window as possible,
while still providing some structure to keep the building standing.
Mr. Bukowski pointed out that many of the buildings in the area do not have 75% transparency, either. Mr. Clugston
responded that, regardless of whether existing development meets the requirement, the current code requirement is to
have 75% transparency on a designated street front. The Board has had discussions in the past where they would like to
have some flexibility to address certain situations, but that is not currently allowed. Mr. Bukowski commented that the
design could be modified, if necessary, to meet the requirement.
CHAIR STRAUSS MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PINE PARK 614 PROJECT BE
CONTINUED TO MAY 19, 2021. BOARD MEMBER JEUDE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Bob asked if a survey has been completed to identify the property line on the west side. Mr. Bukowski answered that the
site they are proposing for development is based off an official survey of record.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. \
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BOARD MEMBER JEUDE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARCH 3, 2021 MEETING MINUTES AS
SUBMITTED. BOARD MEMBER BAYER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 7 of 8
Packet Pg. 244
2.1.m
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Mr. Clugston thanked the Board for their willingness to continue the public hearing to May 19'.
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Board Member Herr announced that he will be moving out of state by the end of the year, which means he will
eventually resign his position on the Board.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 8 of 8
Packet Pg. 245
3.1
Architectural Design Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/19/2021
Approval of Minutes
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Development Services
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
Minutes are approved during each meeting.
Staff Recommendation
Approve May 5th meeting minutes.
Narrative
May 5th meeting minutes attached.
Attachments:
ADB210505d
Packet Pg. 246
3.1.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Minutes of Virtual Meeting
May 5, 2021
Chair Strauss called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 7:12 p.m.
Board Members Present Board Members Absent Staff Present
Lauri Strauss, Chair Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Bruce Owensby, Vice Chair
Kim Bayer
Joe Herr
Maurine Jeude
PUBLIC HEARING: PINE PARK 614 — PHASE 2 DESIGN REVIEW (FILE NUMBER PLN2020-0053)
Chair Strauss reviewed that the public hearing for the Pine Park 614 design review proposal, which began on March 3,
2021, is still open. At that meeting, the Board took a first look at the project (Phase 1), received initial testimony, and
prioritized the Design Guideline Checklist for the applicant to make improvements to the proposal. At this hearing
(Phase 2), the Board will review the applicant's revisions and take additional testimony from staff, the applicant, and the
public. Should the Board require additional information with which to make a decision, a specific request will be made
to the applicant and the public hearing will be continued again to a date certain. However, if the Board finds that the
record is complete, the public hearing will be closed and the Board will begin deliberations and make a decision on the
proposal. She emphasized that anyone who wants an opportunity to speak at any future appeal of the matter and did not
testify on March 3'd or submit written comments, would need to testify at this hearing. She invited those who wanted to
testify for the first time to affirm that their testimony would be the truth. (Note: Those who testified at the Phase 1
hearing did not need to be sworn in again)
Mr. Clugston explained that because the project is located in the Downtown Business (BD3) zone, a 2-phased public
hearing is required for projects that require State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. At the Phase 1 hearing on
March 3'd, the applicant presented the conceptual design, and the Board prioritized the Design Guideline Checklist and
continued the hearing to May 51. The applicant has responded to the guidance from the Phase 1 checklist, and at this
hearing, the Board will review the design for consistency with zoning, the Comprehensive Plan, and the Design
Guideline Checklist. The Board may ask for additional information or close the hearing, deliberate and issue a Type III -
A Decision.
Mr. Clugston shared an aerial photograph of the project site, noting there is a mixture of multifamily and commercial
development to the north, south and west, and primarily single-family development to the east across 5' Avenue S. He
reviewed that multifamily, live/work, parking and loading are all allowed uses in the BD3 zone. However, the
designated street front requirement along 5'' Avenue S triggers ground floor height and depth requirements, as well as
other design standards. The Development Code requires a 15-foot setback from the west property line, which is adjacent
to a multifamily -zoned parcel, and the maximum building height is 30 feet. Off street parking is required, and each of
the units in Building C would have one parking stall. Each of the three units in the two buildings on 5'' Avenue S have
two parking stalls, one for the live portion of the use and another for the work portion.
a
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Pagel of 8
Packet Pg. 247
Mr. Clugston reviewed that the two proposed buildings facing 5' Avenue S (Buildings A and B) are about 60-feet wide
and 30-feet deep, and Building C, which is located further into the site, would be 30-feet deep and about 120-feet wide.
As discussed at the Phase 1 hearing, the layout is compliant, but only if a subdivision is approved to create a lot line in
between Buildings A and B and Building C. The parcel needs to be subdivided to allow the two eastern buildings to
have the reduced street -front depth. Typically, the depth requirement is 45 feet, but if the site is less than 90-feet deep,
the requirement can be reduced to 30 feet, which is what the applicant is proposing for Buildings A and B. With the
subdivision, no open space would be required because Buildings A and B would be less than 120 feet long, and both of
the lots would be less than 12,000 square feet. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to ensure that the
subdivision happens.
Mr. Clugston reviewed the design elements in the design guidelines and Design Guideline Checklist, the design
guidance in the Comprehensive Plan, and the design standards in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
22.43. As noted in the Staff Report, the design guidance from the Comprehensive Plan and Design Guideline Checklist
was generally met when the project was presented for the Phase 1 hearing, so he will focus on the design standards in the
ECDC. He reviewed the standards as follows:
Massing and Articulation. Pictures were provided to compare the Phase 1 submittal to the Phase 2 submittal.
The intent is to have a top and a base, and then mimic the historic building widths in the area. Typically, the
older buildings in Edmonds are between 50 and 60-feet wide, and the two buildings facing 5' Avenue S
(Buildings And B) will be 60-feet wide, and they will be further divided into 20-foot-wide units through the use o
of windows, canopies, etc. There is a cornice at the top to provide a definite edge, and the base of the buildings
is identified via the storefronts and different materials. Although the design standards would not apply to 0-
Building C on the west side of the property, the proposed building provides differentiation for each of the units. a
The applicant is proposing a top deck area, and the bottom area would be set off by some recessed garages. He Q
noted that the exterior stairs that were shown on the Phase 1 drawing were not included in the Phase 2 drawing,
LO
so the applicant will need to advise on how the rooftop decks will be accessed. c
• Orientation to the Street. The intent of this standard is to activate the street front, and the buildings that front
on 5' Avenue S (Buildings A and B) will be built right to the eastern edge of the property line. The entrances
should have a distinct expression, and the applicant is proposing a forecourt in the area beneath the canopies.
• Ground Level Details and Canopies. The applicant is required to use a minimum of five design elements
from the list provided, and the applicant is proposing to use detailed concrete, sconces, planters, medallions, etc.
The entrances will be immediately accessible from the sidewalk, and canopies are proposed over each one.
• Transparency at Street Front. The code requires that the space between 2 and 10 feet on the street -front
fagade must be at least 75% transparent. Based on a quick calculation, it doesn't appear that the proposed
design would meet this requirement, and the applicant will need to address this issue.
• Blank Walls. The applicant is not proposing any blank walls on the fagades facing east (5' Avenue S) and
west, and there will be some interest on the walls that face the alleys through the use of banding and different
materials, as well as lighting along the alleyway.
• HVAC and Utilities. A transformer will be located at the northeast corner of Building C, and he isn't sure
where the other utility equipment will be located. However, it will all need to be screened or camouflaged, and
staff is recommending a condition of approval to make sure that happens as part of the Building Permit
application.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 2 of 8
Packet Pg. 248
3.1.a
Landscaping. The site will be fairly well built out, and there won't be a lot of landscaping. The applicant is
proposing several street trees, as well as planters adjacent to the storefronts. There will also be some small
planters in the area between Buildings A and B. In addition, Type I Landscaping (two rows of evergreens,
fence, shrubs, and groundcover) will be required on the western property line adjacent to the multifamily
development to the west. The applicant is proposing one row of mixed canopy (deciduous and evergreen), as
well a fence, shrubs and groundcover. The code allows the Board to deviate from the exact Type I Landscape
requirements if they feel the proposal meets the screening intent. In this case, it probably does since the adjacent
site to the west is developed with multifamily and the subject parcel will be developed primarily with
multifamily, too.
Mr. Clugston reviewed that, at the Phase 1 hearing, Ed Lorah spoke on behalf of residents of the Park View Twin
Condominium Homeowner's Association, which is located just west of the subject parcel. He voiced concern about
drainage and parking, as well as lighting. While the code primarily addresses the buildings that face 5' Avenue S, they
were hoping the applicant would also address the western fagade. Drainage will be dealt with per code, and each of the
units will have required parking on site. The applicant has provided a lighting plan for the Phase 2 submittal, which
includes low cut-off lights and sconces on each side of the building. Because the site will be developed as primarily
residential, there won't be any big parking lot lights.
m
Mr. Clugston advised that a written comment was received on May 4' from Patrick Allain, the property owner to the
south of the subject parcel. He read the comment letter (Exhibit 10) into the record as follows: 2
4-
0
We are the owners of the property adjacent to the south side of the building site for the proposed Pine Park
development. Our property has two buildings, a commercial building that is currently occupied by the Barkada 0
Restaurant and a 3-unit apartment building. After reviewing the project documents, we have a few concerns that 0.
may not have been addressed yet: Q
Buildings A and Parking
a. There may be a safety concern regarding drivers exiting the parking. It appears that visibility may
be obscured by Building C to the west and a retaining wall to the east. Both vehicle and pedestrian
traffic should be considered.
b. Since the parking access is located directly across from our apartment entrance, we are concerned
about headlights shining into our units while exiting.
2. Construction
a. Construction will always result in noise, dust and disruptions, but to the extent possible, we hope
that these can be minimized.
b. Since the private driveway is the only means of access for our apartment units and for restaurant
deliveries, we would request that it remain available throughout the construction project.
Mr. Clugston responded that because the proposed buildings will be located at the property line on the alley side, the
Traffic Engineer agrees that mirrors or some other mitigation will be required to ensure safe access from the two
driveways into the alleyway. There isn't a lot that can be done to address concerns about headlights shining onto
adjacent properties. However, there are performance, noise and sediment/erosion control standards that apply to all
construction projects to address potential impacts. These standards will be monitored throughout building construction.
There may be some temporary disruption to the alley, but the Engineering Department will require a traffic control plan,
and flaggers may be required at the 5'' Avenue S and alley entrances to ensure that traffic can get through during
construction.
Mr. Clugston said staff also has a few remaining concerns about the proposed project:
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 3 of 8
Packet Pg. 249
3.1.a
• The Building C roof access that was shown in the Phase 1 submittal was omitted from the Phase 2 submittal.
The applicant will need to show how the rooftop will be accessed.
• It doesn't appear that the proposed design meets the requirement of 75% Transparency along 5' Avenue S.
• Staff is proposing an additional condition of approval to require the applicant to provide and identify pedestrian
pathways.
• It is the applicant's understanding that trash service would be provided by Sound Disposal at the 5'' Avenue S
curb. If that is the case, there should be some pedestrian markings on the alleyway to make sure that people in
Building C can get up to the street. Another option would be to locate a trash receptacle on the alley at the
southwest corner of the site. In the downtown area, most of the trash is picked up from the alley.
Mr. Clugston said staff is recommending approval of the project with the nine conditions outlined in the Staff Report, as
well as an additional condition to address alley access safety.
It was noted that a wrong link to the Zoom meeting was published on the agenda memorandum that was posted on the
City's website. However, a courtesy notice was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the subject parcel with the
correct link. Council Member Olsen voiced concern that people who relied on the City's website had the wrong link to
the meeting.
m
r
Augustus Bukowski, Edmonds, said his company owns the subject property and is the applicant for the proposed
project. They purchased the property with the thought that it would be a great place to develop live/work units that allow 2
self-employed people, like himself, to live and work in the community. Instead of developing one large square structure o
that houses commercial or office uses with limited parking, they are proposing to develop the site with three small
buildings. He noted that his company owns the parcel that is the alley, as well. He said his company, Seattle Luxury 0-
Homes, is known for developing very nice, high -end housing in Seattle, and they want to share their great product with a
the Edmonds community. He emphasized that the project is designed to meet all of the code requirements. If they Q
wanted to maximize the site, they would have proposed a larger building with more units.
Craig Pontius, Citizen Design Collaborators, said his company designed the project. hi response to the concerns
raised by staff, he advised that the design team has spoken with Sound Disposal regarding the trash/recycling facility,
and they indicated that both the 5' Avenue S and alley locations would be acceptable to them. The design team would
be willing to work with the location that is deemed best for the community. Rather than doing exterior stairs to provide
rooftop access on Building C, the applicant is proposing an internal stairway with a hatchway on the roof. Due to the
height limits, a full -height penthouse would be problematic, but there are a number of products available to provide a
mechanically -operated hatch that rolls back to provide safe rooftop access. This results in a much lower profile on the
roof. Mr. Pontius concluded that Mr. Clugston did a good job of explaining the modifications that were made in
response to the direction provided at the March 3' Phase 1 hearing.
Ed Lorah, Park View Twin Condominium Homeowner's Association, requested clarification about what is being
proposed for the 15-foot setback on the western side of the property. Mr. Clugston displayed the site plan, noting that
the required 15-foot setback from the west property line can be development with pavement or a driveway, but no
building can be located there.
Bob, a resident of the Park View Twin Condominiums voiced concern about stormwater runoff and potential flooding
on adjacent properties as a result of the proposed development. Mr. Clugston answered that stormwater from the site
will be managed in accordance with current stormwater code. All stormwater must be dealt with on site through low -
impact development technology, retention vaults, etc. He shared the utility plan, noting that the applicant is proposing
two infiltration vaults to deal with all of the stormwater generated by the site. Mr. Pontius added that the driveways
would be permeable, so the water can soak through them. The retention vaults will be tanks with no bottom, filled with
rocks. As they fill with stormwater, the water will slowly percolate into the ground through the rocks. There will be an
overflow that allows stormwater to flow into the City's stormwater system during significant storm events. Chair
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 4 of 8
Packet Pg. 250
3.1.a
Strauss asked if there would be roof drains that flow into the retention vaults or if the roof runoff would just spill off onto
the ground. Mr. Pontius said the roof drainage would be collected and routed into the collection tanks.
Chair Strauss closed the public portion of the hearing.
Board Member Bayer expressed her belief that the proposed project would add a lot to the area. She said several citizens
have voiced their concern to her that, if the property is subdivided, no open space would be required as part of the
project. She noted that other projects in Edmonds are providing even more open space than what the code requires.
Chair Strauss voiced concern that the proposed project does not meet the design objectives for site design. The design
objectives talk about:
• The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscape features as an integral part of how a
building interacts with its surrounding site and environment.
• Open space for residential settings and creating green spaces enhances the visual attributes of the development
and provides places for interaction, play, seating and other activities.
• Site utility storage addresses trash, mechanical areas, noise minimization, etc. Locating the trash receptacles
from 14 units on 5' Avenue S is not workable in her mind.
• Landscape buffers that integrate natural landscape features and unique land forms. The applicant is proposing a
single line of trees along the western property line rather than a double line.
Mr. Bukowski explained that because the lot slopes, the building footprints need to be located as proposed in order to get
the three stories necessary for the project, which is lower density than what is allowed in the zone. If open space is
required, they would close off the oversized walkway that goes through the middle of the building and there would be no
see -through light. Instead, there would be a long fagade facing 5' Avenue S. Also, because the site is not being
developed to its maximum density, there will actually be more outdoor space for residents to the south, west and north if
the project is done in three separate buildings with an approximately 24-foot setback between the structures. He
concluded that there will be a lot of open space for the actual residents of the development, as well as those who
surround the property, a lot more than would be afforded with a 5% open space provided at the building entries. He
doesn't believe it would be better for the residents to do a singular structure, and the proposed design will result in a
more appealing, residential feel to the neighborhood while blending with other residential development in the area.
Mr. Bukowski advised that, due to the parking and backup distance requirements, the only other site design that would
work would be a large multifamily project that would have much more parking and lot coverage. From a top -down
perspective, the project will only cover about 50% of the site, and the code would actually allow up to 70% coverage.
He pointed out that the design incorporates planters, trees and a variety of design elements. He expressed his belief that
the proposed building would most likely have as much or more greenspace as the existing storefronts in the area.
Chair Strauss disagreed and observed that the intent of the residential code is to create not only open space, but green
space. It feels like the proposed design is really crowded with a lot of blacktop, and there is no intent to create any green
space on the site. Mr. Bukowski asked if she would have that same concern if the blacktop were replaced with building,
which would be allowed per the code. Chair Strauss answered affirmatively and pointed out that the area is residential.
Mr. Bukowski clarified that the property is located in the BC zone, which is the highest density zoning in the entire City.
The property is not zoned residential, but the project would add a residential component to the commercial space. He
referred to an aerial view of the surrounding properties, noting that many of them are developed with large building
footprints and significant blacktop. The proposed project will have a lower footprint than a large, multifamily
condominium. Based on the pictures provided, he pointed out that the adjacent properties have no greenspace in front,
where the proposed project would have trees. If they were to do an alternative design aside from the proposed
townhome concept, the buildings would have a larger impact on the lot. He said he would support the argument for
a
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 5 of 8
Packet Pg. 251
3.1.a
more green space if the property were zoned residential, but it is zoned commercial. The property already doesn't have a
lot of greenspace, and they are proposing more than what is provided on surrounding properties.
Chair Strauss commented that no one lives on the properties that are developed as commercial, but Mr. Bukowski
previously mentioned the goal of providing affordable residential units for small business owners and their families.
Absent open space, it isn't likely that the units will be desirable to families.
Board Member Herr cautioned that the code would allow the applicant to develop a bigger, more dense building on the
site. The Board is asking the applicant to do something that he doesn't have to do, and he is trying to be creative with his
site planning by mixing it up with more than one building. The applicant could decide to develop the site to its full
potential, and the City could end up with a worse project that is completely code compliant.
Mr. Bukowski commented that there are already a number of requirements the project must meet, and if additional
requirements cause even one of the units to be eliminated, the project might not be feasible. He noted that construction
costs have increased significantly over the past year, as well. If the project is not approved, the next best option would be
to construct a two-story commercial office space, which was formally approved by the Board for the banks. He said he
would rather do a commercial/residential project, as it would be better for the community and fit with the integrity of the
area.
m
r
Vice Chair Owenby agreed with Board Member Herr. He expressed his belief that the proposed project would result in
good background buildings. While it won't stand out or make a statement, it will be a pleasant building to walk by. He o
noted that most of the development in downtown Edmonds is right up to the property line, and many of the buildings are �a
bland and plain. As a commercial development, the project could be a lot worse. However, he suggested a few minor L
changes could bring a little more green into the project. For example, something narrow and tall, such as bamboo, could a
be planted along the walkway between the two buildings. Grass and a tree could also be planted between the two Q
parking areas to create more depth. 'q
Mr. Bukowski noted that the existing structures on the property abut the street frontage with no articulation, and the
neighboring properties have no greenery, either. He shared a drawing of the proposed new buildings, noting that there
would be planters in front of each of the units, as well as in the area between the two buildings. There will be a pathway
between the two buildings, as well as a pathway behind Building C. The pathways will be constructed of some type of
stonework. In addition, staff has recommended that the project be approved based on the condition of adding more
pedestrian walkway. For example, they could add a pedestrian walkway in front of Building C to create a courtyard feel.
He noted that the intent is to incorporate planters into that space, as well.
Board Member Bayer asked Mr. Bukowski to share more information about the proposed landscaping on the western
property line. Mr. Bukowski said Type I Landscaping is intended to screen adjacent residential development from the
potential impacts associated with a large commercial development. However, in this case, the proposed development (8
residential units) is similar to what is developed on the adjacent property. Therefore, he believes they can accomplish the
goal of separating the two similar building types by tightly packing the trees with ground cover and shrubs, as proposed.
He said he would rather plant nice trees for the adjacent residents to enjoy rather than pack the space with conifer bushes.
Board Member Bayer asked Mr. Clugston to share his perspective on the proposed landscaping. Mr. Clugston explained
that the intent of Type I Landscaping is to create a dense buffer, typically between disparate land -use districts, such as
commercial and residential. In this case, the proposed use multifamily residential, which isn't any different than the use
on the adjacent property. The landscape code allows the Board to alter the standards if they think what is being proposed
still meets the intent of providing a buffer screening.
Because the wrong Zoom information was published on the Board's meeting agenda, Mr. Clugston suggested it would
be best to continue the public hearing again to either May 19' or June 2" d to make sure that all who want to comment
about the project have an opportunity to do so before the Board takes action.
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 6 of 8
Packet Pg. 252
3.1.a
Chair Strauss expressed her belief that providing individual trash receptacles for each of the units will be a problem. She
suggested the applicant consider providing a single, large container near where the transformer will be on the north
property line. Mr. Bukowski said he would continue to work with Sound Disposal to incorporate the trash plan they can
best accommodate, but it is important to recognize that the locating a trash/recycling facility is prohibited by other
zoning requirements. If the City prefers a single, large container, it may require leeway to reduce the parking or setback
requirements, but that is outside of the Board's purview to do. He noted that other residential units in the vicinity have
their trash picked up individually.
Chair Strauss said she lives in Edelweiss, which has one large trash receptacle and one large recycling container for all of
the units to use. Mr. Bukowski pointed out that Edelweiss is a larger building (17 units). If the proposed project was
larger, it would be easier to put a trash/recycling facility inside the parking area. Their project is intended to be fee -
simple townhomes, where the people own both the land and the building and there is no homeowner's association. He
commented that the site is difficult to develop given the slope and the City's height restrictions. If they can't build the
project as proposed, the property will likely be developed with a single, large building that will eliminate a lot more open
space and push the building towards commercial. He would prefer to stick with the current design and work to find
solutions. For example, they could talk to Sound Disposal about potential options for locating a large container or
picking up the individual containers from the alley instead of 5' Avenue S. Board Member Jeude said she would prefer
to not have the trash collected from 5' Avenue S., too.
Board Member Bayer noticed that the color of the proposed s changed to a lighter grey. She said she preferred the dark
color that was presented at the Phase 1 hearing. Mr. Bukowski said many people thought the darker color was ominous.
The lighter color is an attempt to brighten the buildings for the community.
Board Member Jeude asked how the applicant proposes to address the requirement of 75% transparency on the 5'
Avenue S facade. Mr. Pontius responded that this calculation will be done as part of the final elevation review. Mr.
Bukowski said the intent is to meet the transparency requirement, and it may require wider windows or additional doors.
Mr. Pontius said the building articulation is intended to differentiate the three separate units in each of the buildings, but
some adjustments may be needed to meet the requirement. They are trying to maximize as much window as possible,
while still providing some structure to keep the building standing.
Mr. Bukowski pointed out that many of the buildings in the area do not have 75% transparency, either. Mr. Clugston
responded that, regardless of whether existing development meets the requirement, the current code requirement is to
have 75% transparency on a designated street front. The Board has had discussions in the past where they would like to
have some flexibility to address certain situations, but that is not currently allowed. Mr. Bukowski commented that the
design could be modified, if necessary, to meet the requirement.
CHAIR STRAUSS MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PINE PARK 614 PROJECT BE
CONTINUED TO MAY 19, 2021. BOARD MEMBER JEUDE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Bob asked if a survey has been completed to identify the property line on the west side. Mr. Bukowski answered that the
site they are proposing for development is based off an official survey of record.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. \
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BOARD MEMBER JEUDE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARCH 3, 2021 MEETING MINUTES AS
SUBMITTED. BOARD MEMBER BAYER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
g
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 7 of 8
Packet Pg. 253
3.1.a
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Mr. Clugston thanked the Board for their willingness to continue the public hearing to May 19'.
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Board Member Herr announced that he will be moving out of state by the end of the year, which means he will
eventually resign his position on the Board.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m.
a
Architectural Design Board Meeting
Minutes of Regular Meeting
May 5, 2021
Page 8 of 8
Packet Pg. 254
