The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-12-09 Architectural Design Board PacketAgenda Edmonds Architectural Design Board SPECIAL MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 DECEMBER 9, 2024, 6:00 PM Edmonds Architectural Design Board Agenda December 9, 2024 Page 1 MEETING INFORMATION This is a Hybrid special meeting. Attendees may appear in person at 121 5th Avenue N, 3rd Floor, Brackett Room or on-line via the zoom link provided. Join Zoom Meeting at: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWUlwM09PZ1k1MHN2eWM1YXphZz09 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 Call into the meeting by dialing: 253-205-0468 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Previous Meeting Minutes 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Design Review - PLN2023-0071 222 3rd Ave. S B. Cascara Townhouses 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. CHAIR COMMENTS 9. MEMBER COMMENTS 10. ADJOURNMENT Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/9/2024 Previous Meeting Minutes Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Michelle Martin Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve edits from October 24th meeting. Narrative Edited meeting draft attached. Attachments: ADB 10242024_draft - edited Packet Pg. 2 Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 1 of 8 DRAFT CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Webinar Meeting October 24, 2024 Chair Bayer called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:03 p.m., in the Brackett Room at the City Council Chambers, 250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Kim Bayer, Chair Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair Maurine Jeude Corbitt Loch Todd Stine (online) Board Members Absent Alex Hutchinson Steve Schmitz Staff Present Tristan Sewell, Planner Brad Shipley, Senior Planner Mike Clugston, Planning Manager Shane Hope, Interim Director, Planning & Development Department APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES VICE CHAIR BROOKS MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2024 BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER JEUDE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS A. BLD2024-0979 Edmonds Swedish Signage Design Review Planner Tristan Sewell presented Edmonds Swedish Signage Design Review. This permit application was for a sign package to redo the signage at the Langer Building at the Swedish Edmonds Campus. It's a sign package of four new signs, one building ID, and three monument signs around the perimeter, one at basically each street entrance or curb cut, so there's one at the corner of Highway 99 and 216th. The modification of the request is just the number of signs. Under code, there would be permitted one per street, so one on 216th, one on Highway 99, or one at the corner, not both. They're asking for both. Everything else about it is compliant and fits within the design criteria applicable to the CG zone. a Packet Pg. 3 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 2 of 8 ADB reviews any sign application that requests modification to the standards of Chapter 20.60 ECDC. They can only approve requests that arrive from one of these two situations. It's a unique site with unique needs and a configuration in the context of a larger campus. It's in Highway 99 medical activity center. This is where the urgent care clinic is housed, along with some other various services. The expressed concern from the applicant in the request was regarding legibility and navigation on site by patients and visitors requiring urgent care and emergency care, and being able to accurately navigate the site in those kinds of need. That is the reason for the request for three signs rather than the normally allowed two signs. ADB may only approve the request if it meets both of these criteria. The design of the signage itself is compatible with the materials, colors, design, and proportions of development throughout the site and in the vicinity, and that the modification is not more than 50 percent of what would normally be allowed. The one proposed is on the corner, indicating the direction of the various facilities needed. The building ID is on the east face of the building. That one's separate and not contained within the request. There is a pair of monument signs, one on 216th and one on Highway 99. Chair Bayer asked if it will say Langer Building, which was confirmed by Mr. Sewell. This modification is limited to 50 percent. Regarding compliance, it was discussed about the larger campus context and the navigability concerns and needs for urgent or emergent scenarios. The proposed signage is consistent with their larger branding and on-site design schedule. This is an update to bring it in alignment with that. So based on the analysis of the code, the conclusions, and the attachments provided in the staff report, staff recommends that ADB approve the modifications proposed by the applicant because they're compatible materials, designs, and they comply with that 50 percent maximum. Board Member Loch asked regarding the calculation of the sign area if the calculation included the entire sign structure versus just the area where there's text. Mr. Sewell stated it was just the area where there's text per code. These qualify as monument signs, a type of freestanding sign. The sign area is just the area taken up by copy. Board Member Loch questioned the allowable size of the sign, and Mr. Sewell confirmed that they are well within their design maximums, and that everything is to spec. Board Member Loch also stated the two smaller monument signs have plaques for additional signage, so would the applicant have to come in for a permit to put additional text in those lower lines? Planner Sewell stated sign modifications to change the copy on the sign doesn't require a permit. Board Member Stine asked if that would include the blanks in his area calculation. Mr. Sewell confirmed it did. Vice Chair Brooks commented that they had a recent family visit to the emergency room, and so additional signs would've been helpful, and this was just two weeks ago. Chair Bayer confirmed having a similar situation and asked about the Langer Building. Lisa Edwards, Public Hospital District No. 2, was present, and stated that the Langer Building is currently known as the Kruger Clinic. Public Hospital District No. 2 own the whole campus. They own the hospital, and they lease it to Swedish. So they are renaming the Kruger clinic after Frederick P. Langer, a long-time commissioner, who passed away in 2022 after battling cancer. Chair Bayer asked if it was where the Kruger Clinic is currently housed. Ms. Edwards confirmed. Ms. Edwards stated there would be a naming ceremony next year. Board Member Stine reiterated that additional signs would have been appreciated for a recent visit that he had to urgent care. Regarding the proposed signs, he asked if they really wanted traffic going to the hospital going through the parking lot, as opposed to going up to 216th. Ms. Edwards stated that their goal with this sign package is to emphasize urgent care. Emergency department is oversubscribed, and it's an average of five to seven hours per visit. They are looking to emphasize urgent care access because it's underutilized. Board Member Stine stated that it seems like the more direct access to the hospital would be to use 216th rather than going through the parking lot. Ms. Edwards stated it would, but a Packet Pg. 4 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 3 of 8 they find that people come from all different directions, especially when they're upset and trying to get to care, so the intent was to ensure if someone accidentally came through this way, they could still get to the hospital. BOARD MEMBER JEUDE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS PRESENTED AND TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL. VICE CHAIR BROOKS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS, AND THE MOTION PASSED. B. Streamline Design Review and Middle Housing Next new business was the Design Review and Middle Housing presented by Senior Planner Brad Shipley. Under HB 1293, there are to be clear and objective design standards and changes to how any public meetings are held for design review. Streamline design review: any design guidelines have to be clear and objective. They have to have at least one ascertainable criterion by which an applicant can determine whether a given design is going to meet the criteria. Regarding middle housing types, they can't use design standards to make certain housing types unfeasible. You can't reduce it to a point where they can't get built. HB 1293 came about as a response from the builder community, who believed the process to get approval was too long and too subjective. So be clear and objective. Mr. Shipley gave the example of building entry location. Commercial building entries should be easily recognized oriented to the pedestrian's streetscape by being located at the sidewalk. Board Member Loch asked what are the characteristics of a commercial building? It's easily recognizable, but that's a very subjective statement. So that part is not clear and objective. Board Member Stine agreed with that statement. The first part is subjective, the last part is objective. Mr. Shipley stated the use of the phrase "should be" should be replaced, perhaps with "shall." Mr. Shipley also gave the example of weather protection. Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public sidewalks or walkways. Chair Bayer stated the only thing she sees subjective would be what would apply to a covered walkway. Vice Chair Brooks added or the distance, also. Board Member Stine stated that it doesn't necessarily talk about the entire street frontage or the extent of the coverage that's required, but other than that, it seems fairly objective. Mr. Shipley stated that they could probably get a little more specific about how much coverage would be there. But generally speaking, it could be uniformly applied and most people reading this are going to understand what it means. Mr. Shipley then gave the example of building façade. Provide a human-scale streetscape, breaking up long facades into defined forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant spaces. Commercial and mixed-use areas. Avoid blank, monotonous, and imposing building facades using design elements that add detail and emphasize the different levels of building. Chair Bayer stated that this came in handy on two projects, but felt that it was very convoluted. Board Member Stine also believed it to be very subjective. Board Member Loch stated that it is well-intentioned, but it doesn't provide enough clarity for the applicant. Mr. Shipley believed that it is mainly objective in that it's talking about specific design criteria for building facades. But it's kind of hard to do sometimes without some subjective interpretations such as human scale and what measurable elements there are. All of those things really aren't defined here, so would still want to revise this. Board Member Jeude asked about the word avoid. Mr. Shipley stated there are several ways to clean this one up. Board Member Loch suggested striking the word imposing. Mr. Shipley discussed these are going to be the types of things that will need to be dialed in as they start looking at design criteria moving forward. Chair Bayer stated that they had actually done this exercise one time before. They did go through and wordsmith some of this. Mr. Shipley believed that would be a good starting point and as he starts to get into some of these changes, he a Packet Pg. 5 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 4 of 8 will go through what was previously done and see what he could incorporate and bring it back to make sure they get it right. And then also help identify what might be missing as we go through. Chair Bayer stated that Board Member Stine's participation would be great. Mr. Shipley also brought up another example. A building should appear as an assemblage of smaller forms, not one large mass. The word should again starts to get into subjectivity. So for the objective, all buildings shall articulate individual units or clusters of units to appear as smaller forms through varied footprints, heights, setbacks, roof forms, materials, and/or colors. There's still a lot to play with there, and a lot to determine whether they're meeting that criteria, but it really points to some specific things. That's a pretty clear measurement when you're looking at two different things to tell which one is smaller form. He was hoping that maybe this would kind of restimulate some of the conversation about where they want to go and what they're considering as they're looking at the role of ADB, what they would find valuable for your time in terms of being there and donating their time. The other point of HB 1293 is that it can't be more than one public meeting, which gets rid of the iterative process. This is really the extent of most of the changes that would take place. So this process here is kind of where our existing process is. So in the first row, there are different types of design review, some projects are just exempt. Those include single families, ADUs, duplexes, those are all currently exempt. When you go into triplexes and fourplexes, nonresidential uses, residential use of five or more, these are mostly SEPA triggers. Then you get different types of design review, such as middle housing types. There are some that can be five-plus units. Mr. Shipley wasn't sure if they would allow those, but if allowed, they would be exempt unless it was decided to have design review for all of these, including single-family homes. So when the development code is developed for these, they're going to be talking about the development code a little bit differently. Now you go into the zone, and you look up the zone, and it tells you everything that you could do on that single-family lot. It's setbacks, height, and things such as that. But when you start talking about different design or different building types that are allowed, if you want to make sure that they're all encouraged in some sort of way, or you maybe want to encourage a certain type a little more than the other, then you have flexibility within the building code. Chair Bayer asked about the timing of that. Mr. Shipley stated that they have a clear deadline, which is to have all adopted by July 1, 2025, otherwise they would have to go by the model code. They will have to do a phased approach to tackle the whole thing if they really want to have a development code that takes them into the next 70 years. They want to pull all the pieces into one cohesive, unified code. Board Member Stine stated that with only one meeting with the board, it seems like there's more onus on the city staff, so he's curious with that one meeting, what would be most helpful to city staff so we do get the Edmonds that we desire? Chair Bayer asked if was referring to the public hearing, which Board Member Stine affirmed. He asked when is the timing of that in the review process and what would be most beneficial to the city staff because it seemed like the city staff has a bigger burden to carry with only one pubic meeting. Mr. Shipley stated that he thinks that there's a lot of value that could be offered from the public, comments, and just diverse ways of looking at things. However, he's also seen where things become too political, or it becomes something that is too subjective and leaves open to too much interpretation. Mr. Shipley stated that from a time standpoint, the most streamlined process is administrative review. But that removes ADB from that process which he finds valuable for certain types of project. The larger projects he thinks it's helpful to have that feedback and a chance for the public to actually come in and people to hear the voices. Board Member Loch stated that he thinks that deciding the process before they have the design guidelines is backwards. The quality of the design guidelines will help inform the decision of who should decide what and when and public input. So he would be hesitant to answer the question now. Chair Bayer stated that she would be hesitant to eliminate ADB's involvement, and she added that they need dedicated, committed professionals that can step in and participate. a Packet Pg. 6 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 5 of 8 Board Member Loch would like to make sure that they consider where the design guidelines apply. He feels they are living with legacy rules that were originally designed protect the downtown area. He thinks it would be odd to say this emphasis on design isn't relevant elsewhere in the city, especially because the buildings are bigger, so he'd like to look at that, as well. Mr. Shipley agreed that they have a lot of legacy items that exist within the comprehensive plan, and it only gets changed once every 10 years. So far, they are on maybe the third iteration of the comp plan, but that's almost 30 years ago. The development code really hasn't changed that much. But it's gotten more difficult because it's been patchwork, and it hasn't been taken collectively and looked at and created a new framework for how it could be done. All the same things could be accomplished but put it in a framework that actually makes sense. He discussed the history of the downtown waterfront, Vision 2020, and activity centers. Now, they're talking about neighborhood centers and hubs and other things in this comp plan. There is a change to do maybe overlays within the zoning code for specific areas or specific guidelines. Chair Bayer asked if he is looking for the board's input on this. Mr. Shipley stated the only decision that they've discussed is perhaps not having a single phase at all, but it doesn't have to be a single phase. It could be administrative review or some other process, so that's a decision to make whether you want a single phase or not. And then the ones that are exempt, he's pretty confident that no one's going to want to do design review on single family homes, so we're not going to apply it to middle housing. Chair Bayer stated she asked because there have been a discussion about having a design review of the commercial zone. Mr. Shipley stated when this subarea plan was development, they moved nonresidential uses or any residential use that had five or more units to administrative design review. They did make changes to how the administrative design review goes and he thinks if it's over 55 feet, it would require a notice to the neighborhood and a pre-development meeting that the developer hosts. And then it'd still be a staff administrative design review through that process, and then everything else is a Type 1 administrative design review. Board Member Jeude was curious about the single phase. After applicants have brought their designs to ADB, and ADB has things they'd like to see, and then that's the end of it. Then they can decide to do it, or they can decide not to do it. Mr. Shipley stated they could also appeal the process. Planning Manager Clugston stated that if ADB remains the decision maker then they'd issue a decision. They'd say it's approved with these conditions that you have to meet or it's denied and then you have to start again. But that assumes that ADB wants to continue to be the decision maker on the bulk of these design review projects like it has been in the past. But they've also talked about trying to get the board involved earlier in the process because later in the process you go, the more checklist it is. Or maybe staff does the bulk of design reviews if they have clear and objective standards that can be applied with the checklist. But if somebody wants to be innovative and try something different, they can go to the ADB for an exception and ask for some sort of design waiver. Chair Bayer believes it is hard unless they can see what these clear and objective excellent design standards are. Mr. Shipley stated they would be drafting all the design standards before they adopt any new process, so they would have time to discuss what those design standards look like before any decisions are made, as long as they are able to meet their deadline. Vice Chair Brooks asked for the different types to be explained. Mr. Shipley stated that Type 1 is just administrative design review, doesn't require notice. Type 2A is staff design review, but it does have notice. Type 3A is ADB public notice. Chair Bayer discussed how this has been an unusual and difficult year for the ADB. Vice Chair Brooks concurred that it hasn't felt like much has happened in the three years she has been on the board. Chair Bayer concurred that the board could be a lot more high functioning. Board Member Loch agreed that that when it was, they actually achieved some pretty good things in their projects. a Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 6 of 8 Director Shane Hope then joined the conversation and confirmed that Mike Clugston is now the planning manager. Board Member Loch asked that since July '25 is not very far away, that they have a month-by-month schedule work plan and that it would include the decision points that need to be made as it's decided which paths to take to get to the finish line, whether it's the location, the process, the standards, what are built-in standards into the development code. Ms. Hope states they've had to have a very aggressive schedule to get through the comprehensive plan update, still expecting to get it done before the end of the year and that required a very tight calendar. So they will work up something similar for the code updates. Planner Shipley stated that he's been pulling together a lot of the pieces that will be needed, and he expects in the next week or so that they're going to at least have the draft of a plan for them to look at about when those dates and decision points will be. Chair Bayer advised Ms. Hope that the idea was brought up about just trying to connect a little more with the planning board. In the past, they've had joint meetings on special topics that related to the ADB. They talked about trying to hold something in January, so they weren't just working in a vacuum. It would be the planning board and even city council. Does she see a benefit in that or would that just complicate things? Ms. Hope stated that she could see that could be useful, as long as it's figured out in advance what are the touch points and the topics. Board Member Loch wanted to know what others think about this board and its role and its future. Board Member Stine stated he was looking at the Title 16 and Title 22 community development code and there's design standards that are already embedded in there. He'd like to better understand how the design standards that are in the code relate to the design guidelines that are part of the comprehensive plan because it looks like there's some overlap or maybe even contradictions possibly. Ms. Hope stated that comprehensive plan isn't really where design standards should live. People use the term standards and guidelines sometimes to mean something different and sometimes to mean the same thing. Most often people think of standards as being explicit things, not guidance, like, encourage something. Think of standards as being the rules, but some jurisdictions use it either way. But in the comprehensive plan, it's not generally the place for things to guide day by day development projects. The comp plan normally should be for kind of general policy direction and then the codes and standards and so on are set up. The comp draft plan now says that until new regulations are adopted, those ones would stay in effect that are in the comp plan. But then going forward, they'll have things that are in the code like they should be and that's easier for applicants as well as for people that are reviewing it. Mr. Shipley asked how comfortable everybody felt with middle housing. He could talk about maybe some of the thoughts that they could consider and different points that are going to be important in terms of design characteristics. Chair Bayer asked him to explain about middle housing. Mr. Shipley stated that prior to 1940, most communities were built with a full range of housing types prior to zoning codes. Now, when zoning came about, it did away with all of those, and there were single family, and mid-rise or larger apartments. Sometimes, you'll have townhomes or a few others, but really those have made up such a small amount of the overall housing options that are provided that it then became to be termed missing, that it had disappeared, and it was all by design to some extent that they were made illegal to build. Even today, up until those changes have to be made, 75 percent of Edmonds is zoned for one building type. So when you hear missing middle, middle housing is just same thing, all of this. Through HB 1110, all of these building types are defined and have to be accommodate, except for live/work. Live/work is the only one that's not included, though it could be included, but is not a requirement. So there's a range of different homes here. Tier 2 cities are required to accommodate up to four units on all residentially zoned parcels. As far as the bill is written, if you're within a quarter mile of what they call a major transit stop, you have to allow four by right. And if you're further away than that, you allow two by right and then four as an incentive for providing one unit of affordable housing. That has to be affordable to a household making 60 percent of area median income if it's for rent or 80 percent of the area median income if it is for sale. But the affordable piece actually makes it so it probably won't be developed with that building type. Because it's too cumbersome, not only for the person who a Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 7 of 8 owns it, has to comply every year for the next 50 years, but for the city to actually process and continue to process individual homeowners and managing individual homeowners that change over time on compliance every single year of turning in income documentation and rental documentation. Now, you could have nothing but single families and duplexes and ADUs, and that could be the future. Or they could include such things as the cottage port or courtyard buildings. Chair Bayer asked what constituted family housing. The Citizen Housing Commission had recommendations they brought the city council and the multifamily design standards were adopted. She wondered if multifamily term was still being used or if it's now being referred to as middle housing. Mr. Shipley stated his belief that they're going to start talking more about building types versus single family and multifamily. Mr. Shipley discussed how the scale of single family homes has evolved over the years, from 1,400 square feet in the '70s to now probably 2,800 square feet. Chair Bayer asked if the live/work arrangement could be written into the code that it not be allowed. Mr. Shipley stated that live/work is not one of the ones of middle housing that has to be included. It's not as important as it used to be because a lot of people live and work from home these days. Typically, the footprint is going to be about 40 to 60 feet in width on an average lot, kind of 75 foot lot frontage to the street. Off-street parking space is often shared and often in these kind of developments, you have smaller family types, so it doesn't necessarily require the full amount of parking that has always been allocated towards or required for single family homes that are typically much larger, old larger families. But it's important to consider how parking is provided. But whatever they adopt for multifamily, they'll also have to adopt for single family, so that's where a lot of this nuance is going to come into play. Open spaces is typically always shared. That could be provided in many different ways. Stoops, galleys, different ways of the building facing the street and addressing the street, and those could be included. There's potential for tailoring the development codes in this kind of way if it's desired. Board Member Stine referred to the Washington Department of Commerce website, and they've got a whole page about middle housing as well as tool kits for developing objective standards. So seems like some of this work may already be out there. Mr. Shipley stated that they're trying to do a lot of the research and heavy lifting because they know that most city staffs didn't have the staff to do that work or the budgets. Board Member Loch discussed garden-style apartments. Mr. Shipley stated that it doesn't sound like a middle housing type, so he didn't believe it to be a top priority, but that can be discussed, especially as they're looking at developing new zoning districts. Chair Bayer reiterated that until the design standards are figured out, it's hard to talk about the process. She asked if Mr. Shipley could email them what is discussed for those who would like to wordsmith it. She also asked if they foresaw a project coming their way in the November meeting. Mr. Clugston wanted to touch on the draft comprehensive element for design view. After all was said and done, the existing language in the current comp plan 2020 version is being carried forward in the new comp plan. So we'll get to edit that in the future, but at least it didn't vanish entirely as had been proposed at one point. So they'll work on that in the future for sure. So right now for upcoming meetings, the November meeting is on Thanksgiving and the December meeting is on day after Christmas, so those meetings are going to be canceled. A special meeting is already scheduled for December 9th to make up for those. And they should have at least one, possibly two projects to review at that meeting. He stated that given the condensed timeline, he imagines that they'll be having some additional special meetings. The planning board has had a meeting every week this month. He hopes it doesn't get to that extent. So as they develop the work plan, he and Brad will flesh out over the next couple of weeks. At that point, they'll see when and where they may need additional meetings and will get as much warning as possible and get those scheduled. An additional special meeting could be possible, maybe another time in November. a Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Virtual Meeting October 24, 2024 Page 8 of 8 PUBLIC HEARING: None. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m. a Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : A D B 1 0 2 4 2 0 2 4 _ d r a f t - e d i t e d ( P r e v i o u s M e e t i n g M i n u t e s ) Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/9/2024 Design Review - PLN2023-0071 222 3rd Ave. S Staff Lead: Tristan Sewell Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Tristan Sewell Background/History The proposal is for design review of a five-unit townhouse infill project with related site, landscaping, and frontage improvements. An existing house and appurtenances will be removed. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the ADB approve the project design in File PLN2023-0071 with the following conditions: 1. The site plans submitted in application for the subsequent building permit(s) shall demonstrate compliance with Chapter 17.115 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure, Chapter 17.120 Bicycle Parking Facilities, and Title 18 Public Works Requirements. 2. All plantings must meet the sizing requirements found in Section 20.13.015 ECDC Plant Schedule. A performance and maintenance bond will be required per ECDC 20.13.040. 3. Significant trees that are removed must be replaced in accordance with ECDC 23.10.080. Narrative ECDC 20.10.010(C) subjects this proposal to general design review as described in Chapter 20.11 ECDC. Because the applicant proposed five dwelling units, the project is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii). Therefore, the Architectural Design Board conducts a Type III-A review and issues a decision on the project following a public hearing (ECDC 20.11.010(A). The staff report and fifteen attachments are included in the packet. Attachments: PLN2023-0071 Staff Report w. attachments Packet Pg. 11 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION Page 1 of 15 PLANNING DIVISION REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Project: Edmonds 222 Townhouses File Number: PLN2023-0071 Date of Report: December 3, 2024 Staff Contact: Tristan Sewell, Planner Proposal: Application for Design Review of a new 5-unit townhouse development at 222 3rd Ave. S, within the Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5) zone. I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposal is for design review of a five-unit townhouse infill project with related site, landscaping, and frontage improvements. An existing house and appurtenances will be removed. II. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Owner: Augustus Bukowski 2. Applicant: Jacob Young 3. Tax Parcel Number(s): 27032300409500 4. Location: 222 3rd Ave. S 5. Zoning: Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5) 6. Existing Use: Single-family residence 7. Proposed Use: Multifamily residential and associated parking III. Review Process ECDC 20.10.010(C) subjects this proposal to general design review as described in Chapter 20.11 ECDC. Because the applicant proposed five dwelling units, the project is not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii)). Therefore, the Architectural Design Board (ADB) conducts a Type III-A review and issues a decision on the project following a public hearing (ECDC 20.11.010(A)). This staff report contains staff’s a Packet Pg. 12 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 2 of 15 recommendation to ADB on whether the proposal meets the general design review criteria of ECDC 20.11.030, Chapter 20.13 ECDC (landscaping requirements), and the Community Culture and Urban Design element of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. IV. APPLICATION MATERIALS Staff determined the application to be complete on July 23, 2024 (ECDC 20.02.003). Staff then issued the notice of application on August 2, 2024, as prescribed by ECDC 20.02.003. V. SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Per ECDC 20.11.010(A), the Architectural Design Board reviews projects subject to a SEPA threshold determination. WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i) requires a threshold determination for multifamily residential development of more than four dwelling units. Staff issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on November 26, 2024 (Attachment 15). VI. PUBLIC NOTICE & COMMENTS As stated above, staff issued the notice of application per Section 20.03.002 ECDC on August 2, 2024, with a comment period closing at 4:30 pm on August 16, 2024. Staff received seven comments, included unabridged as Attachment 13. Not all comments addressed the design review criteria of ECDC 20.11.030. Comments relevant to design review questioned the necessity of the cherry tree’s removal and the amount of pavement proposed, expressed concern over the outdoor lighting plan’s impact on neighboring properties, and both supported and critiqued the proposed architectural design. Commenters voiced concern over the potential glare from the siding and windows, the design standing out in the vicinity, the choice of two separate buildings over a single building, and tree planting choices in the required landscaping. Some comments addressed topics subject to review in subsequent permit applications, such as traffic impacts, mechanical equipment, utilities and emergency access, setback compliance, and building height. Staff reviewed the proposed height and setbacks, which comply with the zoning code. Engineering provided a Memorandum of Compliance on the preliminary plans (Attachment 9). The ADB hearing will be held in a hybrid format – on Zoom and in the Brackett Room at City Hall – at 6 PM on December 9, 2024: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWUlwM09PZ1k1MHN2eWM1YXphZz09 Passcode: 591531 or by phone at 253 205 0468 Prior to the Architectural Design Board’s public hearing, staff issued a notice of public hearing pursuant to Section 20.03.003 ECDC. This notice went to commenters on the notice of application and property owners within 300’, posted this notice onsite, in the a Packet Pg. 13 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 3 of 15 Planning & Development lobby, the Public Safety Complex foyer, and on the City’s website, and published it in The Everett Herald on November 22, 2024. VII. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The City of Edmonds’ Building and Engineering staff, Snohomish County Fire District No. 1, and Sound Disposal account manager also reviewed and evaluated this application. Building had no specific comments for the design review application, reserving comments for any associated building permit applications. South County Fire communicated applicable preliminary fire code comments, including fire lane width (Attachment 10). Engineering provided a Memorandum of Compliance (Attachment 9) indicating the proposal appears consistent with ECDC Title 18 and Engineering standards and that a more detailed review will occur as part of the building permit review process. VIII. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Topography: The site descends approximately fifteen feet from 3rd Ave. S to the western property boundary, whereat the terrain slopes more severely down to the neighboring lot. Soils: According to the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, the subject site exhibits Alderwood Urban land complex, 2-8% slopes on the western portion of the lot and Kitsap silt loam, 0-8% slopes on the eastern portion. Critical Areas: The City conducted a critical area determination in 2022 under file number CRA2022-0130. Staff identified potential erosion hazards onsite. IX. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS The vicinity primarily includes multifamily residential, mixed use, and public facilities development. This lot’s present use as a single-family residence stands out, as only one other lot is developed as such in the vicinity, per County data. The lot backs up against the City’s wastewater treatment plant and its associated facilities, motivating Type I landscaping for screening along the western property boundary. X. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The 2020 Comprehensive Plan designates this site Multifamily – High Density and within the Downtown-Waterfront Activity Center. Excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan follow below, and specific criteria can be found in the Urban Design: General Objectives section of the Comprehensive Plan. The excerpted segments are those applicable to this application. 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 Packet Pg. 14 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 4 of 15 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 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 Packet Pg. 15 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 5 of 15 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. Staff Analysis: Engineering’s Memorandum of Compliance captures the preliminary review of vehicular access, parking, connectivity, and associated issues. Engineering will review further upon receipt of the application(s) for the necessary permit(s). The site development standards of Section 16.30.030 and landscaping requirements of Chapter 20.13 ensure that setbacks and open space are appropriately addressed – see the review of these topics elsewhere in this report. These requirements preclude the provision of covered walkways. Due to the small size of the lot, the lit pedestrian pathways to each unit’s entrance, shared driveway, and addressing suffice for wayfinding. The applicant proposed no signage; any desired signage would be reviewed separately under a new permit application. Each townhome’s garage acts as the primary utility, storage, and trash area. 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. Staff Analysis: The proposed townhomes avoid monotonous design by breaking up the bulk with changes to texture, materials, glazing, and architectural features. The roof lines modulate, taking advantage of the pitched roof allowance of ECDC 16.30.030(A)(1) to provide greater variation. a Packet Pg. 16 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 6 of 15 Design Objectives for Building Façade. 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 Façade Design. Encourage building façades 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 façade, 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 façades to help define the scale and style of the structure. Variation in façade materials can help reduce the apparent bulk of larger buildings while allowing variety and individuality of building design. Staff Analysis: The façade proposed aligns with the multifamily residential and mixed-used development context in the vicinity. The placement and size of the proposed windows enables natural lighting for each residence and supports human-centric design that affirms a sense of place. The mix of masonry, glazing, and panel siding establishes a unique style that helps minimize the apparent bulk of the building. 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. B.3 Building Entry Location. Commercial building entries should be easily recognizable and oriented to the pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk grade. a Packet Pg. 17 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 7 of 15 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 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 façades should respect and echo historic patterns along downtown pedestrian streets. B.11 Building Façade. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long façades 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). a Packet Pg. 18 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 8 of 15 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 façade. Staff Analysis: As discussed above, Engineering’s Memorandum of Compliance captures the preliminary review of vehicular access, parking, connectivity, and associated issues. Engineering will review further, including any required frontage improvements, upon receipt of the application(s) for the necessary permit(s). Given that the proposal abides by the height limit, these residences fit in with the existing scale of downtown. The previous section addressed the building façade, massing, articulation, and windows. The applicant proposed no signage or public amenity spaces. As mentioned previously, the required setbacks preclude the development from providing a walkway covering along the sidewalk. XI. APPLICABLE CODES ECDC 16.30 (RM – Multiple Residential Zone) Site Development Standards – RM-1.5: Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side Setback Minimum Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Lot Coverage 15’ 10’ 15’ 25’1 45% Staff Analysis: The proposed townhomes abide by the site development standards. Staff will reconfirm compliance in review of the subsequent building permit(s). Parking, Access, and Bicycle Storage Standards: The proposal provides vehicular access to the site along 3rd Ave. S via a shared driveway. The proposed design locates parking in pull-under garages for each unit. Each townhome has two bedrooms, requiring at least nine off-street parking spaces (ECDC 17.50.020(A)(1)(b)). Per ECDC 18.95.020(A)(1)(a), each parking space must be at least 8.5’ wide by 16.5’ long. Pursuant to ECDC 17.115.040(B), each dwelling unit must have at least one EV-Ready or better parking space. ECDC 17.120.040(A) requires 0.75 long-term bike storage spaces per dwelling unit. 40% of the provided storage spaces be “e-bike installed” – within five feet of an electrical outlet reserved for charging e-bikes (ECDC 17.120.010(F)). As such, the City requires four long- term bike storage spaces, two of which must be within five feet of a power outlet. Long- term bicycle parking must comply with the requirements of ECDC 17.120.040(B). Subsection 17.120.030(A) ECDC requires two short-term bicycle parking for fewer than ten dwelling units. 1 Roof only may extend five feet above the stated height limit if all portions of the roof above the stated height limit have a slope of four inches in 12 inches or greater. a Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 9 of 15 Staff Analysis: The applicant proposed ten parking spaces, satisfying the requirement of nine. The submitted plans presently lack the electric vehicle and bicycle parking required by Chapters 17.115 and 17.120 ECDC. Staff will verify compliance during building permit review; a condition is proposed. Minimum Required Parking Summary Number of Dwelling Units 5 Units’ Bedroom Counts All 2-bed Parking Spaces Required per Unit 1.8 Total Required Parking Spaces 9 -Required EV-Ready Parking Spaces 1 per unit Long-Term Bike Parking per Unit 0.75 Required Short-Term Bike Parking 2* Required Long-Term Bike Parking 4* -Required eBike-Installed Parking 2* *All fractions rounded up ECDC 20.11 – General Design Review ECDC 20.11.010 requires the ADB to review general design review applications that trigger review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The subject proposal required SEPA review due including more than four dwelling units (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii)). ECDC 20.11.030 lists the following required criteria for Building Design and Site Treatment. ECDC 20.11.030(A). Building Design. No one architectural style is required. The building shall be designed to comply with the purposes of this chapter and to avoid conflict with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. All elements of building design shall form an integrated development, harmonious in scale, line and mass. The following are included as elements of building design: 1. All exterior building components, including windows, doors, eaves, and parapets; 2. Colors, which should avoid excessive brilliance or brightness except where that would enhance the character of the area; 3. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on the roof, grounds or buildings should be screened from view from the street level; 4. Long, massive, unbroken or monotonous buildings shall be avoided in order to comply with the purposes of this chapter and the design objectives of the comprehensive plan. This criterion is meant to describe the entire building. All elements of the design of a building including the massing, building forms, architectural details and finish materials contribute to whether or not a building is found to be long, massive, unbroken or monotonous. a. In multifamily (RM) or commercial zones, selections from among the following or similar features are appropriate for dealing with this criterion: a Packet Pg. 20 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 10 of 15 i. Windows with architectural fenestration; ii. Multiple rooflines or forms; iii. Architecturally detailed entries; iv. Appropriate landscaping; v. The use of multiple materials; 5. All signs should conform to the general design theme of the development. Staff Analysis: All exterior building elements are harmonious with one another, presenting the overall building design as integrated and self-consistent. The mass of the building is subdivided vertically and horizontally by different materials and articulation. The buildings display a distinct top and bottom. Window variation, awnings, material changes, colors variation and roof form help to break up the buildings mass. The proposed colors avoid excessive brightness. Landscaping is discussed below. The applicant proposes no signage, and the submitted plans lack mechanical or utility equipment. Any subsequent desire for signage would require review of a separate permit application. Staff will review mechanical solutions with the associated building permit(s). ECDC 20.11.030(B) – Site Treatment. The existing character of the site and the nearby area should be the starting point for the design of the building and all site treatment. The following are elements of site treatment: 1. Grading, vegetation removal and other changes to the site shall be minimized where natural beauty exists. Large cut and fill and impervious surfaces should be avoided. 2. Landscape treatment shall be provided to enhance the building design and other site improvements. 3. Landscape treatment shall be provided to buffer the development from surrounding property where conflict may result, such as parking facilities near yard spaces, streets or residential units, and different building heights, design or color. 4. Landscaping that could be damaged by pedestrians or vehicles should be protected by curbing or similar devices. 5. Service yards, and other areas where trash or litter may accumulate, shall be screened with planting or fences or walls which are compatible with natural materials. 6. All screening should be effective in the winter as well as the summer. 7. Materials such as wood, brick, stone and gravel (as opposed to asphalt or concrete) may be substituted for planting in areas unsuitable for plant growth. a Packet Pg. 21 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 11 of 15 8. Exterior lighting shall be the minimum necessary for safety and security. Excessive brightness shall be avoided. All lighting shall be low-rise and directed downward onto the site. Lighting standards and patterns shall be compatible with the overall design theme. Staff Analysis: The project’s compliance with the applicable landscaping requirements of Chapter 20.13 ECDC is discussed in greater detail in the following section of this report. The applicant proposes no areas of wood, brick, stone or gravel in lieu of landscaping as part of this project, nor any service yard in need of screening. As previously mentioned, the most divergent use nearby is the City’s wastewater treatment plant and associated facilities neighboring the site to the west. This property line requires Type I landscaping, the densest barrier. However, the applicant requests ADB’s modification of this standard due to the presence of a sewer line in this area, as to comply with ECDC 20.13.020(N). The proposed development generally utilizes the existing topography onsite, though it includes grading necessary to provide a level driveway into the pull-under garages. The driveway cut will be supported by a retaining wall. Largely unvegetated, the removals proposed will be replaced in compliance with Chapter 20.13 ECDC (discussed below). Per the submitted SEPA checklist, the applicant proposes approximately 300 cubic yards of grading, which may potentially reuse up to 100 cubic yards of excavated material. The applicant submitted a site lighting plan (Sheet A1.6 of Attachment 3). Floodlights mounted on the buildings illuminate the driveway. Step lights illuminate the walkway. Wall sconces illuminate the building pedestrian entrances. All direct light downward and fit into the site’s design. ECDC 20.11.030(C). Other Criteria. 1. Community facilities and public or quasi-public improvements should not conflict with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. 2. Street furniture (including but not limited to benches, light standards, utility poles, newspaper stands, bus shelters, planters, traffic signs and signals, guardrails, rockeries, walls, mail boxes, fire hydrants and garbage cans) should be compatible with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. Staff Analysis: The applicant proposed no street furniture. The proposal is not for a community facility. Improvements within the public right-of-way associated within the subject proposal will be reviewed by the Engineering Division at the time of building permit review to ensure compliance with all applicable Engineering requirements, including compliance with any necessary upgrades to the adjacent sidewalk and/or street tree(s). ECDC 20.13 – Landscaping Requirements: Development subject to general design review thereby required to satisfy the landscaping requirements of Chapter 20.13 ECDC. As previously mentioned, The submitted landscaping plan requests ADB’s modification of the Type I landscaping required on the western property line due to the presence of a sewer line, as ECDC 20.13.020(N) suggests trees not be planted within five feet of water or sewer lines. a Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 12 of 15 ECDC 20.13.000 enables the ADB to modify the requirements of the landscaping code, provided the modification is consistent with the purposes of design review found in ECDC 20.10.000. Staff supports the applicant’s proposed landscaping over the sewer line as an appropriate compromise of the Type I landscaping density and necessary sensitivity to utilities. Furthermore, only the residents of the proposed townhomes would be impacted by the decreased screening offered by this solution. The applicant’s landscaping plan is included as Sheet L-1 of Attachment 4. Section 030 – Landscaping Types A. Type I Landscaping. 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 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. C. Type III Landscaping. Type III landscaping is intended to provide visual separation of uses from streets, and visual separation of compatible uses so as to soften the appearance of streets, parking areas and building elevations. 1. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, a minimum of six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 30 feet on center; and 2. If planted to buffer a building elevation, shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in height, and living ground cover planted so that the ground will be covered within three years; or 3. If planted to buffer a parking area, access, or site development other than a building, any of the following alternatives may be used unless otherwise noted: a. Shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in height, and living ground cover must be planted so that the ground will be covered within three years. b. Earth-mounding, an average of three and one-half feet in height, planted with shrubs or living ground cover so that the ground will be covered within three years. This alternative may not be used in a downtown or waterfront area. c. A combination of earth mounding, opaque fences and shrubs to produce a visual barrier at least three and one-half feet in height. a Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 13 of 15 D. Type IV Landscaping. Type IV landscaping is intended to provide visual relief where clear sight is desired to see signage or into adjacent space for safety concerns. 1. Trees shall be deciduous and planted 25 feet on center and the trunk shall be free of branches below six feet in height. 2. Plant materials which will cover the ground within three years, and which will not exceed three and one-half feet in height. Staff Analysis: The applicant requests ADB’s approval of the proposed modification to the western boundary’s Type I landscaping to accommodate the sewer line running through that area per ECDC 20.13.020(N). Modifying this requirement would exclusively reduce the barrier between the western townhomes and the City’s wastewater treatment facilities. The proposed landscaping offers a next- best alternative compatible with the sewer line. The north and south property lines would receive landscaping compliant with Type III, sufficiently softening the townhomes’ driveway and building elevations. The landscaping proposed along the street face along 3rd Ave. S needs Type IV landscaping to provide clear lines of sight to and from the right-of-way. Engineering will review street trees along with the requisite frontage improvements with the forthcoming permit application(s) (Attachment 9). ECDC 23.10 – Tree Related Regulations New multi-family developments must provide a tree retention and protection plan that retains at least 25% of all significant trees on the developable site. When there are not enough trees outside of the areas to be improved to meet the retention requirement, the applicant shall make up the deficiency, consistent with ECDC 23.10.060(F)(4), as follows: a. Planting a number of new trees on-site in accordance with the ratios established in ECDC 23.10.080 (see table below); and b. If replanting is not feasible, the applicant shall make a fee-in-lieu payment of $2,500 for every tree not planted. Furthermore, lots with fewer than three trees per 8,000 square feet must plant to achieve that tree density. The landscaping requirements of Chapter 20.13 ECDC exceed this stipulation. Significant trees less than 24” DBH are to be replaced at the following ratios: Tree Size Replacement Ratio Viable Trees Removed Replacements Required Six to 10” DBH 1:1 0 0 10.1” to 14” DBH 2:1 0 0 14.1” to 24” DBH 3:1 1 3 Total - 1 3 a Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 14 of 15 The applicant is required to pay fees-in-lieu for any viable tree removed that is greater than 24” DBH. Fees-in-lieu shall be based on an appraisal of the tree as outlined in ECDC 23.10.080(E). Staff Analysis: Even including the modification to the Type I landscape, the landscape proposed more than satisfy the three required replacements for the removed cherry tree and provide a density of at least three trees per 8,000 square feet. XII. CONCLUSION Based on the above analysis of the project proposal, as conditioned, the project is consistent with the urban design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), particularly the requirements of the Multiple Residential (RM) zone, the onsite parking requirements, the design review process, and the landscaping requirements. XIII. RECOMMENDATION Based on the facts, conclusions, and attachments to this report, staff recommends that the ADB approve the project design in File PLN2023-0071 with the following conditions: 1. The site plans submitted in application for the subsequent building permit(s) shall demonstrate compliance with Chapter 17.115 – Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure, Chapter 17.120 – Bicycle Parking Facilities, and Title 18 – Public Works Requirements. 2. All plantings must meet the sizing requirements found in Section 20.13.015 ECDC – Plant Schedule. A performance and maintenance bond will be required per ECDC 20.13.040. 3. Significant trees that are removed must be replaced in accordance with ECDC 23.10.080. XIV. EXPIRATION The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing extensions. Any person wishing to file an extension should contact the Planning Division at (425) 771-0220 for further procedural information. Expiration – ECDC 20.12.090(A): Unless the owner submits a fully completed building permit application necessary to bring about the approved alterations, or, if no building permit application is required, substantially commences the use allowed within 18 months from the date of approval, ADB or hearing examiner approval shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files a fully completed application for an extension of time prior to the expiration date. a Packet Pg. 25 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No. PLN2023-0071 Administrative Design Review Edmonds 222 Townhomes Page 15 of 15 XV. PARTIES OF RECORD City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave. N Edmonds, WA 98020 Jacob Young Citizen Design 10 Dravus St. Seattle, WA 98109 Laurel Anderson anderson.l.laurel@gmail.com Del Mar Condominium Association 210 3rd Ave. S Edmonds, WA 98020 Helen M. Jolly 221 3rd Ave. S Unit 8 Edmonds, WA 98020 Gary Neuman 229 3rd Ave. S Apt 202 Edmonds, WA 98020 Linda Norton and Dennis Trapp 224 3rd Ave. S Apt 201 Edmonds, WA 98020 Pam Tauer 210 3rd Ave. S Unit C Edmonds, WA 98020 gleannpam@gmail.com Vienna Zigalla 224 3rd Ave. S #102 Edmonds, WA 98020 XVI. ATTACHMENTS 1. Land Use Application Form 2. Cover Letter 3. Plan Set 4. Landscape Plan 5. Irrigation Plan 6. Tree Retention and Protection Plan 7. Arborist Report 8. Preliminary Civil Plan 9. Engineering Compliance Memorandum 10. Fire Preliminary Comments Memorandum 11. Determination of Completeness 12. Notice of Application 13. Notice of Public Hearing 14. Public Comments 15. SEPA Materials a Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Page 1 of 2 CITY OF EDMONDS Land Use Application #1381610 - Edmonds 222 - 5 unit a Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Project Contact Company Name:Citizen Design Name:Jacob Young Email:jyoung@collaborativeco.com Address:10 Dravus Street Phone #:(206) 535-7908 Seattle WA 98109 Project Type Activity Type Scope of Work New New Development Activity Design Review Project Name:Edmonds 222 - 5 unit Description of Work: CONSTRUCT FIVE TOWNHOUSES IN TWO BUILDINGS EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED. DIVIDE SUBJECT PARCEL INTO (5) RESULTANT LOTS AND (1) COMMON TRACT VIA SHORT SUBDIVISION. Project Details Development Type Residential Page 2 of 2 CITY OF EDMONDS Land Use Application #1381610 - Edmonds 222 - 5 unit a Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Edmonds 222 | Design Narrative | 2024 1 DATE TO PROJECT September 9, 2024 City of Edmonds Development Services Department 121 5th Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds 222 Townhouses To Whom It May Concern: This letter is provided to explain, in narrative form, the proposed townhouse project located at 222 3rd Avenue’s compliance with applicable design standards. The following sections describe the project, applicable design standards and the design’s response to them. Please feel free to contact our office if additional information is needed for review or if you have any questions. Humbly submitted, Citizen Design Project Description The development will consist of two buildings containing five residential townhouses. The subject parcel currently contains one single family residence which will be demolished. As can be seen on Sheet A1.1, the subject is rectangular in shape with its long axis oriented from east to west. The townhouses are arranged parallel to this axis. The two eastern townhouses directly abut the 3rd Avenue S. right-of-way, with a single curb cut to the north. The remaining units can be seen beyond. The subject is located within the RM-1.5 zone and does not abut a designated street frontage. Applicable design standards are therefore found in ECDC 20.11. ECDC 20.11.030.A : Massing and Articulation As can be seen by the building elevations and renderings [A3.1-A3.4], the townhouses have been designed with a distinctive base and top, as well as individually articulated roof lines. The top steps back from the street and utilizes vertical board siding while the base utilizes a dark brick veneer to provide the classic appearance of masonry. A belly band is provided in areas where there is not articulation between materials to reinforce the transition. Bay windows are used on the front units to break up the street-facing facade and add visual interest. The roof line of each townhome is designed to further indicate the delineation between each separate unit, breaking up the larger buildings into human-scale units. Even the layout of gutters and downspouts is intended to further reinforce the separation of the buildings into individual units. Recessed entryways and canopies provide an inviting transition from the street and draw attention to the unit entrances. COLLABORATIVECO.COM 206.535.7908 WE ARE FAMILY DESIGNING INSPIRED SPACE TO CREATE COMMUNITY a Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Edmonds 222 | Design Narrative | 2024 2 ECDC 20.11.030.B : Site Treatment The site layout for this project follows the topography of the site where it can rather than relying on a large amount of excavation or regrading. The unit entrances are placed at varying heights between the buildings in order to maintain the existing grade where possible. Additionally, the proposal uses the steep site to lessen the appearance of cars and garages by tucking them away below street level. All pedestrian access is provided via a common walkway along the south side of the site. This walkway is accessed directly from the 3rd Avenue sidewalk and is protected by landscaping between the path and neighboring buildings. Landscaping is also used to create beauty and soften the transition between the street-facing units and the right-of-way. Exterior lighting is kept to a minimum and specifically focused around unit entrances and pedestrian access. ECDC 20.11.030.C : Other Criteria This section is not applicable to this project. ECDC 20.13.000 : Landscape Modifications An existing sewer main conflicts with the landscape buffer along the westerly boundary line. This requires modification of the Type 1 landscape buffer to eliminate the requirement for evergreen trees as the trees would prevent access to the sewer for maintenance. Large and medium shrubs and a privacy fence are proposed instead. Refer to the landscape plans for details. Pursuant to this section, the project requests a modification to the requirements for Type 1 landscaping [ECDC 20.13.030.A] to eliminate the required two rows of evergreen trees. a Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) SCALE:A0.0 COVER SHEET AS NOTED September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N EDMONDS 222 FIVE (5) 3-STORY TOWNHOMES a Packet Pg. 31 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) TYP. TYP. TYP. 6' - 1 0 " 33'-0" HALF ROW 15'-0" FRONT STBK 24'-0" BACKING DISTANCE 5'-0" 10 ' - 0 " SI D E S T B K 5'-0" 6' - 1 0 " 10 ' - 0 " SI D E ST B K 5' - 0 " 26.5'± FF E : 3 6 . 5 ± FF E : 3 6 . 5 ± FFE: 35.4'± FFE: 35.4'± FF E : 4 7 . 0 ± FG 34.0'± 26.5'± FF E : 4 7 . 0 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± FG=33.2'± FFE: 35.4'± X X FG: 32.5'± 224 3RD AVENUE S APN: 006810-0000 ZONED: RM-1.5 210 3RD AVENUE S APN: 006464-0000 ZONED: RM-1.5 TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. 128'± ⅊N 88°43'57" W S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 ' ± ⅊ 128'± ⅊N 88°43'57" W ℄ 3 R D A V E N U E S BLDG 2: (3) TOWNHOUSES (3) STORIES FOOTPRINT AREA: 2340± SF AGLA: 1737± SF EACH GARAGE: 511± SF EACH BLDG 1: (2) TOWNHOUSES (3) STORIES FOOTPRINT AREA: 1656± SF AGLA: 2029± SF EACH GARAGE: 500± SF EACH S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 ' ± ⅊ FG 44.01'± FG 44.35'± FG 37.71'± FG 35.95'± FG 35.70'± FG 35.84'± FG 44.17'± TYP. TYP. 24 ' - 0 " DR I V E W A Y 24 ' - 0 " 9'-0" SIDEWALK 15'-0" REAR STBK 5' - 1 0 1 / 2 " 15'-0" PROPOSED PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TYP. GARAGE GARAGE 36'± 23 ' ± 23 ' ± ENTRY ENTRY 44 . 5 ' ± ENTRY ENTRY 8. 5 ' ± 8. 5 ' ± 12 . 5 ± 19 . 5 ' ± 12 . 5 ± ENTRY DN DN DN DN DN GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE DNDN DN TYP. EG = 37.9'± EG = 40.8'± EG = 36.2'± EG = 37.9'± EG = 36.2'± EG = 36.2'± EG = 37.9'±EG = 37.9'± EG = 37.9'± EG = 36.2'± EG = 45.0'± September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE: N A1.1 1 1" = 10' PRELIMINARY ZONING SITE PLAN 0 5 10 1" = 10' 20 SCALE:A1.1 PRELIMINARY ZONING SITE PLAN AS NOTED * PROJECT SITE 222 3RD AVE S HI G H W A Y 1 0 4 2N D A V E S DAYTON ST NTSVICINITY MAP ALDER ST 3R D A V E S 4T H A V E S WALNUT ST KEYNOTES 1. (E) TREE TO BE REMOVED. 2. APPROX. LOCATION OF (E) UTILITIES. SHOWN FOR REF. ONLY. 3. DEMOLISH (E) STRUCTURES UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT. 4. (E) UTILITY POLE PER CIVIL. SHOWN FOR REF. ONLY. 5. CONCRETE RETAINING WALL PER STRC'L. 6. 5 FT WIDE WALKWAY. 7. 5 FT WIDE SITE STAIRS. 8. 8.5 FT x 16.5 FT PARKING SPACE. 9. LINE OF CANOPY (ABOVE). 10. (N) UTILITIES PER CIVIL. SHOWN FOR REF. ONLY. 11. CATCH BASIN PER CIVIL. SHOWN FOR REF. ONLY. 12. PUMP STRUCTURE PER CIVIL. SHOWN FOR REF. ONLY. 13. ELEVATED PORCH ENTRY 14. 3 FT BY 35 FT REFUSE STAGING AREA. 15. FUTURE UNIT LOT LINE (TYP.) 16. (N) TREE PER LANDSCAPE (TYP.) 17. RESERVED 18. MOTOR COURT 19. GRADE BREAK 20. LOCATION OF R TANK 21. PROPOSED WINDOW WELL EDMONDS DESIGN STANDARDS CODE COMPLIANCE PERMITTED USES: (ECDC 16.30.010.A.1) LOT AREA: (ECDC 16.30.030.A) SETBACKS: (ECDC 16.30.030.A) STRUCTURE HEIGHT: (ECDC 16.30.030.A) MAXIMUM COVERAGE (ECDC 16.30.030.A) 2018 SRC / TYPE V-B / OCC. R3 / ZONED RM-1.5 ALLOWED: MULTIPLE DWELLINGS PROPOSED: TOWNHOUSES ALLOWED: MINIMUM LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT: 1500 SF PROPOSED: LOT AREA = 10,890 SF / 5 TOWNHOUSES 2,178 SF PER TOWNHOUSE ALLOWED: 30 FT ABOVE AVERAGE EXISTING GRADE (REF. CALC, 2/A1.2) BLDG. 1: 42.9 + 30' = 72.9'1 BLDG. 2: 35' + 30' = 65' PROPOSED: BLDG. 1 = 29.6' BLDG. 2 = 30' (REF. A1.3) ALLOWED: 45% = 4,900 SF PROPOSED: 2340 SF + 2024 = 4,364 SF FRONT SIDE (EA) REAR REQUIRED: 15 FT 10 FT 15 FT PROPOSED: 15 FT 10 FT 15 FT CONSTRUCT FIVE TOWNHOUSES IN TWO BUILDINGS, PER PLANS AND AS FOLLOWS: ·(2) UNITS w/ 1976± SF AGLA AND 514± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE ·(2) UNITS w/ 1674± SF AGLA AND 529± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE ·(1) UNITS w/ 1670± SF AGLA AND 529± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED. DIVIDE SUBJECT PARCEL INTO (5) RESULTANT LOTS AND (1) COMMON TRACT VIA UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION. ESTABLISH USE AND OCCUPY, PER PLANS. PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER AND DEVELOPER ARCHITECT + APPLICANT CITIZEN DESIGN 10 DRAVUS STREET SEATTLE, WA 98109 CONTACT: JACOB YOUNG TEL: 206.853.8055 EMAIL: JYOUNG@COLLABORATIVECO.COM SCOPE OF WORK 222 3RD AVENUE S EDMONDS, WA 98020 PARCEL MAP NUMBERS 270323-004-095-00 SITE ADDRESS JURISDICTION EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON BUKOWSKI READ ENTERPRISES PO BOX 1478 EDMONDS, WA 98020 LOT AREA AND ZONING LOT AREA: 10,890± SF (0.25± AC) ZONING: RM-1.5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEC 23 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-101) BEG 150 FT S OF SW COR DAYTON & 3RD STS EDMONDS TH S 85 FT TH W 128 FT TH N 85 FT TH E 128 FT TO POB PROJECT INFO. THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IS (4) DWELLING UNITS. THIS PROJECT PROPOSES (5) NEW DWELLING UNITS AND IS SUBJECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. SEPA COMPLIANCE (3) PROPOSED STORIES PROPOSED OCCUPANCY: R-3 (TOWNHOUSE) CONSTRUCTION: TYPE VB, ALL LEVELS FIRE SUPPRESSION: NFPA 13D SPRINKLERS REQUIRED BUILDING INFORMATION DRAWING INDEX A0.0 COVER SHEET A1.1 PRELIMINARY ZONING SITE PLAN A1.2 PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A1.3 PRELIMINARY SITE SECTIONS AND DIAGRAMS A1.4 PRELIMINARY SITE SECTIONS AND DIAGRAMS A1.5 VICINITY MAP A1.6 CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN A2.1 PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS A3.1 RENDERED ELEVATIONS A3.2 RENDERINGS A3.3 RENDERINGS A3.4 CHARACTER STUDY C01 CIVIL SITE PLAN C02 DRIVEWAY GRADING PLAN C03 DETAILS L-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L-2 PLANTING DETAILS IR-1 IRRIGATION PLAN T-1 TREE RETENTION AND PROTECTION PLAN 1 OF 1 SURVEY CIVIL ENGINEER SURVEYOR CHADWICK + WINTERS 1422 NW 85TH STREET SEATTLE, WA 98117 CONTACT: BRANDON WINTERS TEL: 206.297.0996 EMAIL: BRANDONW@CHADWICKWINTERS.COM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT + ARBORIST RUSSELL + LAMBERT 7724 2ND AVENUE NE SEATTLE, WA 98115 CONTACT: MARY ELLEN RUSSELL TEL: 206.898.6312 EMAIL: MARYELLEN@RUSSELL-LAMBERT.COM GENERAL CONTRACTOR FACET 9706 4TH AVENUE NE #300 SEATTLE, WA 98115 CONTACT: BEN IDDINS TEL: 206.523.0024 EMAIL: BIDDINS@FACETNW.COM TBD SCALE:A1.1 2 1" = 20' HEIGHT LIMIT DIAGRAM AVG (E) GRADE CALCS 40.8' + 45.0' + 45.0' + 40.7' = 171.5' 171.5' / 4 = 42.875' ≈ 42.9' BUILDING 1 32.5' + 36.2' + 37.9' + 33.2' = 139.8' 139.8' / 4 = 34.95' ≈ 35.0' BUILDING 2 a Packet Pg. 32 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 6' - 1 0 " 33'-0" HALF ROW 15'-0" FRONT STBK 24'-0" BACKING DISTANCE 24 ' - 0 " DR I V E W A Y 5'-0" 6' - 1 0 " 10 ' - 0 " SI D E ST B K 5' - 0 " 26.5'± FF E : 3 6 . 5 ± FF E : 3 6 . 5 ± FFE: 35.4'± FFE: 35.4'± FF E : 4 7 . 0 ± EG/FG 34.0'± 26.5'± FF E : 4 7 . 0 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± FF E : 3 5 . 9 ± EG=33.2'± FG=33.2'± FFE: 35.4'± X X EG: 31.5'± FG: 32.5'± 15'-0" REAR STBK 224 3RD AVENUE S APN: 006810-0000 ZONED: RM-1.5 210 3RD AVENUE S APN: 006464-0000 ZONED: RM-1.5 TYP. TYP. TYP. TYP. ℄ 3 R D A V E N U E S TYP. 128'± ⅊N 88°43'57" W S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 ' ± ⅊ 128'± ⅊N 88°43'57" W BLDG 2: (3) TOWNHOUSES (3) STORIES FOOTPRINT AREA: 2340± SF AGLA: 1737± SF EACH GARAGE: 511± SF EACH BLDG 1: (2) TOWNHOUSES (3) STORIES FOOTPRINT AREA: 1656± SF AGLA: 2029± SF EACH GARAGE: 500± SF EACH 10 ' - 0 " SI D E S T B K S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 ' ± ⅊ FG 43.9'±EG/FG 44.3'± FG 37.05'± FG 35.85'± FG 35.7'± FG 35.85'± EG/FG 44.2'± 4'-9" 24 ' - 0 " 9'-0" SIDEWALK 5' - 1 0 1 / 2 " A1.3 2 A1.3 2 A1.3 3 A1.3 4 A1.3 1 A1.3 1 A1.3 3 A3.1 5 A3.1 1 A3.1 4 A3.1 2 A3.1 6 A3.1 3 A1.3 4 A1.4 1 A1.4 1 GARAGE 36'± 23 ' ± 23 ' ± ENTRY ENTRY ENTRY ENTRY 6% 8. 5 ' ± 8. 5 ' ± 12 . 5 ± 19 . 5 ' ± 12 . 5 ± ENTRY DN DN DN DN DN GARAGE GARAGE DN GARAGEGARAGE DN DN TYP. TYP. SCALE:A1.2 PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN AS NOTED September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE: N A1.2 1 1" = 10' PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN 0 5 10 1" = 10' 20 KEYNOTES 1. (E) TREE TO BE REMOVED. 2. DEMOLISH (E) STRUCTURES UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT. 3. (N) RETAINING CONCRETE WALL PER STRC'L. 4. 5 FT WIDE WALKWAY. 5. 5 FT WIDE SITE STAIRS. 6. 8.5 FT x 16.5 FT PARKING SPACE. 7. LINE OF CANOPY (ABOVE). 8. ELEVATED PORCH ENTRY 9. FUTURE UNIT LOT LINE (TYP.) 10. (N) TREE PER LANDSCAPE PLAN, L1.0 (TYP.) 11. (N) SHRUB PER LANDSCAPE PLAN, L1.0 (TYP.) 12. MOTOR COURT 13. GRADE BREAK 14. LOCATION OF R TANK 15. PROPOSED WINDOW WELL * PROJECT SITE 222 3RD AVE S HI G H W A Y 1 0 4 2N D A V E S DAYTON ST NTSVICINITY MAP ALDER ST 3R D A V E S 4T H A V E S WALNUT ST CONSTRUCT FIVE TOWNHOUSES IN TWO BUILDINGS, PER PLANS AND AS FOLLOWS: ·(2) UNITS w/ 1976± SF AGLA AND 514± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE ·(2) UNITS w/ 1674± SF AGLA AND 529± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE ·(1) UNITS w/ 1670± SF AGLA AND 529± SF TWO-CAR GARAGE EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE DEMOLISHED. DIVIDE SUBJECT PARCEL INTO (5) RESULTANT LOTS AND (1) COMMON TRACT VIA UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION. ESTABLISH USE AND OCCUPY, PER PLANS. PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER AND DEVELOPER ARCHITECT + APPLICANT CITIZEN DESIGN 10 DRAVUS STREET SEATTLE, WA 98109 CONTACT: JACOB YOUNG TEL: 206.853.8055 EMAIL: JYOUNG@COLLABORATIVECO.COM SCOPE OF WORK 222 3RD AVENUE S EDMONDS, WA 98020 PARCEL MAP NUMBERS 270323-004-095-00 SITE ADDRESS JURISDICTION EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON BUKOWSKI READ ENTERPRISES PO BOX 1478 EDMONDS, WA 98020 LOT AREA AND ZONING LOT AREA: 10,890± SF (0.25± AC) ZONING: RM-1.5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEC 23 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-101) BEG 150 FT S OF SW COR DAYTON & 3RD STS EDMONDS TH S 85 FT TH W 128 FT TH N 85 FT TH E 128 FT TO POB PROJECT INFO. THE CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IS (4) DWELLING UNITS. THIS PROJECT PROPOSES (5) NEW DWELLING UNITS AND IS SUBJECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. SEPA COMPLIANCE (3) PROPOSED STORIES PROPOSED OCCUPANCY: R-3 (TOWNHOUSE) CONSTRUCTION: TYPE VB, ALL LEVELS FIRE SUPPRESSION: NFPA 13D SPRINKLERS REQUIRED BUILDING INFORMATION CIVIL ENGINEER SURVEYOR CHADWICK + WINTERS 1422 NW 85TH STREET SEATTLE, WA 98117 CONTACT: BRANDON WINTERS TEL: 206.297.0996 EMAIL: BRANDONW@CHADWICKWINTERS.COM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT + ARBORIST RUSSELL + LAMBERT 7724 2ND AVENUE NE SEATTLE, WA 98115 CONTACT: MARY ELLEN RUSSELL TEL: 206.898.6312 EMAIL: MARYELLEN@RUSSELL-LAMBERT.COM GENERAL CONTRACTOR FACET 9706 4TH AVENUE NE #300 SEATTLE, WA 98115 CONTACT: BEN IDDINS TEL: 206.523.0024 EMAIL: BIDDINS@FACETNW.COM TBD a Packet Pg. 33 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 10'-0" STBK 30 40 50 60 70 80 BUILDING 1 AVG GRADE: 42.9'± BUILDING 1 HT. LIMIT: 72.9'± PL PLPL 10'-0" STBK FFE: 36.5' ± 10 ' - 2 " 11 ' - 2 " 9' - 3 3 / 4 " FFE: 46.7' ± FFE: 57.8' ± DRIVEWAY 3RD AVE S 24'-0" DRIVEWAY 15'-0" SETBACK PL 15'-0" SETBACK 30 40 50 60 70 80 BUILDING 2 AVG GRADE: 35.0'± BUILDING 2 HT. LIMIT: 65.0'± 8' - 0 " 8' - 3 " 9' - 6 " 11 ' - 2 " VA R I E S VA R I E S FFE:35.9' ±FFE:36.5' ± PL EXISTING GRADE R TANK 2' - 0 " 7'-6" 1 1 (E) SEWER MAIN 15'-0" SEWER ESMT PL 10'-0" STBK 30 40 50 60 70 80 PL 10'-0" STBK 8' - 2 9 / 1 6 " 8' - 3 " FFE: 51.3' ± FFE: 43.9' ± FFE: 35.9' ± BUILDING 2 AVG GRADE: 35.0'± BUILDING 2 HT. LIMIT: 65.0'± 7' - 7 1 1 / 1 6 " 24'-0" DRIVEWAY 15'-0" SETBACK 15'-0" SETBACK 7' - 6 " 7' - 9 " VA R I E S 8' - 1 0 " 10 ' - 0 " VA R I E S FFE:35.9' ±FFE:36.5' ± 3RD AVE S BUILDING 1 AVG GRADE: 42.9'± BUILDING 1 HT. LIMIT: 72.9'± PL PL 30 40 50 60 70 80 BUILDING 2 AVG GRADE: 35.0'± BUILDING 2 HT. LIMIT: 65.0'± DRIVEWAY EXISTING GRADE R TANK 2' - 3 1 / 2 " 7'-6" 1 1 (E) SEWER MAIN 15'-0" SEWER ESMT September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A1.3 1 1" = 10' LONGITUDINAL SECTION SCALE:A1.3 4 1" = 10' LONGITUDINAL SECTION SCALE:A1.3 3 1" = 10' TRANSVERSE SECTION AT BUILDING 1 0 5 10 1" = 10' 20 SCALE:A1.3 2 1" = 10' TRANSVERSE SECTION AT BUILDING 2 SCALE:A1.3 PRELIMINARY SITE SECTIONS AS NOTED a Packet Pg. 34 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 24'-0" DRIVEWAY 15'-0" SETBACK 15'-0" SETBACK VA R I E S 8' - 3 " VA R I E S FFE:35.9' ±FFE:36.5' ± 3RD AVE S BUILDING 1 AVG GRADE: 42.9'± BUILDING 1 HT. LIMIT: 72.9'± PL PL 30 40 50 60 70 80 BUILDING 2 AVG GRADE: 35.0'± BUILDING 2 HT. LIMIT: 65.0'± DRIVEWAY EXISTING GRADE R TANK 2' - 3 1 / 2 " 7'-6" 1 1 (E) SEWER MAIN 15'-0" SEWER ESMT September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A1.4 1 1" = 10' LONGITUDINAL SECTION AT DRIVEWAY 0 5 10 1" = 10' 20 SCALE:A1.4 PRELIMINARY SITE SECTIONS AS NOTED a Packet Pg. 35 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A1.5 VICINITY MAP AS NOTED SCALE: N A1.4 1 NTS VICINITY MAP a Packet Pg. 36 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) SCALE:A1.6 CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN AS NOTED September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 0 5 10 1" = 10' 20 SCALE: N A1.6 1 N/A CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE WALL SCONCES ARE LOCATED ON THE EAST FACADE OF BUILDING 1 (BY THE ENTRY DOORS) AND ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH FACADES OF BUILDING 2 (BY THE ENTRY DOORS). "MODERN COUNTRY CAGE OUTDOOR WALL LIGHT" BY SHADES OF LIGHT COLOR: BLACK MAX. WATTAGE: 60W 1 WALL SCONCE STEP LIGHTS ARE LOCATED ALONG ALL WALKWAYS STEPS THAT CONNECT BOTH BUILDINGS. "LED STEP LIGHT" BY NUVO LIGHTING COLOR: BLACK WATTAGE: 5W INTEGRATED LAMP: 407 LUMENS 2 STEP LIGHT2 2 2 2 2 2 22 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 SURFACE MOUNT FIXTURES ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO GARAGE DOORS TO PROVIDE LIGHT TO MOTOR COURT. "FLOOD LIGHT 2 LIGHT 13" BY GENERATION LIGHTING COLOR:BLACK WATTAGE: 240 WATTS (120 WATTS PER BULB) 3 FLOOD LIGHT 3 2 3 3 1 1 1 22 2 3 33 a Packet Pg. 37 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 46'-0" 23'-0" 38 ' - 0 " 23'-0" KITCHEN KITCHEN LIVING LIVING DINING DINING DN DN DN UP DN UP UNIT A UNIT B 46'-0" 23'-0" 38 ' - 0 " 13 ' - 8 " 23'-0" 6' - 3 1 / 2 " 5' - 3 1 / 2 " 12 ' - 9 " 14'-8 1/2"14'-8 1/2"16'-7" BED 1 BATH 1 CLOSET BED 2 BATH 2 CLOSET LA U N D R Y BED 1 BATH 1 CLOSET BED 2 BATH 2 CLOSET LA U N D R Y DN DN UNIT A UNIT B FFE: 36.5 '± FFE: 36.5 '± 46'-0" 23'-0" 38 ' - 0 " 22 ' - 1 " 23'-0" 6' - 5 " SH E L F / B E N C H TRASH GARAGE SH E L F / B E N C H TRASH GARAGE DEN DEN UP UP7' - 6 " 2' - 0 " 21 ' - 1 0 1 / 2 " 6' - 1 0 " 7' - 3 1 / 2 " WINDOW WELLWI N D O W WE L L WI N D O W WE L L UNIT A UNIT B BUILDING 2: (3) 3-STORY TOWNHOMES FOOTPRINT AREA: 2340± SF AVG (E) GRADE: 35'± AGLA:(2 UNITS) 1674± SF (1 UNIT) = 1670± SF GARAGE: 529± SF EACH BUILDING1: (2) 3-STORY TOWNHOMES FOOTPRINT AREA: 1656± SF AVG (E) GRADE: 42.9'± AGLA UNIT A: 1955 ± AGLA UNIT B: 1966± GARAGE: 514± SF EACH ME C H / GARAGE DEN TRASH ENTRY 65'-0" 9'-9"12'-1 3/4"12'-1 3/4" 36 ' - 0 " 9' - 6 1 / 2 " 26 ' - 5 1 / 2 " ST O R A G E ME C H / ST O R A G E TRASHTRASH ME C H / ST O R A G E DEN DEN ENTRY ENTRY UP UP UP GARAGE GARAGE FFE: 35.9 FFE: 35.9 FFE: 35.9 11'-11 1/2"9'-3" 21'-10 3/4"21'-8"21'-5 1/4" 9'-9" DN DN DN DINING KITCHEN DINING KITCHEN LIVING 36 ' - 0 " DINING KITCHEN LIVINGLIVING UPUP UP DN DN DN 65'-0" 21'-10 3/4"21'-8"21'-5 1/4" BED 1 BATH 1 CLOSET BED 2 BATH 2 BATH 1 CLOSET LAUNDRY LAUNDRY LAUNDRY BED 1 BATH 1 CLOSET BED 2 BATH 2 BED 1 BED 2 36 ' - 0 " 65'-0" 21'-10 3/4"21'-8"21'-5 1/4" 12 ' - 9 " 12 ' - 1 " 11 ' - 2 " BATH 2 DN DN DN September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A2.1 PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS AS NOTED SCALE: N A2.1 1 1/8" = 1' BLDG 1 - PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS SCALE: N A2.1 2 1/8" = 1' BLDG 2 - PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLANS FIRST STORY SECOND STORY THIRD STORY FIRST STORY SECOND STORY THIRD STORY 0 4 8 1/8" = 1'-0" 16 a Packet Pg. 38 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A3.1 RENDERED ELEVATIONS AS NOTED SCALE:A3.1 6 1/8" = 1' SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE:A3.1 3 1/8" = 1' NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:A3.1 2 1/8" = 1' BLDG 2 - EAST ELEVATION SCALE:A3.1 1 1/8" = 1' BLDG 1 - EAST ELEVATION SCALE:A3.1 5 1/8" = 1' BLDG 2 - WEST ELEVATION SCALE:A3.1 4 1/8" = 1' BLDG 1 - WEST ELEVATION BUILDING 2BUILDING 1 FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) DOWNSPOUTS (BLACK) BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES) BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES) GARAGE DOOR (BLACK) (N) SHRUBS PER L'SCAPE. SOME TREES NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) ENTRY DOOR (BLACK) METAL CANOPY (BLACK) WALL SCONCE METAL PANEL (BLACK) WOOD STAIRS FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) VERTICAL LAP SIDING (WHITE) STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (BLACK) METAL PANEL (BLACK) BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES) GARAGE DOOR (BLACK) FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) VERTICAL LAP SIDING (WHITE) DOWNSPOUTS (BLACK) ENTRY DOOR (BLACK) FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES) VERTICAL LAP SIDING (WHITE) STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (BLACK)FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS (BLACK) STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (BLACK) BRICK VENEER SIDING (EARTH TONES) (N) SHRUBS PER L'SCAPE. SOME TREES NOT SHOWN \ FOR CLARITY. VERTICAL LAP SIDING (WHITE) BUILDING 1BUILDING 2 a Packet Pg. 39 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A3.2 RENDERINGS AS NOTED SCALE:A3.2 2 NTS BLDG 1 VIEWED FROM SOUTHEAST SCALE:A3.2 1 NTS BLDGS 1 AND 2 VIEWED FROM NORTHEAST a Packet Pg. 40 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A3.3 RENDERINGS AS NOTED SCALE:A3.3 2 NTS BLDG 2 VIEWED FROM MOTOR COURT SCALE:A3.3 1 NTS BLDG 2 VIEWED FROM BACK OF LOT a Packet Pg. 41 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) September 9, 2024 Design Review City of EDMONDS FOR PLANNING DEPT USE ONLY ED M O N D S 2 2 2 22 2 3 R D A V E N U E S , E D M O N D S W A 9 8 0 2 0 ne w c o n s t r u c t i o n NO T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N SCALE:A3.4 CHARACTER STUDIES SCALE:A3.4 2 NTS CHARACTER STUDY SCALE:A3.4 1 NTS CHARACTER STUDY a Packet Pg. 42 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) a Packet Pg. 43 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) a Packet Pg. 44 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) a Packet Pg. 45 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) a Packet Pg. 46 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Russell + Lambert Page 1 of 3 Tree Report 222 3rd Ave S, Edmonds 7724 2nd Ave NE Seattle, WA 98115 206.898.6312 Tree Report 222 3rd Ave S, Edmonds Updated August 16 , 2024 Updated text in italic. Prepared For: Bukowski Read Enterprises PO Box 1478 Edmonds, WA 98020 augustus.bukowski@cardinalfinancial.com Prepared By: Russell + Lambert Mary Ellen Russell WA Landscape Architect #1149 ISA Certified Arborist #PN-9215A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (206) 898-6312 maryellen@russell-lambert.com Overview I performed level 2 Basic Tree Risk Assessments with a five-year time frame for existing trees 6” or greater measured 4.5’ from the ground (DBH) located at 222 3rd Ave S, Edmonds on May 1, 2024. DBH measurements were taken using a diameter tape rounded to the nearest half inch. Where site conditions limit access diameter was estimated using a standard measuring tape. For multi-stem trees the diameter was averaged by taking the square root of the sum of the squared diameters of each stem. This report summarizes details of the assessments below. Tree Condition Categories This report categorizes tree condition as ‘Good’, ‘Fair’, or ‘Poor’. ‘Good’ indicates that a tree has no evident significant structural defects or disease concerns and has good form for the species and typical vitality. ‘Fair’ indicates that the tree may have minor to moderate structural defects that are not expected to contribute to a failure within the next five years, minor disease or pest concerns, an asymmetric or unbalanced crown, or less than normal vitality. ‘Poor’ indicates that the tree has significant conditions of concern which are likely to cause a failure within the next five years such as major structural defects, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, evidence of decay at the roots, severely overextended branches, sparse or abnormal foliage, or very low vitality. Trees in ‘Poor’ condition may or may not be classified as high-risk trees depending on the size and location of the tree and the likelihood of impacting a target in the event of a failure. Condition was not assessed for off- site trees. Existing Trees There are (2) existing trees on site with a DBH 6” or greater. There are no existing street trees at the site. There are no trees located off-site that have driplines extending onto 222 3rd Ave S. There are no groves at the site. a Packet Pg. 47 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Russell + Lambert Page 2 of 3 Tree Report 222 3rd Ave S, Edmonds Tree Map Tree Table Tree No. Scientific Name Common Name On/ Off Site DBH Canopy Radius Critical Root Zone Radius Condition Hazard Y/N Viable Y/N Nuisance Y/N 1 Prunus sp. Cherry On site 15.5” 16’ avg. 16’-8” Good No Yes No 2 Prunus sp. Cherry On site 9” 8’ 9’-4.5” Poor No No Yes Specific Tree Notes Tree 1 has an off-center canopy toward the southwest. Cherries are short-lived trees prone to disease and decay. This specimen has little indication of disease for its size and age. Tree 2 is in poor condition. It is located extremely close to the existing garage and is growing in conflict with the eave. There is extensive die-back in the canopy and many branches are resting on the roof of the garage. It is low risk due to the small size of the tree but it is not a viable tree. Tree Replacement Both significant trees at the site are slated for removal as part of a redevelopment project. There are no trees nearby that will be affected by the removal of trees 1 and 2. I coordinated with the project team to explore alternate site layouts with the goal of retaining tree 1. Infiltration test results show that the area around tree 1 is the only potential location for required infiltration facilities at the site. See the Drainage Report for more information. Excavation to install the drainage facilities cannot feasibly be accomplished while retaining tree 1. Per ECDC 23.10.060.C(5), developing properties that have “fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees, which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area.” a Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Russell + Lambert Page 3 of 3 Tree Report 222 3rd Ave S, Edmonds Lot area = 10,890 SF 10,890/8,000 x 3 = 4 replacement trees are required. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be 1.5” caliper for deciduous trees or 6’ height for evergreen trees. Each replacement tree should be supplied with (1) slow-release watering bag and watered during the dry season for the first five years. Limit of Liability The terms and evaluation forms used in this report are as laid out in the International Society of Arboriculture Tree Risk Assessment Manual, Second Edition. The tree evaluation is a Level 2 Basic Assessment as defined by the International Society of Arboriculture. As conditions change, it is the responsibility of the property owners to schedule additional site visits by the necessary professionals to monitor the long-term health and risk of the tree. There are many conditions affecting a tree’s health and stability which may be present and cannot be ascertained such as root rot, previous or unexposed construction damage, internal cracks, stem rot and more. Changes in circumstances and conditions can also cause a rapid deterioration of a tree’s health and stability. Adverse weather conditions can dramatically affect the health and safety of a tree in a very short amount of time. While I have used every reasonable means to visually examine the tree, this evaluation represents my opinion of the tree health at the time of the evaluation only. I make no warranties about tree condition. These findings are estimates only, and do not guarantee future safety, nor are they predictions of future events, nor do they insure that a tree will not fail. This tree evaluation is to be used to inform and guide the property owner in the management of their trees. This in no way implies that I am responsible for performing recommended actions or using other methods or tools to further determine the extent of internal tree problems. Furthermore, my recommendations do not in any way insure that a tree will not fail. Extreme weather conditions or hidden rot can cause even good condition trees to fail. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Mary Ellen Russell, PLA Principal, Russell + Lambert Landscape Architecture ISA Certified Arborist ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor a Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF TREE DRIPLINE (TYPICAL) FOUND TACK IN LEAD OFFSET 4.2 FT. EAST AND 0.3 FT. SOUTH OF CALC'D CORNER POSITION WM PP SAN. MANHOLE RIM = 29.91 FT. 10" DT 12" DT FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. = 47.44 FT. FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. = 65.34 FT. OIL FILL ELECTRIC METER 222 3RD AVE. S. HOUSE BLDG. BLDG. R/ W R/ W N 88°43'57" W S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 . 0 0 ' S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 . 0 0 ' 128.00' N 88°43'57" W 128.00' GARAGE SHED N 88°43'57" W 30.00' N 88°43'57" W 30.00' N 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " E 32 5 . 0 4 ' 85 . 0 0 ' 18 0 . 0 0 ' 60 . 0 6 ' PORCH DECK ASPHALT ASPHALT 3R D A V E . S . ASPHALTASPHALT ROCKERY TIMBER WALL TIMBER WALL BAY 30' 30' CHAINLINK FENCE FALLS 0.4 FT. SOUTH OF CALC'D CORNER POSITION CHAINLINK FENCE FALLS 0.6 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION FENCE FALLS 0.4 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION FENCE FALLS 0.2 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W WV FH TELE MANHOLE P P P TE L E TE L E TE L E TE L E 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S SAN. MANHOLE RIM = 32.91 FT. I.E. = 22.55 FT (S. TO CLEANOUT) (FALLS 370.8 FT. N. OF CLEANOUT) SAN. MANHOLE RIM = 43.14 FT. I.E. = 38.04 FT. CATCH BASIN RIM = 42.59 FT. I.E. = 40.75 FT. (FALLS 80.0 FT. NORTH OF SHOWN POSITION) (FALLS 80.0 FT. NORTH OF SHOWN POSITION) I.E. = 19.96 FT. I.E. = 21.87 FT (N.W./MAINLINE) 25 25 3 0 30 3 5 35 40 40 45 45 45 45 45 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S SD SD SD SD SD SD SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFMSS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S WWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWW WW W ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T ES M T BUILDING 1 SECOND FLOOR=46.7 GROUND FLOOR=36.5 BUILDING 2 GROUND FLOOR=35.9 COMM COMM UGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGP LEGEND: CONCRETE ASPHALT PAVER WALKWAY ROOF SURFACES, SEE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR DESCRIPTION OF DELINEATED HARD SURFACES LANDSCAPE KEY NOTES KEY DESCRIPTION DETAIL/ SHEET 6" SSS @ 2.00% MIN - 6" SSSCO RIM 35.40 6" IE 32.00 SS-200 NEW 6" SSS CONNECTION TO EX. 8" SEWER MAIN W/ ROMAC SADDLE EX 8" SS IE 22.00± SS-202 6" SDCO #1 RIM 36.40± #" IE 32.00 SD-619 6" SDCO #2 RIM 35.80± #" IE 32.00 SD-619 6" SDCO #3 RIM 35.80± #" IE 32.00 SD-619 6" PVC SD CONNECTION TO RAINVAULT FROM DOWNSPOUT @ 2.00% MIN - RAINVAULT DETENTION VAULT 570 SF (57.0' L X 10.0' W X 6.66' D) FG 35.70± FACILITY TOP ELEV 34.30 FACILITY BOT ELEV 27.64 - RAINVAULT INFILTRATION FACILITY 560 SF (3.00' D) FG 44.08-44.91± 2" IE 442.75 DRAIN ROCK TOP ELEV 43.58 TOP RAINVAULT 42.75 BOT RAINVAULT 41.34 DRAIN ROCK BOT ELEV 40.58 - 2" SD FORCE MAIN - NOT USED - 48" SDMH STORMWATER PUMP STATION W/ VANED GRATE RIM 36.35 6" IE (NW) 33.80 OVERFLOW 18" IE (S) 27.64 2" IE (E) 33.50 SDFM SUMP 24.64 (TO BE VERIFIED BY PUMP MANUFACTURER) - 6" PVC SD EMERGENCY OVERFLOW @ 1.00% MIN - 4'X2' ROCK LINED DISPERSION PAD W/ QUARRY SPALLS IE 33.20 - (5) 1" WATER SERVICES & CONNECTIONS TO 8" CI WATER MAIN (TYP)- (5) NEW 1" WATER METERS WA-130 1" PE PIPE WATER SERVICE (FROM METER TO BUILDING W/ 14 GA. VINYL COATED WIRE TRACER TO BE GROUNDED AT BUILDING) (TYP, MEP TO CONFIRM SIZE) - WATER SERVICE POINT OF CONNECTION TO BUILDING - 15' SEWER EASEMENT (CENTERED ON EX 8" SEWER MAIN)- CB TYPE 1 RIM 35.70 6" IE (E) 31.00 SD-303 6" SSCO RIM 36.40± 6" IE 33.80 - BUILDINGS TO BE FULLY WATERPROOFED PER GEOTECHNICAL. NO FOOTING DRAINS - 6" SSSCO RIM 36.95 6" IE 31.50 - 6" IE 31.85 - NOT USED - 18" SD @ 0.00%- 24'-WIDE DRIVEWAY TR-541 9'-WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK TR-531 NOT USED - PROPOSED UGP SERVICE TO BE COORDINATED W/ SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUD (UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT) - PROPOSED COMM SERVICE TO BE COORDINATED W/ UTILITY PURVEYOR (UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT) - FUTURE UNIT LOT LINE (TYP.)- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 FI L E L O C A T I O N : Z: \ S H A R E D \ P R O J E C T S \ A C T I V E \ 2 0 2 3 \ 0 4 \ 2 3 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 - 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S \ D W G \ D R A W I N G \ 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S - C I V I L P L A N S . D W G - O R I G I N A L S H E E T S I Z E : AR C H F U L L B L E E D D ( 3 6 . 0 0 X 2 4 . 0 0 I N C H E S ) - L A S T M O D I F I E D B Y : IA N D A H L CIVIL SITE PLAN C01 1 P R O F ESSIONA L E N GINEER REGIST E R E D54904 STA T E O F WASHIN G T O N I B E N J A M N J DIDI . N S PRELIMINARY SHEET _____ OF _____ BA S E M A P / T O P O G R A P H Y P R O V I D E D B Y O T H E R S . D C G / W A T E R S H E D C A N N O T B E H E L D LI A B L E F O R A C C U R A C Y . C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L F I E L D V E R I F Y G R A D E S , U T I L I T I E S , A N D AL L O T H E R E X I S T I N G F E A T U R E S A N D C O N D I T I O N S . I F C O N D I T I O N S A R E N O T A S SH O W N A N D / O R P L A N S C A N N O T B E C O N S T R U C T E D A S S H O W N , C O N T A C T DC G / W A T E R S H E D P R I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . CALL 8112 BUSINESS DAYSBEFORE YOU DIG (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6DATE: DR A W N B Y : DE S I G N E D B Y : PR O J E C T M A N A G E R : PR I N C I P A L : NO . DA T E BY RE V I S I O N PLAN NUMBER: CH E C K E D B Y : 22 2 3 R D A V E S ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 23 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 PERMIT PLAN 9/6/2024 3 BI BI JR GS BI APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE: ________________________________ BY: ___________________________________ CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION 97 0 6 4 t h A v e N E Su i t e 3 0 0 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 1 5 P: 2 0 6 . 5 2 3 . 0 0 2 4 ww w . f a c e t n w . c o m FE D E R A L W A Y | K I R K L A N D | M O U N T V E R N O N | S E A T T L E | S P O K A N E | W H I D B E Y I S L A N D 10'5'0 10'20' SCALE: 1" = 10' 1 2 3 14 13 12 10 9 1 18 17 22 22 18 18 6 7 20 5 7 8 17 7 4 21 16 15 19 15 WATER NOTES: 1. EXISTING DOMESTIC WATER METER TO BE EXAMINED BY CONTRACTOR FOR CONDITION AND SIZE AND MAY ONLY BE REUSED IF 1" 2. UNDERGROUND WIRING TO BE DESIGNED BY ELECTRICIAN. GENERAL UTILITY NOTES: 1. ALL UTILITY SERVICES SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. 2. MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN SEWER AND STORM PIPE CROSSING IS 6". ALL CROSSINGS MEET MINIMUM SEPARATION. 3. ALL FINAL RESTORATION RESULTING FROM THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES IS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 4. MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 3' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION (ON-SITE) & 5' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION (IN ROW) BETWEEN DRY UTILITIES (GAS, POWER, ETC) AND WET UTILITIES (WATER, SEWER, AND STORM). 5. MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 10' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER LINES.18" MIN SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER LINES. 18" MIN SEPARATION SHALL BE APPLIED FOR WATER/SEWER CROSSINGS, IN WHICH WATER SHALL CROSS OVER SEWER AND SEWER SHALL BE ENCASED FOR A MINIMUM OF 10 LF ON EITHER SIDE OF CROSSING. 6. SIDE SEWER MUST MAINTAIN A 2.00% MIN SLOPE. IF PIPE SLOPE EXCEEDS 20% THE PIPE MUST BE ANCHORED. 7. UTILITY PATCHES SHALL BE COMBINED AND FULL WIDTH OR HALF WIDTH OVERLAY MAY BE REQUIRED DEPENDING ON THE EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE. WHERE UTILITY PATCHES FALL ENTIRELY WITHIN ONE TRAVEL LANE, THE OVERLAY SHALL EXTEND INTO BOTH TRAVEL LANES, A FULL WIDTH OVERLAY IS REQUIRED. 8. A SEPARATE FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR EACH UNIT. 9. PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER(S) SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS FOR INJURIES AND DAMAGE DUE TO THE OPERATION OR NON-OPERATION OF THE PUMP SYSTEM. 24.0' 24 . 0 ' 7.5' 18 1 50 . 0 ' 23 24 24 26 27 90.0' 28 30 31 32 PUMP ON/OFF FLOAT ELEVATIONS PUMP OFF 27.14 PUMP ON 28.14 ALARM 33.70 a Packet Pg. 50 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF TREE DRIPLINE (TYPICAL) FOUND TACK IN LEAD OFFSET 4.2 FT. EAST AND 0.3 FT. SOUTH OF CALC'D CORNER POSITION WM PP SAN. MANHOLE RIM = 29.91 FT. 10" DT 12" DT FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. = 47.44 FT. FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. = 65.34 FT. OIL FILL ELECTRIC METER 222 3RD AVE. S. HOUSE BLDG. BLDG. N 88°43'57" W S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 . 0 0 ' S 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " W 85 . 0 0 ' 128.00' N 88°43'57" W 128.00' GARAGE SHED N 88°43'57" W 30.00' N 88°43'57" W 30.00' N 0 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 3 " E 32 5 . 0 4 ' 85 . 0 0 ' PORCH DECK ASPHALT ASPHALT 3R D A V E . S . ASPHALTASPHALT ROCKERY TIMBER WALL TIMBER WALL BAY BLDG. CHAINLINK FENCE FALLS 0.4 FT. SOUTH OF CALC'D CORNER POSITION CHAINLINK FENCE FALLS 0.6 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION FENCE FALLS 0.4 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION FENCE FALLS 0.2 FT. SOUTH OF DEED LINE AT THIS LOCATION 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 36 " S S 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W WV FH TELE MANHOLE P P P TE L E TE L E TE L E TE L E 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 36 " S D 8" S S 8" S S I.E. = 19.96 FT. 25 25 3 0 30 3 5 35 40 40 45 45 45 45 45 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S 8" S S SD SD SD SD SD SD SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFMSS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S SS S WWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWW W W WWW WW W 10 + 2 3 10 + 5 0 11+00 11+50 12+00 BUILDING 1 SECOND FLOOR=46.7 GROUND FLOOR=36.5 BUILDING 2 GROUND FLOOR=35.9 19.05% 42.58'1.70% 20.00' 2.86% 7.00' 0.71% 7.00' 0.86% 7.00'3.88% 17.00' 4.69% 17.05' 10 . 1 2 % 12 . 0 0 ' 2. 4 0 % 12 . 0 0 ' 0. 0 0 % 12 . 0 0 ' 3. 8 2 % 12 . 0 0 ' 0. 5 1 % 29 . 5 0 ' 0. 4 9 % 28 . 4 9 ' 4.66% 30.50' 2.00% 5.00' COMM COMM UGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGPUGP 0.51% 7.51' 38 40 42 32 34 403637 38 39 41 42 43 44 33 3 5 45 4 0 3 8 3 9 4 1 4 2 43 4 4 3 7 39 41 43 4 4 4 5 36 TOC 44.17FG 44.22 FG 44.35FG 44.01FG 37.71FG 35.85 FG 35.70 FG 35.84 FG 35.94 FG 36.50 FG 36.50FG 35.90 FG 35.90 FG 37.43 FG 43.89 FG 44.55 FG 44.65FG 36.30 FG 35.90 FG 36.50 FG 44.06 FG 44.57TOC 44.55 FG 44.32 TOC 44.30 FG 34.00FG 33.90 FG 33.10 FG 33.20 FG 32.40 FG 32.50 FG 44.00± FG 44.92 FG 45.11 40 4536 3738 39 41 42 43 44 3 7 FG 35.95 3 5 3 4 3 6 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 25 30 40 50 10+23 10+30 10+40 10+50 10+60 10+70 10+80 10+90 11+00 11+10 11+20 11+30 11+40 11+50 11+60 11+70 11+80 11+90 12+00 10+23 10+30 10+40 10+50 10+60 10+70 10+80 10+90 11+00 11+10 11+20 11+30 11+40 11+50 11+60 11+70 11+80 11+90 12+00 EG 3 7 . 0 2 FG EG 3 8 . 6 7 FG 3 5 . 8 8 EG 3 8 . 5 0 FG 3 5 . 8 0 EG 3 8 . 3 6 FG 3 5 . 7 5 EG 3 8 . 1 0 FG 3 5 . 7 0 EG 3 7 . 8 2 FG 3 5 . 7 5 EG 3 7 . 4 9 FG 3 5 . 8 0 EG 3 7 . 1 1 FG 3 5 . 8 5 EG 3 9 . 5 8 FG 3 6 . 5 3 EG 4 1 . 1 7 FG 3 8 . 2 9 EG 4 4 . 3 1 FG 4 0 . 1 9 EG 4 4 . 9 3 FG 4 2 . 1 0 EG 4 4 . 9 8 FG 4 3 . 7 8 EG 4 4 . 8 0 FG 4 4 . 1 7 EG 4 4 . 6 4 FG 4 4 . 3 4 EG 4 4 . 2 5 FG 4 4 . 1 6 EG 4 4 . 8 5 FG -5 0 . 1 9 % -2.00% -2.00% 0.51%-2.00%-0.49% 19.05% 1.70% CB TYPE 1 STA 10+70.41, -1.20' LT RIM 35.73 1. 3 4 ' EG AT DRIVEWAY FL FG AT DRIVEWAY FL SO U T H P L EA S T P L 1. 4 0 ' RAINVAULT DETENTION VAULT (SEE C01) RAINVAULT INFILTRATION VAULT SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFM SDFM 2" SD FORCE MAIN STORMWATER PUMP STATION (SEE C01) PVI STA 11+50.00PVI EL 44.00K 0.58 LVC 10.00' BV C S 1 1 + 4 5 . 0 0 BV C E 4 3 . 0 5 EV C S 1 1 + 5 5 . 0 0 EV C E 4 4 . 0 9 PVI STA 11+07.41 PVI EL 35.89 K 0.81 LVC 15.00' BV C S 1 0 + 9 9 . 9 1 BV C E 3 5 . 8 5 EV C S 1 1 + 1 4 . 9 1 EV C E 3 7 . 3 2 KEY NOTES KEY DESCRIPTION DETAIL/ SHEET REPLACE EX SIDEWALK TO NEAREST JOINT AND MATCH EG - MATCH EX TOC AND FL (TYP)- EX CONTOUR (TYP)- CONCRETE RETAINING WALL - PROPOSED CONTOUR (TYP)- 1 2 3 4 5 FI L E L O C A T I O N : Z: \ S H A R E D \ P R O J E C T S \ A C T I V E \ 2 0 2 3 \ 0 4 \ 2 3 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 - 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S \ D W G \ D R A W I N G \ 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S - C I V I L P L A N S . D W G - O R I G I N A L S H E E T S I Z E : AR C H F U L L B L E E D D ( 3 6 . 0 0 X 2 4 . 0 0 I N C H E S ) - L A S T M O D I F I E D B Y : IA N D A H L DRIVEWAY GRADINGPLAN C02 2 P R O F ESSIONA L E N GINEER REGIST E R E D54904 STA T E O F WASHIN G T O N I B E N J A M N J DIDI . N S PRELIMINARY SHEET _____ OF _____ BA S E M A P / T O P O G R A P H Y P R O V I D E D B Y O T H E R S . D C G / W A T E R S H E D C A N N O T B E H E L D LI A B L E F O R A C C U R A C Y . C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L F I E L D V E R I F Y G R A D E S , U T I L I T I E S , A N D AL L O T H E R E X I S T I N G F E A T U R E S A N D C O N D I T I O N S . I F C O N D I T I O N S A R E N O T A S SH O W N A N D / O R P L A N S C A N N O T B E C O N S T R U C T E D A S S H O W N , C O N T A C T DC G / W A T E R S H E D P R I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . CALL 8112 BUSINESS DAYSBEFORE YOU DIG (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6DATE: DR A W N B Y : DE S I G N E D B Y : PR O J E C T M A N A G E R : PR I N C I P A L : NO . DA T E BY RE V I S I O N PLAN NUMBER: CH E C K E D B Y : 22 2 3 R D A V E S ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 23 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 PERMIT PLAN 9/6/2024 3 BI BI JR GS BI APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE: ________________________________ BY: ___________________________________ CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION 97 0 6 4 t h A v e N E Su i t e 3 0 0 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 1 5 P: 2 0 6 . 5 2 3 . 0 0 2 4 ww w . f a c e t n w . c o m FE D E R A L W A Y | K I R K L A N D | M O U N T V E R N O N | S E A T T L E | S P O K A N E | W H I D B E Y I S L A N D 10'5'0 10'20' SCALE: 1" = 10' DRIVEWAY GRADING PROFILE SCALE: H.: 1" = 10'; V.: 1" = 5' LEGEND: CONCRETE ASPHALT PAVER WALKWAY ROOF SURFACES, SEE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR DESCRIPTION OF DELINEATED HARD SURFACES LANDSCAPE 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 a Packet Pg. 51 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) FI L E L O C A T I O N : Z: \ S H A R E D \ P R O J E C T S \ A C T I V E \ 2 0 2 3 \ 0 4 \ 2 3 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 - 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S \ D W G \ D R A W I N G \ 2 2 2 3 R D A V E S E D M O N D S - C I V I L P L A N S . D W G - O R I G I N A L S H E E T S I Z E : AR C H F U L L B L E E D D ( 3 6 . 0 0 X 2 4 . 0 0 I N C H E S ) - L A S T M O D I F I E D B Y : IA N D A H L DETAILS C03 2 P R O F ESSIONA L E N GINEER REGIST E R E D54904 STA T E O F WASHIN G T O N I B E N J A M N J DIDI . N S PRELIMINARY SHEET _____ OF _____ BA S E M A P / T O P O G R A P H Y P R O V I D E D B Y O T H E R S . D C G / W A T E R S H E D C A N N O T B E H E L D LI A B L E F O R A C C U R A C Y . C O N T R A C T O R S H A L L F I E L D V E R I F Y G R A D E S , U T I L I T I E S , A N D AL L O T H E R E X I S T I N G F E A T U R E S A N D C O N D I T I O N S . I F C O N D I T I O N S A R E N O T A S SH O W N A N D / O R P L A N S C A N N O T B E C O N S T R U C T E D A S S H O W N , C O N T A C T DC G / W A T E R S H E D P R I O R T O C O N S T R U C T I O N . CALL 8112 BUSINESS DAYSBEFORE YOU DIG (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) A B C D E F G H A B C D E F G H 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6DATE: DR A W N B Y : DE S I G N E D B Y : PR O J E C T M A N A G E R : PR I N C I P A L : NO . DA T E BY RE V I S I O N PLAN NUMBER: CH E C K E D B Y : 22 2 3 R D A V E S ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 23 0 4 . 0 2 2 8 . 0 0 PERMIT PLAN 9/6/2024 3 BI BI JR GS BI APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE: ________________________________ BY: ___________________________________ CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION 97 0 6 4 t h A v e N E Su i t e 3 0 0 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 1 5 P: 2 0 6 . 5 2 3 . 0 0 2 4 ww w . f a c e t n w . c o m FE D E R A L W A Y | K I R K L A N D | M O U N T V E R N O N | S E A T T L E | S P O K A N E | W H I D B E Y I S L A N D STORMWATER PUMP SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL DESCRIPTION SUBMERSIBLE STORMWATER PUMP DESIGN FLOW & TDH 1.5 GPM @ 17.87' TDH (BASED ON FORCE MAIN DIAM. AND LENGTH PER PLAN DOUBLED TO ACCOUNT FOR MINOR LOSSES) MINIMUM SOLIDS HANDLING 3/4" MIN PUMP EFFICIENCY PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS OPERATING RANGE PUMP ELECTRICAL SINGLE PHASE PUMP CONTROLS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS PUMP MOUNTING & DISCHARGE PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS DISCHARGE MANIFOLD PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS FORCE MAIN & FITTINGS 2" (USED FOR TDH CALCS) CONTROL/FLOAT SPECIFICATIONS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS NOTES: 1. THESE SPECIFICATIONS ARE SCHEMATIC IN NATURE AND SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY THE SUPPLIER AND CONTRACTOR. 2. PUMP FLOATS/CONTROLS AND DISCHARGE VALVES SHALL BE FIELD TESTED AND ADJUSTED TO ACHIEVE DESIGN FLOW AND OPTIMUM PUMP CYCLE TIMES PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 3. DUPLEX PUMP STATION REQUIRED. 4. EMERGENCY ON-SITE AUTOMATIC BACKUP POWER (GENERATOR) REQUIRED. 5. PUMP TYPE (GRINDER, EJECTOR, EFFLUENT, ETC.) AND AVAILABILITY SHALL BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR THROUGH SUPPLIER PRIOR TO INSTALLING FORCE MAIN. ADDITIONALLY, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PUMP CAN UTILIZE SINGLE PHASE POWER VERSUS REQUIRING THREE PHASE POWER SOURCE. A A CPL CPL CONTROL PANEL ON PEDESTAL OR NEARBY BUILDING WALL OR MH (IF REQUIRED) CONNECT LIFT CABLE TO SS HOOK/BRACKET RIM ELEV PER PLAN SS STRAP/SUPPORT AS NECESSARY SST EXTENSION HANDLE REQUIRED FOR DISCHARGE DEPTHS 2'-0" OR GREATER FROM TOP OF BASIN SST EXTENSION BRACE REQUIRED FOR USE WITH EXTENSION HANDLE BRASS GATE VALVE FLEX COUPLING PVC BALL CHECK VALVE W/ CLEANOUT PVC UNION 3' MINIMUM 12" PVC DISCONNECT UNION AND ADAPTER/TRANSITION FITTINGS AS NECESSARY 6" CONCRETE BLOCK SS LIFT CABLE PVC FLEXPIPE INLET PIPE DIAMETER & INVERTS PER PLAN POWER/CONTROL CABLES CB, MH OR OTHER BASIN PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATION STORMWATER PUMP DUPLEX SYSTEM REQUIRED 6" CONCRETE BLOCK FLEX COUPLING FLEX COUPLING PUMP DISCHARGE FITTINGS TO CONNECT TO FORCE MAIN FORCE MAIN PER PLAN CPL STORMWATER PUMPS TO BE BARNES MODEL BP314 OR APPROVED EQUAL PUMP GENERAL NOTES: 1. PUMPS SHALL BE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR THE APPLICABLE USE (E.G., DRAINAGE DISCHARGES OR WASTEWATER DISCHARGES) USING THE PUMP MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED OPERATING GUIDELINES. 2. NO MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY SHALL BE CONNECTED TO ANY PUMP SYSTEM, INCLUDING THE FORCE-LINE. 3. A DUPLEX PUMP SYSTEM IS REQUIRED FOR MULTI-UNIT BUILDINGS AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS. 4. PROJECTS WHICH PROPOSE PUMP SYSTEMS AND ARE LOCATED WITHIN A DESIGNATED GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREA MAY BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL SIDE SEWER AND GEOTECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS PER CITY OF EDMONDS. 5. THE DISCHARGE PIPE (FORCE-LINE) SHALL HAVE A NON-CORROSIVE CHECK-VALVE, A “QUICK-RELEASE” CONNECTOR/FITTING, AND A NON-CORROSIVE GATE-VALVE TO FACILITATE PUMP REMOVAL. THE PIPE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM INSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO-INCHES FOR INJECTOR PUMPS, ONE-AND-ONE QUARTER-INCHES FOR GRINDER PUMPS, OR THREE-INCHES FOR DUPLEX PUMP SYSTEMS, OR PER MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS. THE DISCHARGE FORCE LINE SHALL BE PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR SCHEDULE 80 OR DUCTILE IRON OR AS APPROVED BY THE SITE INSPECTOR. 6. FORCE-LINE SECTIONS OF PIPE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE “PIG PORTS” FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO CONDITIONS: A. A MAXIMUM OF 100 FOOT INTERVALS; AND B. WHEREVER FITTING BENDS TOTAL 135°. 7. THE PUMP SHALL BE INSTALLED IN A CHAMBER THAT IS READILY SERVICEABLE. THE TANK SHALL BE MADE OF NON-POROUS, NON-CORROSIVE, STRUCTURALLY SOUND MATERIAL SUCH AS PLASTIC, FIBERGLASS, STAINLESS STEEL, OR CONCRETE. IF A CONCRETE TANK IS USED, A FIBERGLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC OF POLYURETHANE HYBRID POLYMER RESIN OR EQUIVALENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE CONCRETE CHAMBER. THE LINER MAY BE CAST INTEGRAL WITH THE PRECASTING OF THE MAINTENANCE HOLE OR FIELD ASSEMBLED AND SEALED IN THE PRECAST CONCRETE SECTIONS. 8. PUMP SYSTEMS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED TO PROVIDE EASY ACCESS FROM THE GROUND SURFACE TO ALL MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL DEVICES. 9. AN EXTERNAL AUDIBLE ALARM SYSTEM IS REQUIRED FOR THE HIGH-WATER LEVEL INDICATOR AND SYSTEM FAILURE. 10. AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR AN ELECTRICAL HOOKUP OF A PUMP IF A NEW CIRCUIT IS REQUIRED FOR THE PUMP. . NTS DUPLEX PUMP STATION AC03 a Packet Pg. 52 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Date: October 17, 2024 To: Tristan Sewell, Planning Division From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Division Subject: PLN2023-0071 –Design Review Edmonds 222 – 222 3rd Ave S Engineering has reviewed the subject application and found the information provided is consistent with Title 18 Edmonds Community Development Code & Engineering standards. Compliance with Engineering codes and construction standards will be reviewed with the building permit application for development of the site. Approval of the design review phase of the project does not constitute approval of the improvements as shown on the submitted plans. The following summarizes the engineering division design review analysis for the subject project. 1. The subject development is required to provide complete frontage improvements per City standards and ADA requirements. A new sidewalk with street trees will be installed along the property frontage. 2. Water and Sewer Availability Certificates were completed indicating both water and sewer systems are available and able to serve the proposed development. Specific development requirements will be determined with future building permit. 3. A preliminary transportation impact analysis was submitted. A complete fee mitigation compliance review will be completed with future building permit. 4. The project design includes a driveway slope greater than the standard limit of 14%. The applicant submitted a slope waiver request, consistent with ECDC 18.80.060.D, to allow for up to a 20% slope, which is the maximum allowed by code. This request has preliminarily been approved by Engineering, Fire and Police. Staff will continue to work with the applicant during review of the future building permit to minimize the slope as much as possible. 5. The stormwater management system will need to comply with weight and point load ratings as required by the Fire Department. 6. A preliminary stormwater plan has been submitted to the City to confirm project feasibility. Stormwater management shall be provided consistent with Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 18.30 and the 2019 DOE Stormwater Manual. Refer to Stormwater Addendum, Appendices and Checklists for additional information. 7. The trash hauler has indicated staging of trash bins within the parking lane of 3rd Ave S is acceptable on pick-up day; however, this will need to be reviewed further during the building permit phase of the project so impacts to on-street parking are minimized. Thank you. MEMORANDUM a Packet Pg. 53 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) City of Edmonds Department of Fire Prevention Page 1 of 2 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Date: 11-03-2023 Prepared by: Chris Burt These comments are based on preliminary project review only and subject to change. An actual plan review will occur after a building permit has been submitted. Project Name: Edmonds 222 Townhomes Plan Number: PLN2023-0071 Location: 222 3rd Ave S Proposed Occupancy Group: Residential (Town homes) PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ☒ Indicate that the correct address and suite designations will be posted on the building(s). (Ref: IFC Section 505) ☒ A fire lane is required. See fire lane handout and make all necessary notations on the plans. Buildings greater than 30’ require a 26’ fire lane. Buildings less than 30’ require 20’ fire lanes. (Ref. SCF Fire apparatus access road standard, IFC Section 503) See comments noted below. ☒ An approved fire sprinkler system is required. This system must meet the requirements of NFPA 13D. See ECDC 19.25.035 ☒ Deferred Submittals Required ☒ NFPA 13D Fire Sprinkler Systems FIRE COMMENTS: 1. A fire lane is required for the north drive isle, that runs east and west from 3rd Ave N. “FIRE LANE NO PARKING” signs would be required on both sides of the drive isle. 2. NFPA 13D sprinkler systems are required for each townhome unit. 5 separate permits are required, 1 for each unit. 3. Include a fire service civil plan when submitting civil plans. This plan should include the fire apparatus access road width, grades, turning radius, FIRE LANE - NO PARKING sign locations, water line placement. a Packet Pg. 54 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) City of Edmonds Department of Fire Prevention Page 2 of 2 South County Fire Standards link Fire Prevention Standards | South County Fire (southsnofire.org) NOTE: All required fire hydrants, water supplies, and fire department access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to any construction, in accordance with Sections 501.4 and Chapter 14 of the 2018 International Fire Code. Standpipes shall be installed and made serviceable as required by chapter 905 of the 2018 International Fire Code. Disclaimer: These comments are intended to assist you with designing your proposal prior to submitting it for permitting. They are intended to identify any “fatal flaws” with your proposal as well as aspects of your proposal that require clarification or further analysis. They are based on a brief, informal review of the plans and other information (if any) that were submitted to schedule your pre- development meeting. However, these comments are not based on a complete review of your proposal and they are not intended to identify all code-compliance issues. The complete review will occur following submission of your complete application, and additional concerns, issues or required revisions may be identified at that time. Chris Burt Deputy Fire Marshal Fire Prevention Services 12425 Meridian Ave S Everett Wa 98208 Cell: 425-327-5800 a Packet Pg. 55 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION Page 1 of 1 July 23, 2024 Jacob Young, Citizen Design Via email: jyoung@collaborateiveco.com SUBJECT: NOTICE OF COMPLETENESS FOR YOUR DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION LOCATED AT 222 3RD AVE. S FILE NO. PLN2023-0071 Dear Mr. Young: Thank you for submitting additional information regarding your general design review application located at 222 3rd Ave. S on July 5th, 2024. Your application (File No. PLN2023- 0071) is now considered complete pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.02.003(E). Please accept this letter as notice that the application meets the procedural submission requirements and therefore is complete as of July 20th, 2024, pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003(A). The City will issue a Notice of Application pursuant to ECDC 20.03.002 within two weeks and request comments from adjacent property owners and taxpayers. The Notice will also be published in The Everett Herald, posted at City Hall and the Public Safety Building, and available on the City’s website. I will also install a small blue project notification sign onsite. Comments will be accepted for fourteen days from the date the Notice is published (ECDC 20.03.002(C)(5)). Although staff determined that the application meets the procedural submission requirements and is therefore complete, additional information may be needed as review of the application continues (ECDC 20.02.003(C)). Staff will contact you if additional information is necessary. I will be the main staff contact for your application. If you have questions at any point during the review process, you may reach me at 425-771-0220 or via email at tristan.sewell@edmondswa.gov. Sincerely, Tristan Sewell Planner Cc: File No. PLN2023-0071 a Packet Pg. 56 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION AND COMMENT PERIOD NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young DATE OF APPLICATION: October 16, 2023 DATE OF COMPLETENESS: July 20, 2024 DATE OF NOTICE: August 2, 2024 FILE NO.: PLN2023-0071 PROJECT LOCATION: 222 3rd Ave. S PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Application for General Design Review for five townhouses. The site is zoned Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5) REQUESTED PERMIT: Design Review by Architectural Design Board – Type III-A. Information on this application can be viewed at the City of Edmonds Planning & Development Dept., 121 5th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA 98020, or on the City’s Online Permits website via the QR code above. Search for PLN2023-0071. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Associated building permits REQUIRED STUDIES: TBD EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CRA2022-0130 DOCUMENTS: COMMENT PERIOD: Comments are due by August 16, 2024, at 4:30 pm. Any person has the right to comment on this application during the 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 pre-decision hearing, if any, or, if no open record pre-decision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. CITY CONTACT: Tristan Sewell, Planner (425) 771-0220, Tristan.Sewell@EdmondsWA.gov PUBLISH: August 2, 2024 a Packet Pg. 57 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 2,478 206.5 © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet Notes 222 3rd Ave. S General Design Review Legend This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 138.680 1:1,664 PLN2023-0071 277.4 ReZones PRD RoW Zoning RS-6 RS-8 RS-10 RS-12 RSW-12 RS-20 RS-MP RM-3 RM-2.4 RM-1.5 RM-EW BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 OR WMU BP BN FVMU BC BC-EW CG CW MP1 MP2 a Packet Pg. 58 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No.: File No.: PLN2024-0071 Applicant: Jacob Young General Design Review DECLARATION OF MAILING On the 2nd day of August 2024, the attached Application for General Design Review was mailed by the City as prescribed by Ordinance to property owners within 300 feet of the site that is the subject of this application. I, Heather Lakefish, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 2nd day of August 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. a Packet Pg. 59 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No.: PLN2024-0071 Applicant: Jacob Young General Design Review DECLARATION OF POSTING On the 2nd day of August 2024, the attached Notice of Application and Request for Public Comment was posted at the subject property, Civic Hall, Library and Public Safety buildings. I, Tristan Sewell, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 5th day of September 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: a Packet Pg. 60 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young DATE OF APPLICATION: October 13, 2023 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: December 9, 2024 DATE OF NOTICE: November 22, 2024 FILE NO.: PLN2023-0071 PROJECT LOCATION: 222 3rd Ave. S PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Application for general design review of five multifamily residences per Chapter 20.10 ECDC. The site is zoned Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5). REQUESTED PERMIT: Design Review – Type III-A decision by the Architectural Design Board. Reviewed under the criteria of ECDC 20.11.030. View application materials on the City’s website by using the QR code above or at www.EdmondsWA.gov/DevelopmentNotices, or in person at the Planning & Development Dept., 121 5th Ave. N. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Associated building permits EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CRA2022-0130 DOCUMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING: 6 pm on Monday, December 9, 2024 Brackett Room, City Hall, 121 5th Ave. N Or join the Zoom meeting at: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWUlwM09PZ1k1MHN2e WM1YXphZz09 Or via phone by dialing (253) 205-0468 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 CITY CONTACT: Tristan Sewell, Planner (425) 771-0220 Tristan.Sewell@EdmondsWA.gov PUBLISH: November 22, 2024 a Packet Pg. 61 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) 2,478 206.5 © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet Notes 222 3rd Ave. S General Design Review Legend This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 138.680 1:1,664 PLN2023-0071 277.4 ReZones PRD RoW Zoning RS-6 RS-8 RS-10 RS-12 RSW-12 RS-20 RS-MP RM-3 RM-2.4 RM-1.5 RM-EW BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 OR WMU BP BN FVMU BC BC-EW CG CW MP1 MP2 a Packet Pg. 62 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) File No.: PLN2024-0071 Applicant: Jacob Young General Design Review DECLARATION OF POSTING On the 22nd day of November 2024, the attached Notice of Application and Request for Public Comment was posted at the subject property, Civic Hall, Library and Public Safety buildings. I, Tristan Sewell, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 22nd day of November 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: a Packet Pg. 63 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Fil e N o .: Fil e N o .: P L N 2 0 2 4 -0 07 1 A p p li c a n t: Ja c o b Y o u n g N o tice o f P u b li c H e a rin g DECLARATION OF MAILING On the 22nd day of November 2024, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed by the City as prescribed by Ordinance to property owners within 300 feet of the site that is the subject of this application. I, Heather Lakefish, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 22nd day of November 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. a Packet Pg. 64 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Legal Invoice Date: 11/22/2024 Sound Publishing, Inc. Unit Attn: AIR PO Box 930 Everett WA 98206-0930 Everett Daily Herald Bill To: City of Edmonds Development Services Attn Debbie Rothfus 121 - 5th Ave N Edmonds WA 98020-3145 Customer Account #: 86031703 Legal Description: EDH1005598 Legal Description: City Applications Desc: PLN2023-007 l NOTICE Ordered By: MICHELLE MARTIN Issues Ordered: 1 Legal#: EDH1005598 Ad Cost: $ 55.04 Published: Everett Daily Herald Start Date: 11/22/2024 End Date: 11/22/2024 REC EIVE[~ DEC 02 2024 DEVELOP11;tNT SERVICES COuN TER Due:$ 55.04 Please return this with payment. Questions? Call 1-800-485-4920 City of Edmonds Development Services Attn Debbie Rothfus 121 - 5th Ave N Edmonds WA 98020-3145 Account#: 86031703 Invoice#: EDH1005598 Due:$ 55.04 a Packet Pg. 65 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) E v e r e t t D a il y H er a l d A ffi d a v i t o f P u bli c a t i o n State of Washington } County of Snohomish } ss Michael Gates 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 194 I, 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 EDH1005598 PLN2023-0071 NOTICE 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 11/22/2024 and ending on 11/22/2024 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The amount $55.04. publication is Subscribed and sworn before me on this 't.,, ?.xv).._ day of V\..o v'~ --ic/1A . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Cily of Edm onds Developm ent Serv ices I 86031703 MICHELLE M ARTI N a Packet Pg. 66 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Classified Proof CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NAME OF APPLICANT: Jacob Young DATE OF APPLICATION: October 13, 2023 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: December 9, 2024 DATE OF NOTICE: f'lovember 22, 2024 FILE NO.: PLN2023-0071 PROJECT LOCATION: 222 3rd Ave. S PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Application for general design review or five multifamily resldences per Chapter 20.10 ECDC. The ~~dt~~n;~tw:i~tTi~ Ri:!1ge;t~~:f.':!:~5fype Ill-A decision by the Archilectural Design Board. Reviewed under the criteria of ECDC 20.11.030. View appllcotlon materials on the City's website by using the OR . code above or at www.EQmondsWA.gov/OevelopmentNotlces, or In person at the Planning & Development [)ept., 121 5th Ave. N. ~J~~~N~E~UJrlc\lN~Eif ~~E Associated ~u~t;i:1:.gr~t~ DOCUMENTS: PUBLIC HEARING: 6 pm on Monday, December 9, 2024 Brackett Room, cnv Hall, 121 5th Ave. N go~'zoo~1~sw~itsgf;s09~2?~~~~'lrfdP~01wJ6tf1ekdfMo~~~:•- WM tYXphZZ09 Or via phone by dialing (253) 205-0468 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 CITY CONTACT: Tristan Sewell, Planner ~1s~l~.~~~~~~EdmondsWA.gov Published: November 22, 2024. EDH1005598 Proofed by Pospical, Randie, 11/22/2024 08:36:30 am Page:2 a Packet Pg. 67 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) From:Laurel Anderson To:Sewell, Tristan Subject:Disappointed Date:Friday, August 16, 2024 4:14:28 PM You don't often get email from anderson.l.laurel@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hello, Thanks for chatting & educating me on “design review” comment periods. Although my comments don’t pertain to the particular “design” of the townhouses, I will be affected for a number of reasons in which I feel compelled to share. Feel free to share my comments with pertinent parties. I am disappointed in this recent development. I live directly across the street & my mountain and partial ocean view will no longer be a view after construction is complete. This diminishes my property value and quality of life, as I deeply love where I live. I also work from home a majority of the time, and do not have a local office I can go to, and construction noises for likely over a year will not work for me. I am now in a position where I may be forced out of my home. I also have concerns about parking, as there is already limited street parking available. I am extremely disappointed by this project and will no doubt lose my quality of life, the peace and tranquillity that comes from living in Edmonds, and will suffer financially. I was crushed to receive the communication on this new development. Thank you. - Laurel Anderson 206.779.5479 a Packet Pg. 68 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) a Packet Pg. 69 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) From:Gary Neuman To:Sewell, Tristan Cc:JOANNE NEUMAN; Doug Nelson; Ellie Lang; Kelly Humann; BARBARA POMEROY Subject:Comment on CRA2022-0130 Date:Saturday, August 31, 2024 12:46:35 PM You don't often get email from garyneuman@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hello Tristan, My wife and I were traveling in Africa for several weeks and returned to find the Notice of Development which is of great concern to us. We live at 229 3rd Ave S, Apt 202 which is across the street from the proposed development. We currently have a direct line of sight to the Puget Sound from our windows and balcony. We purchased this property for our home mostly due to the view and location.The proposed development will totally obscure our view so we are very much against this project as designed. Again, we were away for the short comment period indicated on the notice and upon return struggled to find the details of the development plans. I finally tried the QR code which took me to the list of items and then to the actual plans for 222 3rd Ave S. I find that the notice period which corresponds directly with summer vacation times is quite unfair. The notice was published on 8/2 (not sure when we actually received it as we were away) and a comment period bending 8/16. Two weeks during the summer is insufficient for people to comment. This project will benefit Jacob Young at my expense as my view and property value will be directly impacted. I do not think that the City of Edmonds wants to harm one property owner for the benefit of another so I demand that this project be declined or severely modified so as not to eliminate my view. I am copying my neighbors who may have missed the details of this notice as they too will be impacted and their property value reduced. I demand to have my say and look for your earliest reply. I will also be contacting Mike Rosen to discuss this unfair practice. Thanks Gary Neuman 925-980-0423 a Packet Pg. 70 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) From:linda norton To:Sewell, Tristan Subject:Comment on PLN2023-0071 Design Review Date:Friday, August 16, 2024 11:20:38 AM You don't often get email from nortonlinda@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear Planning Department, As a next-door neighbor of many years, I have loved this home and property at 222 3rd Avenue South. When I walk by it is a reminder of "home" and "country" that I treasure. I will miss the forsythia blooms each spring and the plum tree which hangs over the fence and provides a taste for the neighbors each summer. Do you know that the birds flock to the tree at the NE of the property and clear it of berries each fall? Occasionally, a bunny hops by. All this is to say I will mourn one of Edmonds' most charming properties, one which is worthy of preserving. As this proposed project heads to review, here are some concerns: 111 The setback does not appear to be in line with the neighboring properties, giving an intrusive feel to the pedestrians walking by. 111 There is a serious concern about the proposed lighting along walkways and the parking lot area, bright lights are not welcome in the middle of the night. 111 Even more, the overall design looks plain, one might say office/industrial, without charm or appeal. Just look at most of the buildings along this stretch and you'll see what I mean. Sincerely, Linda Norton and Dennis Trapp 224 3rd Ave S, Apt 201 Edmonds, WA 98020 a Packet Pg. 71 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) From:Pam Tauer To:Sewell, Tristan Subject:PLN2023-0071 - Public Comment Date:Tuesday, August 6, 2024 12:03:17 PM Tristan, I am a neighbor of 222 3rd Ave S with windows facing south overlooking this property. I have performed an initial review of the application for General Design Review and have the following comments: 1. Editorial statement - the house at 222 3rd Ave S was built in 1901 by one of the founding Edmonds families. It is a shame that it cannot be preserved in some way but I understand that is not possible. 2. The townhomes submitted are attractive and I appreciate that only 5 will be built. 3. There is a beloved and prolific 100+ year old cherry tree that is to be removed at the Northeast corner on 3rd Ave. As a member of the climate protection committee I would like to appeal that removal and ask that the developmenter preserves it. 4. There is a lot of pavement associated with the development. Is there a way to reduce and/or require/recommend that the pavement be permeable? I believe more plantings and larger ones are warranted if the existing design (pavement) is accepted. I am still reviewing and may comment again. In general, I understand the need for more multi-family units although these will be very high-end and pricey. Could you briefly outline the permitting steps after the General Design review approval. I am curious if we are 1, 3, or 5 years out from building. Thank you, Tristan. Pam Tauer a Packet Pg. 72 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) From:ztribe@comcast.net To:Sewell, Tristan; vienna zigalla Subject:Design review Comment_222 3rd Ave so. PLN2023_0071 Date:Friday, August 16, 2024 1:37:31 PM You don't often get email from ztribe@comcast.net. Learn why this is important Edmonds planning Department Tristan Sewell Design Review Architectural Design Board Comments to address: The number of buildings proposed overwhelms the lot with concrete. The hardscape vs landscape plan is not balanced for the environment or the neighborhood. A one building design would continue the historical character of the block and maintain a similar curb appeal in this older established neighborhood. Compare the site development and design of the adjacent buildings; 224 and 210 3rd Ave south. Both have a similar number of units. Both include outdoor parking spaces in the back of the buildings along with garages, view decks and dark sky compliant lighting. In addition, green spaces in the front, back and side areas. The proposed grading/site development plan and building design does not allow conventional access to the lower area for sewer maintenance, emergency services, waste management, guest parking, or an opportunity to achieve wheelchair accessibility standards. The turning radius of the motor court for 10 cars creates excess carbon monoxide fumes in an already tightly enclosed area. An unhealthy impact to the current residents living nearby and unbeknownst by the purchasers. The roof design does not fit the character of the street or the current height restrictions. (without the slope) The seagull droppings on the black metal roof color will be an eyesore year-round. In addition, the white vinyl color will reflect sunlight and create glare. Note the exterior design inside the motor court area. A lot of white shiny vinyl. Lastly, the impact of cars exiting building 224 safely, mandates a study of pedestrian safety. a Packet Pg. 73 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Please note the attached photo for reference. Please address meeting or exceeding ADA compliance. "One in four Americans lives with some sort of disability" Thank you in advance for your careful attention to an established community members concern. Vienna Zigalla 224 3rd Ave So. #102 Edmonds,Wa 98020 a Packet Pg. 74 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the following project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Application for general design review of two townhomes containing five dwelling units. The site is zoned Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5). General design review is Type III-A decision by the Architectural Design Board because the applicant proposed more than four dwelling units. PROJECT PROPONENT: Jacob Young DATE DNS ISSUED: November 22, 2024 PROJECT LOCATION: 222 3rd Avenue South SEPA COMMENTS DUE: December 10, 2024 APPEAL PERIOD: You may appeal this determination by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required appeal fee no later than December 17, 2024) by 4:30 PM. SEPA MATERIALS: Application materials are available at: www.edmondswa.gov/developmentnotices. Search for file number PLN2023-0071. These materials are also available for viewing at the Planning Division, located on the second floor of Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds, WA 98020. CITY CONTACT: Tristan Sewell, Planner tristan.sewell@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 x1332 PUBLISH: November 26, 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF SEPA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE a Packet Pg. 75 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Page 1 of 2 SEPA DNS PLN2023-0071 11/22/24.SEPA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Application for general design review of two townhomes containing five dwelling units. The site is zoned Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5). General design review is Type III-A decision by the Architectural Design Board because the applicant proposed more than four dwelling units. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: 222 3rd Avenue South 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. X This DNS is issued under WAC 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 December 9, 2024. Project Planner: Tristan Sewell, Planner Responsible Official: Mike Clugston, AICP, Acting Planning Manager Contact Information: City of Edmonds | 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 | 425-771-0220 Date: November 22, 2024 Signature: XX You may appeal this determination to Tristan Sewell, Planner, at 121 5th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the appeal with the required appeal fee no later than December 16, 2024. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Mike Clugston to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on November 22, 2024, at City Hall, the Edmonds Public Safety Building, and Edmonds Public Library. Published in the Everett Herald. Uploaded to the Department of Ecology SAW. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies below. The SEPA Checklist, DNS, and associated documents can be obtained online at: https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public_involvement/public_notices by searching for permit number PLN2024-0002, and by emailing the project planner (michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov), or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220. CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 a Packet Pg. 76 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Page 2 of 2 SEPA DNS PLN2023-0071 11/22/24.SEPA Distribution List: This DNS and SEPA checklist were distributed to the following: ☒ Applicant ☒ Dept. of Ecology ☐ City of Everett ☐ 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 ☒ Puget Sound Energy ☒ Dept. of Fish & Wildlife ☒ Snohomish PUD ☐ Dept. of Health – Drinking Water ☒ Snohomish Co. Public Works ☒ Olympic View Water & Sewer ☒ 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 ☐ Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ☐ King County - Transit ☒ South County Fire ☐ Puget Sound Regional Council ☐ King County – Environ. Planning ☐ Swedish Hospital ☐ Puget Sound Partnership ☒ Community Transit ☒ Tulalip Tribe ☐ Other pc: File No. PLN2023-0071 SEPA Notebook a Packet Pg. 77 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) #P71 CITY OF EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Revised on 9/16/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 1 of 25 Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environment al impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepare d for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide informat ion to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from th e 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 an swer, 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 thes e 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 differen t 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) whi ch 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: Edmonds 222 Townhouses 2.Name of applicant: Citizen Design 3.Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 10 Dravus Street, Seattle, WA 98109 Attn: Jacob Young 206.535.7908 4.Date checklist prepared: October 28, 2022 5.Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds RECEIVED Oct 13 2023 CITY OF EDMONDS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PLN2023-0071 a Packet Pg. 78 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 25 6.Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction is expected to begin in the summer of 2023 and continue for approximately 12-18 months. No phasing is planned for this project. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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 geotechnical and soil infiltration study was performed by PanGeo in October 2022. A critical areas designatio n [CRA 2022-0130] was prepared by the City of Edmonds in September 2022. (STAFF COMMENTS) 9.Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other propos als directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None pending. (STAFF COMMENTS) Design review by the Architectural Design Board scheduled for December 9, 2024. Subsequent Building permit applications therefore outstanding. Construction date no longer accurate, but duration likely remains unaffected. a Packet Pg. 79 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 3 of 25 10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. In addition to design review and environmental review, the project will require several building permits, a demolition permit, a short plat and a right-of-way construction permit. (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 ce rtain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The project consists of five townhouses in two buildings. All townhouses are to be t hree stories in height with attached, two-car garages. Two townhouses are to contain 2029± sf above-grade floor area [AGLA] and 500± sf garage area each, and three townhouses are to contain 1737± sf AGLA and 511± sf garage area each. In addition to the townhouses themselves, the project includes a paved motor court, a driveway, walkways, onsite utilities including stormwater detention, and landscaping. See following sections for details. (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 is located at 222 3rd Avenue S. This is in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 23, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, Willamette Meridian. The subject parcel’s legal description is as follows. See attached plan sets for maps. That portion of the SE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Sec. 23, T. 27N, R. 3E, W.M., described as follows: Beginning at a point 150 feet south of the SW corner of Dayton and Third Streets in the City of Edmonds; Thence south along the west line of Third Street for 85 feet; Thence west 128 feet; Thence north 85 feet; Thence east 128 feet to the point of beginning. (STAFF COMMENTS) Necessity and anticipation of a short plat for this multifamily residential development is unclear. a Packet Pg. 80 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 4 of 25 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: As described by the project geotechnical engineer, “[t]he existing grade gently slopes down from about Elevation 45 in the east end of the site, to about Elevation 32 in the west end for an overall grade change of approximately 13 feet across the 128-foot-long site.” [Xue, 2022, p. 1] (STAFF COMMENTS) b.What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The average grade of the site is approximately 10%. Several retaining walls are present on the site, but no steep slopes have been observed. Steep slopes identified by the city’s critical areas designation appear to be associated with existing retaining walls. (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 t hem and note any agricultural land of long term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The site is underlain by approximately 2-3 feet of fill underlain by medium dense to very dense, silty sand. This has been interpreted as Pre-Fraser glacial till deposits by the project geotechnical engineer. [Xue, 2022, p. 5] (STAFF COMMENTS) d.Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicin ity? If so, describe. No. Critical areas determination (CRA2022-0130) a Packet Pg. 81 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 5 of 25 (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. Approximately 100 yards of temporary excavation are anticipated to reach proposed foundations. Approximately 300 yards of fill are expected to be needed, and the 100 yards of excavation may be reused for this purpose. If not reused onsite, soils exported from the subject will be disposed of outside city limits. (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, no atypical erosion is expected as part of this small- scale project on gentle slopes. (STAFF COMMENTS) g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 76% [8295 sf]. (STAFF COMMENTS) h.Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Best management practices [BMPs] will be employed both during and after construction. Reference civil sheets C2.0-C4.1 for details. (STAFF COMMENTS) 2.AIR a.What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, an d industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Erosion control measures compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed with the Building permits by the Engineering division. Erosion control measures compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed with the Building permits by the Engineering division. a Packet Pg. 82 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 6 of 25 Typical construction emissions, such as dust and engine exhaust, are anticipated during the build phase. No significant emissions are anticipated after completion of the project. (STAFF COMMENTS) b.Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known at present. City officials have indicated that the equipment yard to the west of the subject may be redeveloped as a treatment plant in the future. This future expansion is not included in the city’s 2022-2027 or 2023-2028 capital improvements plans, suggesting that it is to be considered a potential long-term impact rather than to be anticipated in the short term. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the air, if any: Typical construction practices, such as watering exposed earth to reduce dust, will be employed at the discretion of the general contractor. No measures are proposed after the completion of construction. (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 name s. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. (STAFF COMMENTS) (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. No. (STAFF COMMENTS) a Packet Pg. 83 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 7 of 25 (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 surfa ce waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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 a Packet Pg. 84 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 8 of 25 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 ho uses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Water Runoff (including storm water): (1)Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collec tion and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow int o other waters? If so, describe. Runoff will be generated by the proposed structures and pavement. It will be collected by catch basins and drains, and the collected water will be conveyed to the public storm main. See civil sheet s C3.0-C4.1 for details. (STAFF COMMENTS) (2)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally de scribe. Not anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) Stormwater management measures compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed further with the Building permits by the Engineering division. Stormwater management measures compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed further with the Building permits by the Engineering division. a Packet Pg. 85 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 9 of 25 (3)Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. The natural grade directs runoff to the west, and the proposed conveyances will route it to the storm drain to the east. This is necessitated by site constraints including topography and the lack of public stormwater infrastructure to the west. Refer to the attached preliminary stormwater engineering report for details. (STAFF COMMENTS) d.Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The project will collect runoff and convey it to the public storm main. While extensive subgrade dewatering is not anticipated, footing drains will be installed and routed to the public storm main. (STAFF COMMENTS) 4.Plants a.Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: Species unknown ________________________________ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: ___________________________________________________ X shrubs Species unknown _______________________________________________________________ X grass Lawn _________________________________________________________________________ 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) Stormwater management measures compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed further with the Building permits by the Engineering division. Stormwater management measures and erosion control compliant with Title 18 ECDC required. To be reviewed further with the Building permits by the Engineering division. Trees identified as cherries (Prunus sp.) in tree retention and protection plan. a Packet Pg. 86 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 10 of 25 b.What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The site is to be fully cleared, including both significant trees. (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: The perimeter of the site will be landscaped at the close of construction. This will include several new trees, shrubs and groundcover plantings. Specials may include Serbian spruce, maple, lavender, hairy manzanita and vibernum as shown on the preliminary landscape plan. Final species selections will be made at a later date. (STAFF COMMENTS) e.List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known. (STAFF COMMENTS) Majority of required replacement trees to be native species. Presently proposed to include vine maple and western red cedar. All plantings must be compatible with Edmonds' climate. a Packet Pg. 87 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 11 of 25 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: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ____________________________________________________ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: _______________________________________________________ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: ________________________________________________ None known. (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. Unknown. (STAFF COMMENTS) d.Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. Typical urban fauna anticipated, especially birds and mammals. No fish. a Packet Pg. 88 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 12 of 25 (STAFF COMMENTS) e.List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known. (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. Electric energy will be used for space conditioning, lighting and other domestic uses. Natural gas may be used for cooking and water heating, and this decision will be finalized during review of the project ’s building permits. (STAFF COMMENTS) b.Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This small-scale project is not expected to have a significant impact on the northerly neighbor ’s solar access. (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 project will be designed in accordance with current Washington State Energy Code, which requires a variety of energy conservation measures. The final measures used will be selected at a later date. a Packet Pg. 89 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 13 of 25 (STAFF COMMENTS) 7.Environmental Health a.Are there any environmental health hazards, including ex posure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. No environmental health hazards are expected from this residential project. (STAFF COMMENTS) (1)Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. An existing underground oil tank is present on the subject. It [and any contaminated soil] will be removed during excavation for the project. (STAFF COMMENTS) (2)Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project devel opment and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None known. (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. None anticipated, except in household quantities. a Packet Pg. 90 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 14 of 25 (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: None proposed. (STAFF COMMENTS) b.Noise (1)What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The westerly abutting parcel is developed with what appears to be a heavy equipment garage . Some traffic noise is anticipated from 3rd Avenue S and Dayton Street. (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 hour’s noise would come from the site. Typical construction noise is anticipated during the construction phase. No significant noise generation is expected from this residential project post-occupancy. a Packet Pg. 91 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 15 of 25 (STAFF COMMENTS) (3)Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction activities will be limited to city-standard working hours and days. No noise controls are proposed after the completion of construction. (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 subject abuts residential condomiums to the north and south. The westerly abutting parcel is developed with an office building [currently occupied by ArtWorks Edmonds] and what appear s to be a heavy equipment garage. Parcels on the opposite side of 3rd Avenue S are developed with multifamily residential structures. The proposal is not expected to affect these adjacent uses. (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? No. (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 applicatio n of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: a Packet Pg. 92 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 16 of 25 No. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Describe any structures on the site. The subject is currently developed with a single-family residence originally built in 1906. A storage shed is located in the subject’s southwest corner. (STAFF COMMENTS) d.Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? All existing structures on the site are to be demolished. (STAFF COMMENTS) e.What is the current zoning classification of the site? RM-1.5 (STAFF COMMENTS) f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Multifamily – High Density (STAFF COMMENTS) a Packet Pg. 93 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 17 of 25 g.If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site? Not applicable. (STAFF COMMENTS) h.Has any part of the site been classified critical area by the city? If so, specify. Portions of the site were designated as erosion hazard areas under CRA2022-0130, specifically those exceeding 15% grade. However, the project geotechnical engineer anticipates that slopes as steep as 2H:1V will be stable. [Xue, 2022, p. 12] No slope stability issues are anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) i.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 15 persons. (STAFF COMMENTS) j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None, the subject parcel is presently vacant. (STAFF COMMENTS) k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None proposed. The subject parcel is presently vacant. (STAFF COMMENTS) a Packet Pg. 94 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 18 of 25 l.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed development is permitted outright by current zoning and conforms to the type of development anticipated by the comprehesive plan designation. Most nearby parcels are developed with various forms of multifamily housing, and the proposal fits well within the existing land use context. (STAFF COMMENTS) m.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: None proposed. (STAFF COMMENTS) 9.Housing a.Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low -income housing. Five units of middle-income housing are proposed. (STAFF COMMENTS) b.Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low -income housing. One unit of high-income housing will be eliminated. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None proposed. a Packet Pg. 95 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 19 of 25 (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 tallest structures are to be 30 ft tall. Primary exterior materials include brick veneer, vertical lap siding and metal panel roofing. (STAFF COMMENTS) b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Due to the sloping site and relatively low structures, the effect of the project on local views is expected to be minimal. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The project will undergo design review. (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? This residential project is not expected to produce substantial glare. Interior lights will be visible through windows, particularly in the evening hours. Complies with RM zone height limit. No unanticipated or impermissible obstruction. a Packet Pg. 96 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 20 of 25 (STAFF COMMENTS) b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Exterior lighting will be kept to the minimum necessary to create a safe and welcoming environment, and light from vehicle headlights will be mitigated by placing the motor court between the two blocks of townhouses. Landscaping will also be used along the southerly property line to mitigate headlight spillover to the neighboring site. (STAFF COMMENTS) 12.Recreation a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The Edmonds Marsh natural area is located approximately ¼ mile to the southwest, and the downtown retail area is located approximately one block to the east. (STAFF COMMENTS) Subject to design review by Architectural Design Board. a Packet Pg. 97 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 21 of 25 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: The project will pay park impact fees. Passive recreation will be provided onsite via patios, porches and planted areas. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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. The existing single-family residence on the site is more than 45 years old. It does not appear to be on any 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 a reas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. No such resources have been found. No professional studies have been conducted. a Packet Pg. 98 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 22 of 25 (STAFF COMMENTS) c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cult ural 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 database has been consulted, as have local, state and federal preservation registers. (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 proposed as no resources are known to exist. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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 subject is served by 3rd Avenue S to its east. Access to this right-of-way is proposed to be a shared driveway along the north side of the subject. (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 area is served by Community Transit’s 116, 130, 196 and 416 bus lines. These lines run along Dayton Street to the north of the subject. The nearest stop is approximately 500 feet from the subject. a Packet Pg. 99 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 23 of 25 (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 ten garage parking spaces. It would eliminate one surface parking space to the south of the existing residence. (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). It is expected that the project will replace the public sidewalk and curb along its frontage. Asphalt overlay may be required in the existing roadway as a consequence of utility service installation. No other right-of-way improvements are proposed. See civil sheeat C4.0-C4.1 for details. (STAFF COMMENTS) e.Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. (STAFF COMMENTS) At least nine off-street parking spaces required. a Packet Pg. 100 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 24 of 25 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 multifamily development in a general urban or subur ban context generates approximately 0.44 trips per unit. The Manual also indicates that single -family detached development in this context generates approximately 0.99 trips per day. Townhouses are likely more akin to detached single -family, resulting in an estimate of 4.95 trips per day. No truck traffic is expected for this residential development. (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. No. (STAFF COMMENTS) h.Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Transportation impact fees will be paid. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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 project increases the number of dwelling units on the subject, resulting in a corresponding increase in the need for public services. As the project is relatively small, the impact is also expected to be small. (STAFF COMMENTS) a Packet Pg. 101 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Revised on 9/19/16 Edmonds 222 SEPA Checklist Page 25 of 25 b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: Fire impact fees will be paid. (STAFF COMMENTS) 16.Utilities a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: Public sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, refuse service, electricity, communications and natural gas services are currently available to the subject. (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. Water, sewer, storm: City of Edmonds Electricity: Snohomish County PUD Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Refuse: Sound Disposal Utility service lines will generally be required between the utility mains and townhouses. Most mains are located in the 3rd Avenue S right-of-way, and the sanitary sewer main is located near the westerly property line of the subject. (STAFF COMMENTS) C.SIGNATURE I declare under penalty of perjury laws that the above answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. ____________________________________________ __________________________________________ Signature of Proponent Date Submitted 10.08.2022 a Packet Pg. 102 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 S t a f f R e p o r t w . a t t a c h m e n t s ( D e s i g n R e v i e w - P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 7 1 2 2 2 3 r d A v e . S ) Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/9/2024 Cascara Townhouses Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History This is a new project for Board review. Staff Recommendation Approve with conditions as noted in the attached staff report. Narrative The proposal is for two three-unit townhouse buildings and site improvements at the vacant 9516 Edmonds Way. The north building would front Edmonds Way, and the south building would be behind separated by a drive aisle to access parking within the buildings. An existing curb cut at the west edge of the site at Edmonds Way that currently serves the subject site and the two parcels to the south will be retained and upgraded together with the rest of the project’s frontage. The upgraded access drive will continue to serve the subject site and the two lots to the south, and it will also provide access for the lot to the west. Together with the staff report are 13 attachments including the project plans and related documents. Attachments: PLN2023-0029 Staff report and attachments Packet Pg. 103 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION REPORT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Project: Cascara Townhouses File Number: PLN2023-0029 Date of Report: December 4, 2024 Staff Contact: ____ ________________________ Mike Clugston, AICP, Planning Manager Meeting: Monday – December 9, 2024 at 6:00 P.M. Brackett Room, 3rd Floor City Hall 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Or on Zoom at: https://edmondswa-gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932 Passcode: 591531 Join by phone at: 253 205 0468 I. PROJECT PROPOSAL The proposal is for two three-unit townhouse buildings and site improvements at the vacant 9516 Edmonds Way. The north building would front Edmonds Way, and the south building would be behind separated by a drive aisle to access parking within the buildings. An existing curb cut at the west edge of the site at Edmonds Way that currently serves the subject site and the two parcels to the south will be retained and upgraded together with the rest of the project’s frontage. The upgraded access drive will continue to serve the subject site and the two lots to the south, and it will also provide access for the lot to the west. II. FINDINGS, ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS A. PROCESS Design review is required for this project as indicated in Section 20.10.020.A of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Due to its location and because it required a SEPA threshold determination, per ECDC 20.10.010.C, general design review is required by the Architectural Design Board (ADB) using the requirements in ECDC 20.11. Findings must be a Packet Pg. 104 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 2 of 16 made relative to the design criteria in ECDC 20.11.030, the urban design chapter of the Community Culture and Urban Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and the zoning ordinance. A Type III-A permit, the Design Board conducts a public hearing to take testimony and establish the record and then issues the final decision on the design of the project. The following Attachments are included with this report: 1. Land use application 2. Project narrative 3. Aerial photo 4. Architectural plans • Location and site plans • Floor plans • Elevations • Building renderings • Light schedule and rendering 5. Preliminary civil plans 6. Arborist report 7. Landscape plans 8. Letter from trash hauler 9. Notice of complete application and notice of application documentation 10. Solomon/Getachew comment 11. SEPA DNS and checklist 12. Notice of public hearing and SEPA determination 13. Technical comments B. SETTING 1. Address: 9516 Edmonds Way (Tax ID: 27033600100900) 2. Zoning: Multiple Residential - Edmonds Way (RM-EW) 3. Comprehensive Plan designation: Edmonds Way Corridor 4. Neighborhood: The project site is located at the eastern end of the Westgate commercial area along Edmonds Way. The subject parcel is surrounded by underdeveloped parcels that are zoned Multiple Residential and Community Business – Edmonds Way. The parcels are either vacant (to the west) or developed with older single-family residences (south and east). Further west is a PUD substation and further east are several multifamily developments. North of Edmonds Way is an area of underdeveloped parcels zoned Multiple Residential and Community Business – Edmonds Way. 5. Environment: The site is fairly level, with approximately 6% slope. A critical area determination was completed for the site in 2007 which identified no critical areas on the site. The site was originally developed with a single-family residence but that was a Packet Pg. 105 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 3 of 16 demolished in 2007, and the site is now vacant with some existing trees and vegetation along the west and south property lines. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposal is subject to the design guidance found in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan’s Urban Design Element (pages 123 - 125). There is also guidance for commercial and multifamily development along the Edmonds Way Corridor (page 73). Refer to Attachment 4 for project plans and color renderings and Attachment 2 for the applicant’s analysis of the project relative to the design guidance. 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 tying 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 Packet Pg. 106 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 4 of 16 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. Analysis of Site Design: The project site is generally level with Edmonds Way and presents few challenges to redevelopment. An existing curb cut at the west edge of the site to Edmonds Way that serves the subject site and the two parcels to the south will be retained and upgraded together with the rest of the project’s frontage. The upgraded access drive will continue to serve the subject site and the two lots to the south and it will also provide access for the lot to the west. Trash and recycling will be located in a screened area at the east end of the internal drive between the buildings. The north building fronts Edmonds Way with pedestrian entrances and porches and the third floor is recessed from a PUD power line and easement along Edmonds Way, creating a small deck area. Parking will be incorporated in individual units and buffer landscaping would be provided around the site. 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 Packet Pg. 107 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 5 of 16 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. Analysis of Building Form: The proposed buildings use a mix of materials along with wall and roof modulation to reduce apparent mass and create pedestrian scale. Design Objectives for Building Façade. 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 Façade Design. Encourage building façades 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 façade, 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 façades to help define the scale and style of the structure. Variation in façade materials can help reduce the apparent bulk of larger buildings while allowing variety and individuality of building design. Analysis of Building Façade: The proposed facades use shapes and materials found throughout contemporary residential developments in Edmonds. Each façade includes a variety of materials, window sizes, and articulation with roof overhangs. The north building relates well to Edmonds Way using small canopies over pedestrian entrances within fenced patio areas together with large windows and recessed third-floor decks. Commercial Development Goal E. The Edmonds Way Corridor consists of portions of Edmonds Way between the 100th Avenue West intersection and Highway 99. This corridor serves as a key transportation corridor, and also provides a key link between Edmonds and Interstate 5. Established residential areas lie on both sides of the corridor. An established pattern of multiple family residential development lies along much of the corridor, while small-scale businesses can be found primarily near intersections. A major concern is that the more intensive development that occurs along the corridor should not a Packet Pg. 108 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 6 of 16 interfere with the flow of through traffic or intrude into adjoining established communities. E.1 Permit uses in planned multiple family or small-scale business developments that are designed to minimize contributing significantly to traffic congestion. E.2 Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. E.3 Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access should not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. E.4 Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped-down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Make use of natural topography to buffer incompatible development whenever possible. Analysis of Commercial Development: Commercial uses are not proposed with this multifamily project. The existing access to the site at Edmonds Way will be upgraded to create an improved shared access point for the subject site as well as two parcels to the south and one to the west. Staff Conclusion Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the design guidance in the Comprehensive Plan for Site Design, Building Form, and Building Façade as well as Commercial Development along the Edmonds Way Corridor. D. APPLICABLE ZONING CODES Compliance with all codes will be verified through the review and approval of subsequent building, engineering, and fire permits. 1. ECDC 16.50 Multiple Residential – Edmonds Way (RM-EW) a. Use. Multiple dwelling units are primary permitted uses in the RW-EM zone (ECDC 16.30.010.A). b. Site development standards (per ECDC 16.30.030.A): Zone Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side Setback Minimum Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Coverage RM-EW 15’ 10’ 15’ 25’4 45% a Packet Pg. 109 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 7 of 16 4 The maximum base height of any building fronting on Edmonds Way may be increased to 35 feet if the following apply to the site and proposed development: (a) At least two of the following techniques shall be incorporated into the building and/or site’s design: (1) Achievement of at least LEED gold certification or comparable green building certification; (2) Inclusion of housing units affordable to persons at low/moderate income as determined by Snohomish County Tomorrow. The number of affordable units must be at least 15 percent of the gross number of units proposed; (3) Low impact development (LID) techniques are employed. LID best management practices include, but are not limited to: bioretention/rain gardens, permeable pavements, roof downspout controls, dispersion, soil quality and depth, minimal excavation foundations, vegetated roofs, and water re-use. Height: As noted above, the north building fronting Edmonds Way may be up to 35 feet in height, if the requirements listed above in Sub 4(a) are met. As shown on Sheets A100, A300 and A301 of Attachment 4, the north building would meet the 35-foot standard. However, the applicant has not indicated which two of the three criteria for extra height would be achieved by the development – a condition to that effect is proposed. The maximum height allowed for the south building is 25 feet, but a 30-foot-tall building is shown on Sheets A100, A300 and A301 of Attachment 4. The 4:12 roof pitch exception available in other RM subdistricts was used for the south building but unfortunately that is not an available exception in the RM-EW zone per ECDC 16.30.030(A). The south building must be redesigned to comply with the height criteria or the project revised to only have one building that would meet the 35’ height required described above; a condition to that effect is proposed. According to ECDC 21.40.030(B), average level is calculated by averaging elevations of the downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of the building, excluding a maximum of 30 inches of eaves. If a corner falls off the site, its elevation shall be the average elevation of the two points projected downward where the two sides of the rectangle cross the property line. Setbacks: The proposed north building is set back 15 feet from the street property line along Edmonds Way, which meets the minimum zoning requirement and accommodates an existing utility easement along the frontage (Sheet 100 of Attachment 4). Both buildings would meet the 10-foot side setback from the east property line as well as that from the shared easement on the west side of the project. The south building is set back more than 15 feet from the south property line. In the RM – EW zone, uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may occupy up to one-half of the required street setback area along Edmonds Way; provided, that these structures or uses are located no more than 20 feet above the ground level at any point. Small fenced patio areas would be located within the street setback for each of the three units in the north building, which would meet the exception. a Packet Pg. 110 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 8 of 16 Eaves may project up to 30 inches into required setbacks in accordance with ECDC 21.90.020. The east eaves both buildings encroach approximately 12 inches into the east side setback. Entry canopies on the north building would encroach approximately 18 inches into the north street setback. Maximum Lot Coverage: The two buildings, including the 2nd and 3rd floor overhangs as shown on Sheet A200 of Attachment 4, are proposed to cover approximately 44% of the net lot area (11,571 sq. ft. gross lot area minus the 2,483 sq. ft. access easement equals 9,268 sq. ft. of net lot area; the two buildings will cover approximately 4,077 sq. ft. of the 9,268 sq. ft. or 44%). RM-EW Design Criteria: ECDC 16.30.030.B.1 contains one zone-specific design criterion for façade materials: Seventy-five percent of a building facade facing a public right-of-way shall be clad with preferred building materials which include natural stone, wood, architectural metal, brick and glass. Concrete, laminates, veneers, fiber cement products and the like may be permitted if they replicate the appearance of the listed preferred materials. At least 55 percent of building facade materials must be salvaged, recycled content, bio-based or indigenous. The north façade of the building fronting Edmonds Way exceeds the 75% criterion since it would clad with batten and board on levels 1 and 2 with large glass windows on each. Small wood and metal fences define the pedestrian entries, each of which is covered with a small canopy. The recessed third level has large glass windows and is clad with fiber cement panels. A similar theme is used on both buildings. The 55% criterion is also met through the use of fiber cement, wood, and glass on all sides of the buildings. 2. ECDC 17.50 Off Street Parking Regulations According to ECDC 17.50.020(A)(1)(b), the number of parking spaces required per dwelling unit for multifamily units is based upon the number of bedrooms per unit. Each of the six two-bedroom units will provide two enclosed parking stalls, meeting the standard. Five surface stalls are shown on the adjacent property that have access from the shared driveway on the west side of the project site. It appears that the spaces would be used as additional or guest parking for the Cascara project; a shared parking agreement is required to describe the operation and maintenance of those stalls and a condition to that effect is proposed. 3. ECDC 17.115 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure The project must meet the minimum requirements electric vehicle charging for multiple dwelling units in ECDC 17.115; a condition to that effect is proposed. 4. ECDC 17.120 Bicycle Parking Facilities Bikes racks are shown by the pedestrian entrances to the three north units (Sheet A100 of Attachment 4), but no others are indicated. The project must meet the minimum a Packet Pg. 111 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 9 of 16 requirements for short- and long-term bike parking for multiple dwelling units in ECDC 17.120; a condition to that effect is proposed. 5. ECDC 20.02 Development Project Permit Applications This project was submitted on May 10, 2023, the application fees paid for on May 15, 2023, and the application was determined to be technically complete on June 13, 2023. Requests for supplemental information and clarifications were made afterwards but public notice of the project could be issued. 6. ECDC 20.03 Public Notice Requirements A Notice of Application and Request for Comment was published in the Herald Newspaper and posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, and City Hall on June 23, 2023 (Attachment 9). Notices were also mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. PUBLIC COMMENT One public comment was received after the notice of application was distributed (Attachment 10). Genet Solomon and Desta Getachew own an adjacent property to the east at 9510 Edmonds Way and were interested in how access to the new project would affect their site. Because the new project will use the existing curb cut on the west side of the project site, no impact to access for the parcel to the east would occur. A Notice of Public Hearing and SEPA Determination was advertised in the same manner as the notice of application on November 25, 2024 (Attachment 12). No new public comments have been received as of the date of this report. 7. ECDC 20.11 General Design Review Criteria Per ECDC 20.10 (Design Review), General Design Review is required for this project since it is not located within an area that has district-based design standards. ECDC 20.11.030 lists the general criteria for Building Design, Site Treatment, and Other Criteria that the proposal must satisfy. Refer to Attachment 3 for project plans and color renderings and Attachment 2 for the applicant’s analysis of the project relative to the design criteria. A. ECDC 20.11.030.A. Building Design. No one architectural style is required. The building shall be designed to comply with the purposes of this chapter and to avoid conflict with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. All elements of building design shall form an integrated development, harmonious in scale, line and mass. The following are included as elements of building design: 1. All exterior building components, including windows, doors, eaves, and parapets. 2. Colors, which should avoid excessive brilliance or brightness except where that would enhance the character of the area. 3. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on the roof, grounds or buildings should be screened from view from the street level. a Packet Pg. 112 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 10 of 16 4. Long, massive, unbroken or monotonous buildings shall be avoided in order to comply with the purposes of this chapter and the design objectives of the comprehensive plan. This criterion is meant to describe the entire building. All elements of the design of a building including the massing, building forms, architectural details and finish materials contribute to whether or not a building is found to be long, massive, unbroken or monotonous. 5. All signs should conform to the general design theme of the development. The proposed buildings are not long, massive or monotonous. They are pedestrian scaled, and a variety of materials are used throughout. No signage is proposed and any mechanical equipment near the street front would be screened by proposed landscaping and fencing. B. ECDC 20.11.030.B. Site Treatment. The existing character of the site and the nearby area should be the starting point for the design of the building and all site treatment. The following are elements of site treatment: 1. Grading, vegetation removal and other changes to the site shall be minimized where natural beauty exists. Large cut and fill and impervious surfaces should be avoided. 2. Landscape treatment shall be provided to enhance the building design and other site improvements. 3. Landscape treatment shall be provided to buffer the development from surrounding property where conflict may result, such as parking facilities near yard spaces, streets or residential units, and different building heights, design or color. 4. Landscaping that could be damaged by pedestrians or vehicles should be protected by curbing or similar devices. 5. Service yards, and other areas where trash or litter may accumulate, shall be screened with planting or fences or walls which are compatible with natural materials. 6. All screening should be effective in the winter as well as the summer. 7. Materials such as wood, brick, stone and gravel (as opposed to asphalt or concrete) may be substituted for planting in areas unsuitable for plant growth. 8. Exterior lighting shall be the minimum necessary for safety and security. Excessive brightness shall be avoided. All lighting shall be low-rise and directed downward onto the site. Lighting standards and patterns shall be compatible with the overall design theme. The site is fairly level and currently overgrown. New landscaping is proposed across the site (Attachment 7) to buffer the buildings and to screen the trash enclosure. Exterior lighting would be minimal, typical of a residential project (Sheet DR07 of Attachment 4). a Packet Pg. 113 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 11 of 16 C. ECDC 20.11.030.C. Other Criteria. 1. Community facilities and public or quasi-public improvements should not conflict with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. 2. Street furniture (including but not limited to benches, light standards, utility poles, newspaper stands, bus shelters, planters, traffic signs and signals, guardrails, rockeries, walls, mail boxes, fire hydrants and garbage cans) should be compatible with the existing and planned character of the nearby area. The project is not a community facility. No street furniture is proposed at the sidewalk; the mailbox is proposed to be interior to the site next to the north building (Sheet C1.0 of Attachment 4). 8. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements There are five types of landscaping that can be used throughout a site depending on the setting. A Type II mixed buffer would be appropriate along the east and south edges of the project where it is adjacent to less dense residential development. A Type III mixed buffer would be appropriate along the north side of the project site by Edmonds Way. Surface parking areas like that to the west of the access drive require Type V landscaping. While there are specific requirements for each of these landscaping types, the ADB may interpret and modify the requirements as long as the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the design review chapter in ECDC 20.10.000. These purposes 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. As shown on Attachment 7, the proposal includes a mostly new landscaping around the site and two retained trees. TYPE II Type II Landscaping. Type II landscaping is intended to create a visual separation between similar uses. 1. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 30 percent being deciduous, a minimum of six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 20 feet on center; and a Packet Pg. 114 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 12 of 16 2. Shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in height and other plant materials, planted so that the ground will be covered within three years. The landscaping proposed along the south and east edges of the project site is consistent with the Type II criteria. The two trees that are to be retained as part of the redevelopment are located along the south edge as well. TYPE III Type III landscaping is intended to provide visual separation of uses from streets, and visual separation of compatible uses so as to soften the appearance of streets, parking areas and building elevations. 1. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, a minimum of six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 30 feet on center; and 2. If planted to buffer a building elevation, shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in height, and living ground cover planted so that the ground will be covered within three years; or 3. If planted to buffer a parking area, access, or site development other than a building, any of the following alternatives may be used unless otherwise noted: a. Shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in height, and living ground cover must be planted so that the ground will be covered within three years. b. Earth-mounding, an average of three and one-half feet in height, planted with shrubs or living ground cover so that the ground will be covered within three years. This alternative may not be used in a downtown or waterfront area. c. A combination of earth mounding, opaque fences and shrubs to produce a visual barrier at least three and one-half feet in height. The landscaping shows along the north property line is consistent with the Type III criteria. TYPE V Type V Landscaping. Type V landscaping is intended to provide visual relief and shade in parking areas. 1. Required Amount. a. If the parking area contains no more than 50 parking spaces, at least 17.5 square feet of landscape development must be provided as described in subsection (E)(2) of this section for each parking stall proposed. b. If the parking area contains more than 99 parking spaces, at least 35 square feet of landscape development must be provided as described in subsection (E)(2) of this section for each parking stall proposed. a Packet Pg. 115 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 13 of 16 c. If the parking area contains more than 50 but less than 100 parking spaces, the director – or his designee – shall determine the required amount of landscaping by interpolating between 17.5 and 35 square feet for each parking stall proposed. The area must be landscaped as described in subsection (E)(2) of this section. 2. Design. a. Each area of landscaping must contain at least 150 square feet of area and must be at least four feet in any direction exclusive of vehicle overhang. The area must contain at least one tree a minimum of six feet in height and with a minimum size of one and one-half inches in caliper if deciduous. The remaining ground area must be landscaped with plant materials, decorative mulch or unit pavers. b. A landscaped area must be placed at the interior ends of each parking row in a multiple-lane parking area. This area must be at least four feet wide and must extend the length of the adjacent parking stall. c. Up to 100 percent of the trees proposed for the parking area may be deciduous. d. Repealed by Ord. 4085. e. The minimum area per planter is 64 square feet. f. The maximum area per planter is 1,500 square feet for parking lots greater than 12,000 square feet. Planters shall be spread throughout the parking lot. g. Shade trees are required at the rate of a minimum of one per planter and/or one per 150 square feet of planter. No landscaping is currently shown around the surface parking stalls but landscaping around that area is required and must meet the Type V criteria; a condition to that effect is proposed. Finally, per ECDC 20.13.020.E, automatic irrigation is required for this project, unless waived by the ADB. 9. ECDC 20.15A Environmental Review (SEPA) The scope of this project required an environmental threshold determination. The City of Edmonds acted as lead agency for SEPA review and issued a Determination of Nonsignificance on November 25, 2024 (Attachment 11). No comments or appeals have been received as of the date of this report. 10. ECDC 20.60 Sign Code Signage was not included with this proposal. Signage meeting the requirements of ECDC 20.60 is exempt from design review. Staff will review future sign permits to verify compliance with the sign code. a Packet Pg. 116 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 14 of 16 11. ECDC 23.10 Tree Related Regulations New multifamily developments must provide a tree retention and protection plan that shows retention of at least 25% of all significant trees on the developable site. As indicated in the associated arborist report (Attachment 6), there are seven trees within the developable site that would be impacted by the proposal, all of which are in generally good condition. Two trees will be retained near the south edge of the site and included with the proposed landscaping in the area (Attachment 7), but five significant trees are proposed to be removed. For those two trees to be removed that are less than 24” DBH, replacement is required consistent with ECDC 23.10.080. For those three trees 24” or greater DBH, a fee-in-lieu payment is required. The arborist report will need to be updated during building permit review to be consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.10 for tree replacement and for a calculation of fees-in-lieu. Required replacement trees may be used as part of the landscaping plan required by ECDC 20.13. 12. ECDC 23.40 Environmentally Critical Areas A critical area determination was completed for the site (CRA2007-0025), which identified no critical areas on or adjacent to the site. An updated critical area determination will be required with a subsequent building permit application. E. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE In addition to the Planning Division, the Engineering Division evaluated the feasibility of the project relative to the Public Works Requirements in Title 18 ECDC and the Building Division and South County Fire did the same for the codes in Title 19 ECDC (Attachment 13). The Building Division had no specific concerns with the design review. Fire and Engineering had several comments, which will be added as proposed conditions. Traffic impact fees associated with the project are collected with the building permit. In the end, each group found the project to be feasible, with conditions, and will confirm code compliance at the building permit stage of the development review process. III. RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to ECDC 20.11.020, when recommending approval of applications, the ADB must find that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria listed in ECDC 20.11.030 (General Design Review), the Comprehensive Plan, and the zoning ordinance. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and attachments with this report, staff recommends that the ADB APPROVE the design for the proposed Cascara Townhouse project with the following motion and recommended conditions of approval: THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ADOPTS THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND FINDS THAT, AS CONDITIONED, THE CASCARA TOWNHOUSE PROPOSAL IN FILE PLN2023-0029 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DESIGN CRITERIA OF ECDC 20.11.030, AND ZONING a Packet Pg. 117 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 15 of 16 REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE APPROVES THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. At least two of the criteria in ECDC 16.30.030(A) Sub 4(a) must be met in order to obtain the maximum 35-foot height for the north building fronting Edmonds Way. The applicant must indicate which criteria will be satisfied by the project. 2. The height of the south building as proposed exceeds the maximum 25 feet in accordance with the table in ECDC 16.30.030(A). The south building must be redesigned to meet that requirement or the project could be revised to only have one building that complies with the 35’ height allowed per ECDC 16.30.030(A) Sub 4(a). 3. Electric vehicle charging must be shown at building permit and meet the standards in ECDC 17.115. 4. Bicycle parking facilities must be shown at building permit and meet the standards in ECDC 17.120. 5. A shared parking agreement is required for the operation and maintenance of the five surface parking stalls to the west of the shared driveway. 6. An updated critical area determination is required at building permit. 7. Type V landscaping is required for the five surface parking stalls adjacent to the project site. 8. Retained trees must be protected during development in accordance with ECDC 23.10.070. 9. The arborist report must be updated for the building permit application to include all trees being removed from the project site, and to address the resulting replacement and fee-in-lieu requirements of ECDC 23.10. 10. Street tree species will be determined by the Parks Department at building permit. 11. The Fire and Engineering comments in Attachment 13 are adopted as conditions that must be met at building permit. 12. Staff will verify compliance of the proposal with all relevant codes and land use permit conditions through review of building, engineering, and fire 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 Jake Lyon Cascara LLC a Packet Pg. 118 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Cascara Townhouses PLN2023-0029 Page 16 of 16 jake@westerlyre.com Matt Driscoll, D/Arch LLC (rep. Cascara LLC) mattd@darchllc.com Genet Solomon & Desta Getachew genetsol@gmail.com destag@gmail.com V. APPEALS According to ECDC 20.01.003.B and 20.06.150, Type III-A decisions are not administratively appealable but rather subject to LUPA appeal at Snohomish County superior court pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW. VI. LAPSE OF APPROVAL According to ECDC 20.11.050.A, unless the owner submits a fully completed building permit application necessary to bring about the approved alterations, or, if no building permit application is required, substantially commences the use allowed within 18 months from the date of approval, ADB or hearing examiner approval shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files a fully completed application for an extension of time prior to the expiration date. For the purposes of this section the date of approval shall be the date on which the ADB’s or hearing examiner’s minutes or other method of conveying the final written decision of the ADB or hearing examiner as adopted are mailed to the applicant. In the event of appeal, the date of approval shall be the date on which a final decision is entered by the city council or court of competent jurisdiction. a Packet Pg. 119 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Page 1 of 2 CITY OF EDMONDS Land Use Application #1313142 - Cascara Attachment 1 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 120 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Project Contact Company Name:d/Arch LLC Name:Matt Driscoll Email:mattd@darchllc.com Address:2412 Westlake Ave N Ste 3 Phone #:(206)547-1761 Seattle WA 98109 Project Type Activity Type Scope of Work New New Development Activity Design Review Project Name:Cascara Description of Work:Design Review approval of 6 Townhomes with 12 parking spaces Project Details Development Type Multifamily Page 2 of 2 CITY OF EDMONDS Land Use Application #1313142 - Cascara Attachment 1 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 121 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Supplemental Name: Applicant Certification - Planning The 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. The property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant or that the application has been submitted with the consent of all owners of the affected property. I certify, under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on behalf of the owner of the subject property. I do so certify. Jurisdiction:Edmonds Project Name: Cascara Application ID: 1313142 Attachment 1 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 122 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Supplemental Name: Land Use Application If this is a new parcel or lot that does not yet have an address or a County tax account number, please describe the property and its location (otherwise, you may skip this question): Please describe the project and/or proposed use(s) you are seeking approval for with this application (you can upload a more detailed file/letter later in the application, as necessary): Design Review approval of project with 6 townhomes and 12 parking spaces Check the boxes indicating all of the related approvals you are seeking for this project (including this application). NOTE THAT A SEPARATE APPLICATION IS REQUIRED FOR EACH APPROVAL. Design Review Jurisdiction:Edmonds Project Name: Cascara Application ID: 1313142 Attachment 1 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 123 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 9516 Edmonds Way Cover Letter 05/08/2023 p. 1/5 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is 11,571 sf. It is in the RM-EW Zone. Properties across Edmonds Way to the North are zoned BC-EW (Community Business, BC-Edmonds Way). East and West are Muti-family zones. South residential zones. To the Northwest, properties are zoned commercial WMU (Westgate Mixed Used). The project is a 6 townhouses with 12 parking stalls (garaged). Total building area is approximately 11,200 sf. The building is 3 stories of Type V-A Wood construction. Vehicular access is provided via a single curb cut/driveway in the middle of the site to minimize its impact on vehicular and pedestrian activity. Pedestrian access is provided along Edmonds Way and next to a shared driveway with adjacent property. A fire apparatus road is provided at the south end of the site in conjunction with the parking access. A hammerhead terminates this fire apparatus road. 2. SITE DESCRIPTION The northern three-quarters of the site is relatively flat and level. Ground elevations range from approximately 338 feet near the northwest corner of the parcel to elevation 344 feet near the southeast property corner. The subject parcel, Parcel No. 27033600100900, is approximately 0.29 acres in size and is vacant. The site is bordered by undeveloped property to the southwest and residential developed properties to the northeast and southeast. 3. STANDARDS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE The project is designed to comply with the requirements of the Edmonds city code and Community development code. The intended Multifamily use is permitted per 16.50.010 uses. The building setback allowed per 16.30.030, minimum street setback 15’, minimum side setback 10’, minimum rear setback 15’. The proposed site plan complies with setback requirements. Attachment 2 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 124 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 9516 Edmonds Way Cover Letter 05/08/2023 p. 2/5 The building height allowed per 16.30.030. A is 25’ and note #3 states: the maximum base height of any building fronting Edmonds Way may be increased to 35 feet. The proposed project is designed with modulated pitched roofs, and the height is below 35’ maximum height requirement above average grade. The building is set back 15’ from Edmonds Way to meet the setback. Required parking per 17.50.020 Parking is 1.8 parking spaces per dwelling units with 2 bedrooms. Each townhouse is provided with 2 stalls within the garage. Per 16.30.030.B Design Standard -Seventy-five percent of a building facade facing a public right-of-way shall be clad with preferred building materials which include natural stone, wood, architectural metal, brick and glass. Concrete, laminates, veneers, fiber cement products and the like may be permitted if they replicate the appearance of the listed preferred materials. At least 55 percent of building facade materials must be salvaged, recycled content, bio-based or indigenous. The building materials proposed are designed to complement the massing of the building. The lower level will feature board and batten siding, which will provide a refined residential appearance while incorporating vertical expression that resembles the appearance of architectural metal. Meanwhile, the upper level will feature darker fiber cement panels to provide contrast and further enhance the building's aesthetic appeal. In addition, secondary design elements such as glass railings, wood soffit, and an entryway canopy will be included to add depth and interest to the building's design. A. General Design Objectives a. Design Objectives for Site Design Design Objectives Analysis A.1 Vehicular Access Reduce the numbers and width of driveways (curb cuts) to improve pedestrian, bike, and auto safety Proposed shared driveway with neighbor project, which minimize the curb cut, and comply with fire department access requirements. A.2 Layout of Parking Parking should be placed to the site and rear. Proposed parking garages for each townhouse, which locate away from the public street, at the rear of the front row building. A.3 Connections On- and Offsite Design site access between sites to encourage linkages for pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles. The proposal is a pedestrian-oriented housing development. The project will improve the pedestrian experience by overhead weather protection, Attachment 2 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 125 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 9516 Edmonds Way Cover Letter 05/08/2023 p. 3/5 landscaping, and lighting. A.4 Building Entry Location Building entries should be clear. Secondary design elements such as paved pathway, wood soffit, and an entryway canopy will be incorporated to identify the residential entries. A.5 Setbacks Setbacks should be appropriate to the desired landscape. Front/side/rear setbacks will provide opportunity for landscaping and rest areas for pedestrians to provide relief from the public to private property. A.6 Open Space Create green spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the development. Planting and appropriate lighting along the building will be provided to create a pleasant pedestrian environment. A.7 Building/Site Identity Providing variety in building form, colors, materials and individuality of buildings. The lower level will feature board and batten siding, which will provide a refined residential appearance while incorporating vertical expression that resembles the appearance of architectural metal. Meanwhile, the upper level will feature darker fiber cement panels to provide contrast and further enhance the building's aesthetic appeal. A.8 Weather Protection Provide covered walkways and entries for pedestrian weather protection Canopies provided at the residential entries. A.9 Lighting Provide adequate and appropriate illumination to support activity and security Perimeter and entrance lighting provided around the site. Attachment 2 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 126 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 9516 Edmonds Way Cover Letter 05/08/2023 p. 4/5 A.10 Signage Signage that provide clear information and direction. Individual townhouse will have its own numbers next to front doors. A.11 Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and M/E system Minimize the noise, odor, and visual impacts of utility systems. Utility is located in between the two building masses, away from public street. A.12 Integrating Site Features Integrate natural landscape features. Landscape design is consistent with overall architectural design and site plan. A.13 Landscape Buffers Use landscape and/or other features such as fences to maintain privacy and visual barrier. The proposal will provide abundant landscape green space along the street level. The proposed design provides a clear vehicular path sharing with adjacent property, while minimizing the impact on pedestrian sidewalks. Individual garages are provided for each townhouse, which minimize the visual impacts to the street. Each townhouse entrance is incorporated with overall design, by using landscaping, pathways, and architectural features to emphasize the visibility. b. Design Objectives for Building Form Design Objectives Analysis A.14 Building Form Avoid repetitive, monotonous building forms. The proposed project is provided with consistent design elements and material. A.15 Massing Reduce bulk and mass. The building façade is breaking into three vertical portions, along with pitched roof design, which reducing the overall massing. A.16 Roof Modulation Use roof forms to help identify different programs Pitched roof design provided. A.17 Wall Modulations Variation in materials, decorative elements, to support pedestrian scale environments, and streetscapes or break up large building mass. The building materials proposed are designed to complement the massing of the building. Attachment 2 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 127 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 9516 Edmonds Way Cover Letter 05/08/2023 p. 5/5 c. Design Objectives for Building Façade Design Objectives Analysis A.18 Building Façade Design Reinforce the appearance and consistency of streetscape patterns. The building design will contribute to the developing character of the neighborhood and in keeping with the modern design of the project. A.19 Window Variety and Articulation Use window size and placement to help define the scale and character of the building. Large window openings provided, which is consistency with the design. A.20 Variation in façade Materials Employ variation in materials, colors, or design elements on building façade. The building materials proposed are designed to complement the massing of the building. 4. Trash Pick Up The applicant called Republic Service on 05/04/2023. The representative agreed to the design proposal that each townhouse would have their own trash, recycle, composite bins. Owner of each townhouse can stage the bins in front of their garage door, and the driver from Republic Services will wheel them out and collect on pick up day. 10/25/2023 10:01 PM R:\2021d\2106d_9516 Edmonds Way\Edmonds\Design Review Submittal\Architectural\Cover Letter_9516-Edmonds_Way_DesignReviewNarrative.docx Attachment 2 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 128 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 2,257 188.1 © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet Notes Cascara Design Review PLN2023-0029 Legend This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 126.300 1:1,516 Aerial Photo - 9516 Edmonds Way 252.6 ArcSDE.GIS.STREET_CENTERLINES <all other values> 1 2 5; 4 9; 71; 7; 8 Sections Boundary Sections Edmonds Boundary ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_BUILDINGS ArcSDE.GIS.STREET_CENTERLINES <all other values> Interstate Principal Arterial Minor Arterial; Collector Local Street State Highways <all other values> 0 1 2 County Boundary Parks ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_WASHINGTON ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_CITIES ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_CITIES City of Edmonds City of Lynnwood City of Mountlake Terrace Unincorporated King Co; Unincorporated County City of Woodway City of Arlington; City of Bothell; City of Brier; City of Everett; City of Gold Bar; City of Granite Falls; City of Lake Stevens; City of Marysville; City of Mill Creek; City of Monroe; City of Mukilteo; City of Snohomish; City of Stanwood; City of Sultan; Town of Darrington; Town of Index Attachment 3 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 129 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 TH-2 TH-1 EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) OWNER / APPLICANT ENGINEER/CONTACTSURVEYOR BM EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP CASCARA EW S N INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 S1 22-1226 SITE PLAN CASCARANE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Site Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: BUILDING SETBACKS SITE DATA AREA BREAKDOWN B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IH A L NEEED N O R B T A IMPERVIOUS AREAS BREAKDOWN LEGEND UTILITY CONTACT LIST Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 130 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 TH-2 TH-1 EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) OWNER / APPLICANT ENGINEER/CONTACT SURVEYOR BM EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP CASCARA EW S N INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C1.0 22-1226 COVER SHEET CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Site Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A SHEET INDEX GRADING QUANTITIES: SOIL TYPE UTILITIES BUILDING SETBACKS IMPERVIOUS AREAS BREAKDOWN LEGEND Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 131 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TP-4 TP-5 TP-3 TP-1 TP-2 INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C1.1 22-1226 EXISTING FEATURES MAP CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A TP-X Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 132 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C2.0 22-1226 GRADING PLAN CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A GRADING QUANTITIES: CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE ACCESS TO TOWNHOME-1 PROFILE ACCESS TO TOWNHOME-2 PROFILE ACCESS TO TOWNHOME-3 PROFILE Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 133 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C2.1 22-1226 SWPP PLAN CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE NOTE: TESC LEGEND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE THE 13 ELEMENTS OF TESC BMP ONSITE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: BMP T5.13 POST-CONSTRUCTION SOIL C2.1 3 C2.1 2 C2.1 4 SEDIMENT TRAP Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 134 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C2.2 22-1226 NOTES & DETAILS GRADING AND TESC CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK DETAIL C2.1 1 ESC NOTES (ECDC 18.30.050) STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE C2.1 3 FILTER FABRIC FENCE DETAIL C2.1 2 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP FOR CATCH BASINS C2.1 4 Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 135 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y STORMTANK WITH INFILTRATION CB#4 CB#1 CB#2 CB#5, EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) OWNER / APPLICANT ENGINEER/CONTACT SURVEYOR BM EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP EW S N INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C3.0 22-1226 & UTILITY PLAN ROAD, DRAINAGE CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Site Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A LEGEND CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE TYPE-1 OVERFLOW CB1 C3.0 2 C3.3 1 C3.0 A A 1 C3.1 CONSTRUCTION NOTES: TYPE OF AREA PROJECT SITE CATEGORY: SQUARE FOOTAGE STORMWATER FACILITY 1 C3.2 Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 136 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C3.1 22-1226 SHARED DRIVEWAY PROFILE CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATESHARED DRIVEWAY PROFILE SHARED DRIVEWAY (SECTION A-A)1 C3.1 Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 137 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y STORMTANK WITH INFILTRATION CB#4 CB#1 INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C3.2 22-1226 DRAINAGE DETAILS CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE STORMFILTER1 C3.2 IE C SCALE: 1" = 0 105 10' STORMTANK CROSS SECTION2 C3.2 2 C3.2 1 C3.2 Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 138 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C3.3 22-1226 STORMTANK DETAILS CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 139 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C3.4 22-1226 STORMTANK DETAILS CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 140 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) EDMONDS WAY (SR 104) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C4.0 22-1226 FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IEC Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A NOTES: CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 C4.0 SR-104 (EDMONDS WAY) B B 1 C4.0 CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE C5.0 5 Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 141 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C5.0 22-1226 AND DETAILS GENERAL NOTES CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE PIPE SPECIFICATIONS TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION C5.0 1 TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION E4.2 · · CONCRETE SIDEWALK DETAIL C5.0 2 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAIL C5.0 3 CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 C5.0 4 DRIVEWAY APPROACH TYPE-3 DETAIL C5.0 5 GENERAL NOTES: Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 142 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 TH-2 TH-1 EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TP-4 TP-5 TP-3 TP-1 TP-2 INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C6.0 22-1226 POST OFFICE APPROVAL PLAN CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE APPROVAL SUPERINTENDENT POSTAL OPERATIONS Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 143 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 TH-2 TH-1 EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TP-4 TP-5 TP-3 TP-1 TP-2 INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C7.0 22-1226 TREE RETENTION PLAN CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR: , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE LEGEND TREE PROTECTION DETAIL1 C7.0 ” “” TREE PROTECTION NOTES: # SPECIES DBH CSD CONDITION NOTES Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 144 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 TH-2 TH-1 EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TP-4 TP-5 TP-3 TP-1 TP-2 OWNER / APPLICANT ENGINEER/CONTACT SURVEYOR BM EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION VICINITY MAP CASCARA EW S N INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C8.0 22-1226 SEWER AND WATER PLAN CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. SCALE: 1" = 010 20 10' 105 IE C Site Know what's below.before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A LEGEND NOTES: SEWER & WATER NOTES: Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 145 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) INFO@INSIGHTENGINEERING.NET (425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX EVERETT, WA 98206P.O. BOX - 1478 C8.1 22-1226 SEWER NOTES AND DETAILS CASCARA NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. PLN2023-0029 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. Know what's below. before you dig.Call R UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE: CAUTION: B GSET IREGI LAN SSIO NE R AW I NA OET P R O F R E STRA F . S K G N IHA L N EEED N O R B T A OLYPMIC VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT APPROVED FOR WATER AND SEWER CONSTRUCTION Attachment 4 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 146 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DA T E : CO M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A000 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y CO V E R S H E E T DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 CASCARA TOWNHOUSES DESIGN REVIEW REV 2 04/11/2024 EDMONDS, WA SOLID DOT INDICATES UPDATED SHEETS OPEN DOT INDICATES UNCHAGED SHEETS (REFER TO PREVIOUS ISSUE) SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATION ONLY REVISED & SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATION ONLY SHEET REMOVED FROM SET NOT SUBMITTED INDEX: CONTACT INFORMATION : Owner: WESTERLY LLC 320 Dayton St, Suite 101 Edmonds, WA 98020 Contact Jack Lyon e/jake@westerlyre.com p/425.422.0053 Architect: d/Arch LLC 2412 Westlake Ave. N, Suite 3 Seattle, WA 98109 Contact: Matt L. Driscoll e/ mattd@darchllc.com p/ 206.547.1761 Landscape: Civil Engineer: Surveyor: Arborist: Transportetion Engineer: INDEX:ARCHITECTURE COVER:NOTES COVER SHEET 05 . 0 9 . 2 0 2 3 - D R C S u b m i t t a l A100 SITE PLAN A200 1/8" = 1' -0" FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1-2 A201 1/8" = 1' -0" FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3 & ROOF A300 ELEVATIONS - EAST & NORTH A301 ELEVATIONS - WEST & SOUTH A310 SECTIONS A320 POWERLINE SETBACK SECTION DR01 3D VIEWS DR02 3D VIEWS DR03 STREET PERSPECTIVES DR04 STREET PERSPECTIVE DR06 3D VIEWS WITHIN CONTEXT DR07 LIGHTING- Night View SITE INDEX: SURVEY 1/1 TOPOGRAPHIC & BOUNDARY SURVEYPLAN : 1"=20' A001 PROJECT DATA LOCATION: 9516 Edmonds Way ZONING: RM-EW SITE AREA:11,571 SF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC 36 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-1F1-6A) BEG SW COR N1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 TH E 90FT TH N02*54 05W 274.02FT TO SELYMGN CO RD TH NELY ALG SD CO RD 12.46FT TPB TH CONT ALG CRV SD CO RD 91.53FT TH S25*29 40E 130FT TH S48*38 13W 103.96FTTAP WH BEARS S25*29 40E 130FT FR SD CO RD TH N25*29 40W 103.95FT TAP WH BEARS S02*54 05E FR TPB TH N02*54 05W 31.48FT TO TPB SUBJ ESE PUD LESSST HWY PARCEL #: 27033600100900 OWNER: CASCARA LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH 6 TOWNHOUSE. 3- STORY BUILDING WITH 12 PARKING STALLS PROVIDED ON GROUND FLOOR OCCUPANCY/TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: PARKING: S-2/VA RESIDENTIAL:R-2/VA SPRINKLERS: NFPA NO. OF STORIES: 3 ABOVE GRADE; 35' HT BASED ON RM -EW- 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) NO. OF TOWNHOUSES: 6 NO. OF PARKING STALLS: 12 TOTAL BUILDING AREA: 11,224 SF SITE INFORMATION: INDEX: CIVIL S1 C1.0 C1.1 C2.0 SITE PLAN C2.1 C2.2 C3.0 C3.1 C3.2 C4.0 C5.0 C6.0 C7.0 C8.0 C8.1 COVER SHEET EXISTING FEATURES MAP GRADING PLAN SWPP PLAN GRADING AND TESC NOTES & DETAILS ROAD, DRAINAGE & UTILITY PLAN SHARED DRIVEWAY PROFILE DRAINAGE DETAILS FRONTAGE IMPROVMENTS GENERAL NOTES AND DETAILS POST OFFICE APPROVAL PLAN TREE RETENTION PLAN SEWER AND WATER PLAN SEWER NOTES AND DETAILS INDEX:LANDSCAPE L-1 L-2 L-3 L-4 LANDSCAPE PLAN L-5 LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN IRRIGATION PLAN IRRIGATION PLAN 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 - D R C R E V 1 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 - D R C R E V 2 Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 147 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Edmo n d s W a y ( S R 1 0 4 ) Basis of Bearing: Benchmark Tree Legend: Legal Description: Legend: B r a s s T a c k I n v e s t m e n t s Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 148 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 2 5 ' FY 1 2 3 4 5 SHARE D D RIVEWAY DR I V E A I S L E POWER POLE VEHICULAR ENTRANCE AND EGRESS DRIVEWAY SHARED WITH 9600 EDMONDS WAY AND TWO LOTS TO SOUTH DRIVEWAY/HAMMER HEAD FOR 9516 EDMONDS WAY 22 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 30 ' - 5 1 / 4 " 34 ' - 0 3 / 4 " PROTECTION FENCE FENCE #1#2#3 #4 #5 #6 #1&#2 TREES TO RETAIN #3 TREE TO BE REMOVED TREE TO BE REMOVED 20' EASEMENT AGREEMENT (A.F. #2110719)TH 1 1,639 nsf 1,875 gsf TH 2 1,744 nsf 1941 gsf TH 3 1,739 nsf 1,983 gsf TH 4 1,588 nsf 1,818 gsf TH 5 1,576 nsf 1,763 gsf TH 6 1,570 nsf 1,803 gsf +338' +344' +342' +339' +342' +340' +338' Bike Racks Bike Racks 7 ' - 9 1 / 2 " 30' - 7 3/4" Trash Staging Trash Staging Trash Staging Trash Staging Trash Staging Trash Staging#5&#6 TREES TO BE REMOVED, AGREEMENT SIGNED BY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER 5 STREET PARKING STALLS BELONG TO ADJACENT PROPERTY D R I V E W A Y 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 4 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 2 3 / 4 " 30' - 10 3/4" 10' - 2 1/4" 18.91' 10 3 . 9 6 ' 1 0 3 .9 6 ' 11 9 . 4 3 ' 342.00' 338.50' 342.00' 342.00' 338.50' 338.50' 338.50' 340.00' 340.00' Entry Entry Entry Entry Entry Entry 339.50' BLDG A BLDG B AVG. GRADE1= (A+B+C+D)/4 = (338.00'+339.38'+342.00'+338.80')/ 4 = 339.55' B= +339.38' D= +342.00' F=+342.00' A=+338.00' C=+338.80' E= +338.74' H=+344.34'G=+340.50' AVG.GRADE 2= (E+F+G+H)/4= (338.74'+342.00'+344.34'+340.50')/ 4 = 341.40' +342' +344' +339' +338' +338' Footprint: 3325 SF DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A100 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y SI T E P L A N DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:3/32" = 1'-0"1 Site Plan 4'0 8' 16' 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301-A302. 4. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 (below) 5. SITE UTILITIES are all available along Edmonds Way NOTES: LOCATION: 9516 Edmonds Way ZONING: RM-EW SITE AREA:11,571 SF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC 36 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-1F1-6A) BEG SW COR N1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 TH E 90FT TH N02*54 05W 274.02FT TO SELYMGN CO RD TH NELY ALG SD CO RD 12.46FT TPB TH CONT ALG CRV SD CO RD 91.53FT TH S25*29 40E 130FT TH S48*38 13W 103.96FTTAP WH BEARS S25*29 40E 130FT FR SD CO RD TH N25*29 40W 103.95FT TAP WH BEARS S02*54 05E FR TPB TH N02*54 05W 31.48FT TO TPB SUBJ ESE PUD LESSST HWY PARCEL #: 27033600100900 OWNER: CASCARA LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH 6 TOWNHOUSE. 3- STORY BUILDING WITH 12 PARKING STALLS PROVIDED ON GROUND FLOOR OCCUPANCY/TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: PARKING: S-2/VA RESIDENTIAL:R-2/VA SPRINKLERS: NFPA NO. OF STORIES: 3 ABOVE GRADE; 35' HT BASED ON RM-EW- 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) NO. OF TOWNHOUSES: 6 NO. OF PARKING STALLS: 12 TOTAL BUILDING AREA: 11,224 SF SITE INFORMATION: SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"A100 AV.GRADE_CALCULATION2 LOT AREA: 11,571 SF LOT COVERAGE: 3,325 sf / 11,571 sf = 28.74% SCALE:3/64" = 1'-0"A100 LOT COVERAGE CALCULATION3 5206 SF, 45%Revisions: Rev 2 1. Added grades at building to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 149 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 2 4 "F 3 6 "F 1 6 "M 1 8 "P 1 6 "P 24"P 2 0 " F END SSSTUB EX.SSMHRIM=338.59 I.E.=329.87 I.E.=335.27 RIM=339.15 EX.C.B. G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS 3 3 8 3 4 2 340 3 4 4 3 4 0 W I R E -2 G G G GG G G G G T O E -R K T O E -R K P P @ N E -F A C E W I R E -6 W I R E -6 W I R E -5 W I R E -5 W I R E -4 WIRE-4 W I R E -4 W I R E -3 W I R E -3 W I R E -3 W I R E -2 W I R E -2 W I R E -2 W I R E -9 W I R E -8 W I R E -7 W IR E-6 W I R E -5 WIRE-5 W I R E -4 W I R E - 4 WIRE-3 WIRE-3 W I R E -2 W I R E -2 W I R E -1 W I R E -1 W I R E -1 W I R E -6 W I R E -5 W I R E -4 W I R E -3 P P @ S W -F A C E W I R E -8 W I R E - 1 PP@SW-FACE W I R E -6 W IR E-6 WIRE-5 W I R E -5 W I R E -4 W I R E -4 WIRE-3 W I R E -3 W I R E -2 WIRE-2 WIRE-9 W I R E -9 W I R E -8 W I R E -7 W I R E -7 W I R E -1 W I R E -1 1 2 5 9 1 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 1 3 3 1 1 3 3 01329 1 3 2 8 1 3 2 7 1 3 2 6 1 3 0 8 1 3 0 7 1 3 0 6 1 3 0 3 1 2 9 7 1 2 9 6 1 2 8 9 1 2 8 8 1 2 8 0 1279 1 2 7 8 1 2 7 1 1 2 7 0 1 2 6 9 1 2 6 2 1 2 6 1 1 2 6 0 1 2 5 4 1 2 4 5 1 2 4 0 1234 1 2 2 6 1225 1 2 2 4 1 2 2 3 1216 1215 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 3 1 2 0 5 1 2 0 4 1 2 0 3 1 2 9 5 1 2 9 0 1 2 7 7 1 2 7 2 1 3 0 4 1 2 4 3 1 2 0 8 1305 1 2 9 4 1 2 9 3 1292 1 2 9 1 1 2 7 6 1 2 7 5 1274 1 2 7 3 1 2 5 8 1257 1256 1 2 5 5 1 2 4 4 1 2 4 2 1 2 4 1 1 2 0 7 1 2 0 6 3 7 0 .6 9 3 3 6 .7 8 3 3 7 .0 8 3 3 7 .2 4 3 3 7 .5 4337.3 7 3 3 7 .3 5 3 3 6 .5 2 3 3 5 .3 5 3 3 5 .0 6 3 3 5 .6 0 3 3 6 .8 5 3 7 0 .4 7 3 7 0 .1 3 3 7 0 .9 1 3 7 0 .7 8 3 7 0 .3 7 3 6 7 .9 5 370.50 3 7 1 .1 0 3 7 1 .2 9 3 7 0 .6 6 3 6 7 .9 1 3 6 8 .1 8 3 7 0 .6 9 3 7 1 .0 5 4 0 0 .4 7 3 9 2 .2 8 3 8 5 .3 7 370.14 3 6 8 .1 2 370.34 3 7 0 .5 0 3 6 7 . 9 6 367.93 370.66 3 7 0 .7 0 3 6 7 .6 2 3 7 1 .3 6 3 7 0 .7 3 3 6 8 .9 6 3 7 1 .7 7 3 7 0 .5 6 3 7 2 .0 8 3 7 2 .0 9 3 7 9 .3 8 4 0 2 .1 1 3 8 0 . 0 9 374.37 3 7 4 .4 8 3 8 0.0 3 375.01 3 7 1 .0 0 3 7 4 .1 7 3 8 0 .0 8 380.10 3 7 3 .9 1 3 7 1 .4 3 375.07 408.06 3 9 6 .0 8 3 9 7 .8 5 3 9 5 .9 1 3 9 0 .2 4 3 7 5 .0 7 3 7 2 .6 5 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x UP UP UP DN UP DN DN UP RE F . DN DN RE F . RE F . RE F . RE F . RE F . DN DN UP UP UP A301 A3002 A301 2 A300 1 1-1 A310 2-2 A310 DRIVEWAY SHARED WITH 9630 EDMONDS WAY AND TWO LOTS TO SOUTH DRIVEWAY TO SOUTH LOTS NSF : 438 SF TH-4 NSF : 333 SF TH-5 NSF : 333 SF TH-6 NSF : 415 SF TH-3 18' - 3" NSF : 101 SF FOYER NSF : 99 SF FOYER 18 ' - 0 " NSF : 414 SF TH-2 NSF : 388 SF TH-1 NSF : 101 SF FOYER NSF : 95 SF FOYER NSF : 93 SF FOYER 338.50' 338.50' 338.50' 338.50' 338.50' 5' - 2 1/4" 18' - 6" 4' - 11 1/4" 8' - 6"18' - 6" 18 ' - 0 " 22 ' - 3 1 / 4 " 13' - 10 3/4"18' - 6" 18' - 3" 22 ' - 5 1 / 4 " 18' - 6 3/4" PLANTER 19' - 7 3/4"19' - 5"19' - 10 3/4" 34 ' - 0 3 / 4 " 30 ' - 5 1 / 4 " 22 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 18 ' - 0 " 18 ' - 0 " 30 ' - 5 1 / 4 " 28 ' - 7 " 29 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 7 ' - 9 1 / 2 " 8 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 1 5 STREET PARKING STALLS BELONG TO 9630 EDMONDS WAY - --- - --- +338' +340' +336' +340' +342' +338.5' +338.5' 340.00' 359.24' - --- +342' 1 5 ' - 0 " 342.00' Entry 342.00' Entry Entry BLDG A BLDG B A301 A3002 A301 2 A300 1 1-1 A310 2-2 A310 A NSF : 569 SF TH-5 NSF : 533 SF TH-3 NSF : 569 SF TH-6 NSF : 510 SF TH-2 DINING NSF : 579 SF TH-4 NSF : 491 SF TH-1 38 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 30' - 10 3/4" 16 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 32 ' - 9 1 / 4 " 20' - 0 1/4"19' - 5"19' - 10 3/4" 10' - 2" 32 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 16 ' - 7 1 / 2 " 37 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 0 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 0 ' - 8 1 / 2 " 15' - 3 1/4"19' - 5"19' - 10 3/4" 59' - 3 3/4" - 1 5094 SF - --- - ---- --- - --- BLDG A BLDG B 7' - 1 3 / 4 " DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A200 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y FL O O R P L A N - L E V E L 1 - 2 DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"1 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 1 4'0 8' 16' SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"2 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 2 4'0 8' 16' 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301-A302. 4. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 5. SITE UTILITIES are all available along Edmonds Way 6. For POWERLINE SETBACK at Level 2, See A320 NOTES: Revisions: Rev 2 1. Added grades at building to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 150 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DN DN DN DN 1-1 A310 2-2 A310 NSF : 540 SF TH-2 NSF : 662 SF TH-3 NSF : 543 SF TH-6 NSF : 570 SF TH-5 NSF : 583 SF TH-4 NSF : 617 SF TH-1 5 ' - 8 1 / 4 " 31 ' - 1 " 6' - 8 3 / 4 " 16 ' - 7 1 / 2 " 32 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 6' - 9 " 32 ' - 3 " 16 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 32 ' - 9 1 / 4 " - --- - ---- --- - --- - --- BLDG A BLDG B 3' - 2 " 3' - 2 " 0 ' - 6 " 0 ' - 6 " 4" / 12"4" / 12" 4" / 12"4" / 12" 4" / 12"4" / 12" 3 0 ' - 1 0 1 / 2 " 60' - 7 1/2" 59' - 3 1/4" 4" / 12"4" / 12" 4" / 12"4" / 12" 4" / 12"4" / 12" el 373.68' el 373.68' el 373.68' el 371.32' el 371.32' el 371.32' BLDG A BLDG B DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A201 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y FL O O R P L A N - L E V E L 3 & RO O F DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 4'0 8' 16' SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A201 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 31 SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A201 Roof 1 B2 4'0 8' 16' 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301 -A302. 4. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 (below) 5. SITE UTILITIES are all available along Edmonds Way NOTES: Revisions: Rev 2 1. Added roof elevations at building highest pt to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 151 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" LEVEL 2 B 349' -4" Level 3 B 359' -0" Roof 1 B 366' -6" AVG. GRADE_1 339' -6 1/2" MAX. HEIGHT_1 374' -6 1/2" 1-1 A310 ROOF.A 368' -7 3/4" LEVEL 3.A 360' -7 3/4" LEVEL 2.A 350' -9 3/4" AVG.GRADE_2 341' -4 3/4" MAX.HEIGHT_2 371' -4 3/4" 30 ' - 0 " ECDC 16.30.030.B.1 At least 55% of building facade materials must be salvaged, recycled content, bio-based or indigenous. LEVEL 1 A 338' -6" el 371.32' el 373.68' BLDG ABLDG B 35 ' - 0 " 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 9 ' - 1 0 " 8 ' - 0 " 4 ' - 1 0 7 / 8 " 4' - 9 7 / 8 " 7' - 6 " 9' - 8 " 10 ' - 1 0 " LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" AVG. GRADE_1 339' -6 1/2" MAX. HEIGHT_1 374' -6 1/2" 35 ' - 0 " ROOF.A 368' -7 3/4" LEVEL 3.A 360' -7 3/4" LEVEL 2.A 350' -9 3/4" 373.54' 8' - 0 " 9' - 1 0 " 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 4 " / 1 2 "4 " / 1 2 " 3 1 /2 " / 1 2 " Fiber Cement Panel Batten and Board ECDC 16.30.030.B.1 At least 55% of building facade materials must be salvaged, recycled content, bio- based or indigenous. BLDG A 4' - 1 0 7 / 8 " EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION 1 2 DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A300 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y EL E V A T I O N S - E A S T & NO R T H DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A300 EAST ELEVATION2 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A300 NORTH ELEVATION1 4'0 8' 16' 4'0 8' 16' 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301 -A302. 4. 35' BUILDING HEIGHT base on RM-EW 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) 5. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 NOTES: Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch 2. Added roof elevations at building highest pt to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 152 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" LEVEL 2 B 349' -4" Level 3 B 359' -0" Roof 1 B 366' -6" 7' - 6 " 9' - 8 " 10 ' - 1 0 " AVG.GRADE_2 341' -4 3/4" MAX.HEIGHT_2 371' -4 3/4" 4 " / 1 2 " 371.32'371.32'371.32' ECDC 16.30.030.B.1 At least 55% of building facade materials must be salvaged, recycled content, bio-based or indigenous. Fiber Cement Panel Batten and Board BLDG B 30 ' - 0 " 4' - 9 7 / 8 " WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" LEVEL 2 B 349' -4" Level 3 B 359' -0" Roof 1 B 366' -6" AVG. GRADE_1 339' -6 1/2" MAX. HEIGHT_1 374' -6 1/2" 1-1 A310 ROOF.A 368' -7 3/4" LEVEL 3.A 360' -7 3/4" LEVEL 2.A 350' -9 3/4" AVG.GRADE_2 341' -4 3/4" MAX.HEIGHT_2 371' -4 3/4" 35 ' - 0 " 371.32' 373.54' 26' - 5 1/4" LEVEL 1 A 338' -6"BLDG A BLDG B 7' - 6 " 9' - 8 " 10 ' - 1 0 " 30 ' - 0 " 4' - 9 7 / 8 " 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 9 ' - 1 0 " 8 ' - 0 " 4 ' - 1 0 7 / 8 " DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A301 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y EL E V A T I O N S - W E S T & SO U T H DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A301 SOUTH ELEVATION2 NOTES: 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301-A302. 4. 35' BUILDING HEIGHT base on RM-EW 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) 5. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A301 WEST ELEVATION1 Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch 2. Added roof elevations at building highest pt to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 153 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) AVG. GRADE_1 339' -6 1/2" MAX. HEIGHT_1 374' -6 1/2" 2-2 A310 - --- ROOF.A 368' -7 3/4" LEVEL 3.A 360' -7 3/4" LEVEL 2.A 350' -9 3/4" 1 A320- --- LEVEL 1 A 338' -6" 35 ' - 0 " BLDG A 8' - 0 " 9' - 1 0 " 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 373.54' 373.54'373.54' LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" LEVEL 2 B 349' -4" Level 3 B 359' -0" Roof 1 B 366' -6" AVG. GRADE_1 339' -6 1/2" MAX. HEIGHT_1 374' -6 1/2" 1-1 A310 7' - 6 " 9' - 8 " 10 ' - 1 0 " 35 ' - 0 " 9' - 8 3 / 4 " 371.32' ROOF.A 368' -7 3/4" LEVEL 3.A 360' -7 3/4" LEVEL 2.A 350' -9 3/4" AVG.GRADE_2 341' -4 3/4" MAX.HEIGHT_2 371' -4 3/4" 337.83' 30 ' - 0 " LEVEL 1 A 338' -6" 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 9 ' - 1 0 " 8 ' - 0 " BLDG A BLDG B 373.54' DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A310 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y SE C T I O N S DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A310 SECTION 1-11-1 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A310 SECTION 2-22-2 4'0 8' 16' 4'0 8' 16' NOTES: 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301-A302. 4. 35' BUILDING HEIGHT base on RM-EW 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) 5. For AVERAGE GRADE calculation, see A100 Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch 2. Added roof elevations at building highest pt to match building ht revision Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 154 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 1 0 ' B S B L 15'BSBL 15'BSBL S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y 2 5 ' 5' 4' 3 0 ' 5 ' 1 9 ' A A B B 15'-2" RADIUS FROM WIRE 1 LEVEL 1 B 338' -6" LEVEL 2 B 349' -4" Level 3 B 359' -0" Roof 1 B 366' -6" POWERLINE CLR. AVG.GRADE_2 341' -4 3/4" MAX.HEIGHT_2 371' -4 3/4" LEVEL 1 A 338' -6" DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S A320 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y PO W E R L I N E S E T B A C K SE C T I O N DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0"A320 POWERLINE SETBACK -PLAN3 SCALE:1" = 10'-0"A320 POWERLINE CLEARANCE1 Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 155 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) EDMONDS WAYEDMONDS WAYNE AXONOMETRIC SW AXONOMETRIC DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR01 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y 3D V I E W S DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:DR01 AXONOMETRIC -NE1 SCALE:DR01 AXONOMETRIC -SW2 NOTES: 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301 -A302. 4. 35' BUILDING HEIGHT based on RM-EW 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 156 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS WAY SE AXONOMETRIC NW AXONOMETRIC DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR02 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y 3D V I E W S DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:DR02 AXONOMETRIC -NW1 SCALE:DR02 AXONOMETRIC -SE2 NOTES: 1. FOR SUMMARY: PROJECT DATA. SEE A001 2. EXISTING GRADE ELEVATIONS are taken from survey by others. See SURVEY. 3. For BUILDING HEIGHTS; See BUILDING ELEVATIONS, A301 -A302. 4. 35' BUILDING HEIGHT based on RM-EW 16.30.030.A.4(a)(1) & (3) Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 157 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR03 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y ST R E E T P E R S P E C T I V E S DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:DR03 3D View 21 SCALE:DR03 3D View 32 BATTEN AND BOARD FIBER CEMENT PANELS BATTEN AND BOARD FIBER CEMENT PANELS ENTRY CANOPY PITCHED ROOF Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 158 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR04 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y ST R E E T P E R S P E C T I V E DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 SCALE:DR04 3D View 41 SCALE:DR04 3D View 52 BATTEN AND BOARD FIBER CEMENT PANELS BATTEN AND BOARD FIBER CEMENT PANELS Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 159 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR06 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y 3D V I E W S W I T H I N CO N T E X T DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 Revisions: Rev 2 1. Lowered Building 2 to compy with ECDC 16.30.030, 25' + 5' w/4:12 pitch Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 160 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) DA T E : C O M M E N T : D A T E : C O M M E N T : BY: d/Arch Llc #: Seattle, WA c 2 0 2 4 d / A r c h L l c 24 1 2 W e s t l a k e A v e . N , S t e 3 Se a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 9 p/ 2 0 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 1 f / 20 6 . 5 4 7 . 1 7 6 2 ww w . d A r c h L l c . c o m d/A r c h L l c CA S C A R A T O W N H O U S E S DR07 95 1 6 E d m o n d s W a y LI G H T I N G - N i g h t V i e w DR C S u b m i t t a l DR C R e v 1 DR C R e v 2 05 . 1 0 . 2 0 2 3 10 . 2 5 . 2 0 2 3 04 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 4 04.11.2024 OUTDOOR SCONE LED EXTERIOR ENTRY DOOR MANUFACTURER: PHILLIPS PRODUCT/ITEM NUMBER: SLIM SURFACE LED SIZE: 5" TRIM/FINISH: ALUMINUM/ BLACK CONTACT: N/A OUTDOOR LANDSCAPE PATH LIGHT LED EXTERIOR PATHWAY MANUFACTURER: PHILLIPS PRODUCT/ITEM NUMBER: PATH LIGHT SIZE: 2.375" TRIM/FINISH: ALUMINUM/ BLACK CONTACT: N/A ITEM LOCATION DESCRIPTION D-1 P-1 SYMBOL LIGHTING SCHEDULE IMAGE D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D1 D1 D1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 DOWN-LIGHT SURFACE MOUNTED LED GARAGE DOORD-2 MANUFACTURER: PHILLIPS PRODUCT/ITEM NUMBER: SLIM SURFACE LED SIZE: 5" TRIM/FINISH: ALUMINUM/ BLACK CONTACT: N/A D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 Attachment 5 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 161 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Shoffner Consulting 1015 10th St. Mukilteo, WA 98275 Mobile:(206)755-9407 tony@tonyshoffner.com November 11, 2022 Jake Lyon Westerly, LLC 320 Dayton St. Suite 101 Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Tree Inventory Report - Cascara, 9516 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA Jake: This report is provided to report on the inventory I conducted of the trees on the property of the proposed Cascara project site in the City of Edmonds, WA. The accompanying tree inventory map shows the locations, the tree numbers and the information on species and trunk dbh for the surveyed trees. The inventory and this report are provided to address EMC 23.10. 1.0 Professional Experience and Credentials Following is a summarization of my experience and credentials as a consulting arborist: • Master of Science in Urban Horticulture from Center for Urban Horticulture, University of Washington, 1996. Focus of study and thesis was nursery production of Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) and establishment into a natrual/urban ecosystem. • ISA Certified Arborist since 1996. • Tree Risk Assessment Qualified since 2012. • Consulting arborist, 1996-present. • Wetland Biologist, 1996-1998 • Other related experience: City of Everett Urban Forestry, summers 1989-1992; Natural Resource Management staff and Bellevue Botanical Garden staff, City of Bellevue, 1996-1997. 2.0 Site Conditions and Proposed Development The project site is currently undeveloped but has been cleared of significant vegetation. It is bordered by lots developed with single family residences and an undeveloped lot. 3.0 Tree Inventory - Methods and Results I conducted visual evaluations of all the trees according to ISA standards and based upon many years conducting such evaluations on trees in the Pacific Northwest. I oberserved trees up close to inspect conditions of the trunk and from afar to inspect conditions in the crowns. All assessments were conducted according to the methods specified in the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Manual (Dunster, Julian A., E. Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lily. 2013. Tree Risk Assessment Manual. Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 162 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) The investigations involved the gathering of the following information: • Tree species • Trunk diameter • Crown spread diameter • Location factors • Health and condition notes (general level of vigor, defects, disease or pest problems) There are 4 significant trees on the property and three just off-site with drip lines that extend onto the property. All are shown on the inventory map. All of the information specific to each tree is provided in the accompanying Tree Evaluation Data spreadsheet. In summary, all of the trees are in good to generally good condition and health and no significant defects were noted. 4.0 Limits of Disturbance Discussion and Encroachment The City of Edmonds requires Limits of Disturbance (LOD) be established as minimum distance of protection for all retained trees on site and for those just off-site with driplines that extend onto the property. Limits of development for each tree are provided on the accompanying Tree Evaluation Data spreadsheet. The LODs are set based upon the following criteria: • For trees with higher crowns where development can occur below the crown, the LODs are set a location to protect the structural root plate for below ground features. Above ground features can be within the LOD as no root disturbance will result. • For small trees with low crowns, the LOD is set just beyond the edge of the drip line in order to eliminate impacts to the crown. This distance is also adequate to provide sufficient root protection and prevent significant disturbance. 5.0 Tree Retention, Replacement Required and Protection. The City of Edmonds tree retention, protect and replacement requirements are specified in chapter 23.10 Tree Related Regulations. Tree Retention - The City of Edmonds requires retention of 30% of the significant trees. At 4 significant trees, 2 trees are required to be retained. The project proposes to retain 2 significant trees and removes 2 trees for 50% retention. Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 163 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 5.1 Tree Replacement The proposed development plan proposes the removal of 2 trees on the property. Replacement of significant trees will be required as follows as required by ECDC 23.10.080 6”-10” One new tree 10.1”-14” Two new trees >14” Three new trees Replacement for the removal of the 2 significant trees on the property requires 6 replacement trees, or its equivalent in fee in lieu. Replacement trees shall primarily be native species and sized as follows: Deciduous trees - 1 1/2” caliper Evergreen trees - 6 feet tall The site plans show the locations of the proposed replacement trees. Replacement Tree Fee in Lieu: A fee in lieu of tree replacement may be allowed, subject to approval by the director after consideration of all other options. A tree replacement fee shall be required for each replacement tree required but not planted on the application site or an off-site location. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $1,000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the city’s tree fund. 2. The fee shall be paid to the city prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 5.2 Tree Protection Measures The following tree protection measures are required by 23.10.070 of the ECDC: Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate city staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows: 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines. B. Placing Materials Near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 164 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state, at a minimum, “Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited,” and provide the city phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand-excavating a two-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director’s authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half of the area of the tree’s critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree’s survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree’s critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree’s survival and to minimize the potential for root-induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 165 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree’s survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. F. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices. [Ord. 4218 § 1 (Att. A), 2021]. 6.0 Impact Assessment Encroachment is proposed into the drip line setbacks of the two retained trees for the new building to the north of the trees. The distance between the building and the trees is far enough that root damage will be minor. Over-excavation for the foundation within the protection zone of the retained trees is to be limited to no more than 2 feet. Any damaged roots as large as 1/2” are to be hand cut just prior to backfilling at a point beyond the damage where the root bark is not torn or damaged. This will help the roots to heal. Removal of tree #3 is to be done in a way that will lessen the impacts to the roots of trees 1 and 2. Preverably, the stump is to be ground down to below the soil surface. 7.0 Use of This Report This report is provided as a means of addressing the trees on the property of the Linton Short Plat project in the City of Edmonds, WA. This report addresses only trees on this property. There is no gurarantee that retained trees will survive through construction, and as trees are dynamic and their conditions can change rapidly due to environmental changes, Shoffner Consulting cannot be held liable for the failure of any retained trees. Cordially, Tony Shoffner ISA Certified Arborist #PN-0909A TRAQ Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 166 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) TREE EVALUATION DATA Westerly, LLC - Cascara 9516 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA November 11, 2022 Tree #LocaFon Species Dbh CSD RaFng LOD N LOD S LOD E LOD W CondiFon Notes Status Replacement 1 On site Western white pine (Pinus monFcola)18"30’2 15’N/A N/A N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Minor deadwood.To be retained 0 2 On site Western white pine (Pinus monFcola)18"28’2 6’N/A N/A N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Minor deadwood.To be retained 0 3 On site Western white pine (Pinus monFcola)24"36’2 15’N/A N/A N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Large and older.To be removed 3 4 On site Silver maple (Acer saccharinum)16"44’1 15’15’15’15’Good condiFon and health. No defects.To be removed 3 5 Off-site Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)36"42’2 N/A N/A 15’N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Large and older.Off-site 0 6 Off-site Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)24"40’2 N/A N/A 15’N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Large and older.Off-site 0 7 Off-site Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii)20"34’2 15’N/A N/A N/A Generally good condiFon and health. No defects. Large and older.Off-site 0 6 Tree #Tree number as assigned on tag Species Species of tree Dbh Trunk diameter inches at 54” height CSD Crown spread diameter in feet RaFng CondiFon RaFng: 1=Very good condiFon and health. No defects. Young and vigorous. 2=Generally good condiFon and health. May be minor defects. Older and less vigorous. 3=Fair condiFon and health. Defects and/or health concerns. Symptoms of stress / decline. 4=Poor condiFon and health. Major defects and significant health issues. LOD - Specified limits of disturbance based upon tree size, height and crown spread CondiFon Notes Notes on condiFons specific to each tree if specific concerns over health or defects Status Significant status Replacement Number of trees required for replacement if removed. 1 Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 167 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Edmond s W a y ( S R 1 0 4 ) Basis of Bearing: Benchmark Tree Legend: Legal Description: Legend: Br a s s T a c k I n v e s t m e n t s #1 TR E E I N V E N T O R Y M A P #2#3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 168 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Attachment 6 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 169 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y DRIVE A I S L E CLEARING LIMITS LINE EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TREE TO BE PROTECTED, TYP. TREE TO BE REMOVED, TYP. TREE PROTECTION FENCE, TYP. SHEET NO: DATE: APRIL 28, 2023 L-1 APPLICANT: ODG PROJECT #: 23-472 DRAWN BY: KL CHECKED BY: KL REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION ORIGIN 1031 185TH AVE NE SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 TEL: 425.346.1905 CA S C A R A A P A R T M E N T S 95 1 6 E D M O N D S W A Y ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 PA R C E L : 2 7 0 3 3 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 DESIGN GROUP STATE OF WASHINGTON LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KRYSTAL LOWE LICENCE NO. 1206 # DESCRIPTION DATE OF 5 NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DRAWING TITLE: LANDSCAPE PLAN 1 CITY COMMENTS 8/22/2023 00 20'40' NORTH GENERAL NOTES All rough grading shall be positive, draining away from all structures. All stones larger than 1.5" diameter shall be removed from the growing medium. Topsoil shall be provided in accordance to BMP T5.13 WSDOE Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. All bed areas to receive 2" of fine ground fir or hemlock bark, composition mulches are not an acceptable alternative. Trees and shrubs are to be planted at a depth 3/4" higher than the level that they were grown in the nursery. Bark mulch is not to be placed above the root crown. All plants shall at least conform to the minimum standard established by the american association of nurserymen. Lawn areas are to be hydroseeded per manufacturer's specifications, OR EQUIVALENT. Remove all stones larger than 1" from lawn areas. Equivalent plant material substitutions may be allowed with prior approval by the Landscape Architect. If the site work is different than shown on the Landscape Plan, or poor soils and debris are discovered, requiring changes to the Landscape Plan, contact the Landscape Architect for instruction. The Landscape Contractor is responsible for maintaining the landscape during installation, until final acceptance by the owner's representative. The Landscape Contractor shall warranty all materials and workmanship for a period of one year, from the time of final acceptance. During the warranty period, the Landscape Contractor will not be responsible for plant death caused by unusual climatic conditions, vandalism, theft, fire, or poor maintenance practices. The Landscape Architect shall have sole authority to determine the cause of death. Planting plan takes precedent when there is a discrepancy between plant quantities in the plant schedule and the plan. All vehicle traffic shall be routed away from significant trees during construction to avoid excessive soil compaction. Where vehicular traffic is required the soil shall be protected with a 10" layer of woodchips and/or plywood placed over the path of the vehicle. The woodchips may be removed when no longer needed. All significant trees to be saved and/or retained shall be protected with a 5' high chainlink or plastic net fencing placed 5' beyond tree driplines during construction. The fencing shall not be removed without the authorization of the consulting arborist or site supervisor. Trenching within tree driplines shall be avoided. Tunneling around primary tree roots is permitted when disturbance within driplines is necessary. Stump pulling of all trees to be removed in the vicinity of significant trees to be retained shall be avoided. Stump grinding is permitted as necessary. It may be necessary to provide supplemental irrigation during dry periods within the construction process, and mulching over the roots of any or all preserved trees. TREE PROTECTION Existing tree.5' high chainlink or plastic net fencing. Securely attach to posts w/staples or wire rings. 2 x 4 wood post Alt: Steel fence post Existing Grade NOTE: No construction activity allowed within dripline of tree. See specifications. 1' - 6 " Dripline of tree or per plan TREE PROTECTION FENCING NTS1 JAKE LYON WESTERLY, LLC 320 DAYTON ST, STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 JAKE@WESTERLYRE.COM 2 SITE PLAN CHANGES 9/6/2023 Attachment 7 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 170 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y DRIVE A I S L E TYPE II LANDSCAPING TYPE II LANDSCAPING TYPE III LANDSCAPING EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) TYPE IV LANDSCAPING SHEET NO: DATE: APRIL 28, 2023 L-2 APPLICANT: ODG PROJECT #: 23-472 DRAWN BY: KL CHECKED BY: KL REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION ORIGIN 1031 185TH AVE NE SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 TEL: 425.346.1905 CA S C A R A A P A R T M E N T S 95 1 6 E D M O N D S W A Y ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 PA R C E L : 2 7 0 3 3 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 DESIGN GROUP STATE OF WASHINGTON LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KRYSTAL LOWE LICENCE NO. 1206 # DESCRIPTION DATE OF 5 NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DRAWING TITLE: LANDSCAPE PLAN # 00 20'40' NORTH ECDC 23.10.060.C 25% of all significant trees in the developable site shall be retained. There are 4 trees on-site. 2 trees shall be removed and replaced at a 3:1 ratio. There are 3 trees off-site. 2 trees shall be removed. 1 tree shall be removed and replaced at a 3:1 ratio. For the significant tree greater than 24' in DBH removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required. TREE RETENTION TREE REPLACEMENT ECDC 23.10.080 A. Replacement Required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 23.10.060(A). Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: 1. For each significant tree between six inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one replacement tree is required. 2. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DBH removed, two replacement trees are required. 3. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DBH removed, three replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: 1. The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor, for reasons not attributable to the development. D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. One-and-one-half-inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller-sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. 4. Replacement trees must be planted within the city of Edmonds or its urban growth area. Trees 3 & 4 to be removed. #3 = Western White Pine = 18" DBH = 3 replacement trees required #4 = Silver Maple = 16" DBH = 3 replacement trees required #5 = Douglas Fir = 36" DBH = A fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required. #6 - Douglas Fir = 24" DBH = 3 replacement trees required 9 replacement trees required 9 replacement trees proposed 9 replacement trees have been provided. Some native or ornamental varieties of native species have been provided, with the remainder being ornamental species appropriate for the density of the site. See Arborist report provided by Shoffner Consulting for additional information. TREE INVENTORY JAKE LYON WESTERLY, LLC 320 DAYTON ST, STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 JAKE@WESTERLYRE.COM DECIDUOUS TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER SPACING 4 Acer circinatum Vine Maple 8` Ht.B&B SPACING AS SHOWN 1 Acer palmatum 'Tsukasa Silhouette'Tsukasa Silhouette Japanese Maple 1.5" Cal.B&B SPACING AS SHOWN 1 Amelanchier x grandiflora `Autumn Brilliance`Autumn Brilliance Apple Serviceberry 1.5" Cal.B&B SPACING AS SHOWN EVERGREEN TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER SPACING 2 Cupressus nootkatensis `Pendula`Weeping Nootka Cypress 6` MIN. HT.B&B SPACING AS SHOWN 1 Pinus contorta Shore Pine 6` MIN. HT.B&B 20` O.C. 2 Thuja plicata 'Excelsa'Excelsa Western Red Cedar 6` Ht.B&B SPACING AS SHOWN 4 Thuja x `Junior Giant`Junior Giant Thuja 6` MIN. HT.B&B 20` O.C. STREET TREES QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER SPACING 2 Prunus serrulata 'Amanogawa'Japanese Flowering Cherry 2" Cal.B&B PLANT SCHEDULE SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER 11 Berberis thunbergii `Crimson Pygmy`Crimson Pygmy Japanese Barberry 18" HT Pot 7 Calamagrostis x acutiflora 'Karl Foerster'Karl Foerster Feather Reed Grass 18" HT Pot 21 Euonymus japonicus `Aureo-marginatus`Golden Euonymus 18" HT Pot 4 Hydrangea paniculata `Dvp Pinky` TM Pinky Winky Panicled Hydrangea 18" HT Pot 20 Nandina domestica `Gulf Stream` TM Gulf Stream Heavenly Bamboo 18" HT Pot 33 Pennisetum alopecuroides `Hameln`Hameln Fountain Grass 18" HT Pot 3 Symphoricarpos albus Common White Snowberry 18" HT Pot 18 Vaccinium ovatum `Native Star`Native Star Evergreen Huckleberry 18" HT Pot GROUND COVERS QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONTAINER 426 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Kinnikinnick 4"Pot PLANT SCHEDULE TYPE II LANDSCAPE COMPLIANCE For calculations purposes only. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 30 percent being deciduous, a minimum of six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 20 feet on center. TYPE III LANDSCAPE COMPLIANCE For calculations purposes only. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, a minimum of six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 30 feet on center. TYPE IV LANDSCAPE COMPLIANCE For calculations purposes only. 1.Trees shall be deciduous and planted 25 feet on center and the trunk shall be free of branches below six feet in height. 2.Plant materials which will cover the ground within three years, and which will not exceed three and one-half feet in height. 1 CITY COMMENTS 8/22/2023 2 SITE PLAN CHANGES 9/6/2023 Attachment 7 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 171 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) SHEET NO: DATE: APRIL 28, 2023 L-3 APPLICANT: ODG PROJECT #: 23-472 DRAWN BY: KL CHECKED BY: KL REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION ORIGIN 1031 185TH AVE NE SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 TEL: 425.346.1905 CA S C A R A A P A R T M E N T S 95 1 6 E D M O N D S W A Y ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 PA R C E L : 2 7 0 3 3 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 DESIGN GROUP STATE OF WASHINGTON LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KRYSTAL LOWE LICENCE NO. 1206 # DESCRIPTION DATE OF 5 DRAWING TITLE: LANDSCAPE PLAN 1/ 3 T R E E H E I G H T NOTE: WHERE TREES OCCUR IN LAWN AREAS, PROVIDE 3' DIA MULCH CIRCLE. TREE GUY STAKE FINISH GRADE OF MULCH FLAG WIRES 2-STRANDS #10 GAUGE WIRE W/ VINYL HOSE GUY AT 3 POINTS PER TREE EQUAL SPACED 45° CONIFER TREE PLANTING & GUYING 1/2" = 1'-0" 45 ° 2 SHRUB - MODIFIED SOIL 3/4" = 1'-0" Notes: 1- Shrubs shall be of quality prescribed in the root observations detail and specifications. 2- See specifications for further requirements related to this detail. Modified soil. Depth varies. Root ball. 4" high x 8" wide round - topped soil berm above root ball surface shall be constructed around the root ball. Berm shall begin at root ball periphery. Prior to mulching, lightly tamp soil around the root ball in 6" lifts to brace shrub. Do not over compact. When the planting hole has been backfilled, pour water around the root ball to settle the soil. 4" layer of mulch. No more than 1" of mulch on top of root ball. (See specifications for mulch). Root ball rests on existing or recompacted soil. Existing soil. Finished grade. Shrub. SECTION VIEW URBAN TREE FOUNDATION © 2014 OPEN SOURCE FREE TO USE FX-PL-FX-SHRB-03 3 E Q . EQ. Notes: 1- See planting legend for groundcover species, size, and spacing dimension. 2- Small roots (14" or less) that grow around, up, or down the root ball periphery are considered a normal condition in container production and are acceptable however they should be eliminated at the time of planting. Roots on the periphery can be removed at the time of planting. 3- Settle soil around root ball of each groundcover prior to mulching. PLAN SECTION VIEW Pavement. Mulch. Groundcover plants to be triangularly spaced. Existing soil. Modified soil. Depth varies. 2 - 3" thick layer of mulch. Finished grade. 6" m i n . GROUNDCOVER 3/4" = 1'-0"4 1" = 1'-0" TREE DOUBLE STAKE PLANTING SHRUB AREAS. PLANTING AT STAKING DETAILPLANT PIT DETAIL TURF AREAS. PLANTING AT FX-PL-FX-TREE-11 1 JAKE LYON WESTERLY, LLC 320 DAYTON ST, STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 JAKE@WESTERLYRE.COM ECDC 20.13.020.N Trees and very large shrubs should be planted at least five feet from any water/sewer lines. Landscape plantings shall reflect consideration of plantings in relation to utility lines. GENERAL DESIGN STANDARDS TREE PLANTING PROCEDURES GUIDELINES FOR STREET TREE LOCATION, SPACING AND CLEARANCES ARE DEFINED BELOW: Maintain the following minimum clearances: 5 feet from underground utilities unless adequate protection is provided for the tree and the utility line as approved by the City. Call 1-800-424-5555 to request location of underground utilities, 10 feet from power poles, 7-1/2 feet from driveways, 20 feet from street lights, 20 feet from other existing trees, 30 feet from street intersections except at intersections with special design treatment and/or as approved by the City. EDMONDS STREETSCAPE PLAN 1 CITY COMMENTS 8/22/2023 2 SITE PLAN CHANGES 9/6/2023 Attachment 7 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 172 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-3 S H A R E D D R I V E W A Y DRIVE A I S L E EDMO N D S W A Y ( S R 1 0 4 ) 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0101 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 65 5 4 6 6 6 6 5 5 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 8 8 858 5 5 8 5 8 8 8 8 5 5 01 01 8 01 01 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 M BF C RF 1 18.11" 2 19.11" 3 13.31" 12" 3 4" 12"12" 12" 3 4" 12" 114" 12" 8 12" 12" 114" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12"114" 1" 12" 3 4" 12" 1" 114" 114" 1" 3 4" 114" 1" 3 4" 12" 3 4" 12" 1" 12" 1" 12" 114" 5 5 6 SHEET NO: DATE: APRIL 28, 2023 L-4 APPLICANT: ODG PROJECT #: 23-472 DRAWN BY: KL CHECKED BY: KL REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION ORIGIN 1031 185TH AVE NE SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 TEL: 425.346.1905 CA S C A R A A P A R T M E N T S 95 1 6 E D M O N D S W A Y ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 PA R C E L : 2 7 0 3 3 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 DESIGN GROUP STATE OF WASHINGTON LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KRYSTAL LOWE LICENCE NO. 1206 # DESCRIPTION DATE OF 5 NE 1/4, SEC. 36, TWP. 27N. RGE. 3 E., W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DRAWING TITLE: IRRIGATION PLAN 00 20'40' NORTH IRRIGATION NOTES All city standards shall be followed. Plan is diagrammatic and conceptual in nature. Standard trade practices shall be employed to insure economy of trenching and sleeving. Exact location of lines and heads may be altered by contractor to provide best water coverage. Manufacturer's recommended head spacing shall be exceeded only with permission of landscape architect. Adjust sprinkler arc and radius as needed to avoid over spray onto hard surfaces, while maintaining coverage. Irrigation trench depths, 18" for mainline, 12" for lateral lines. trenches shall be free of all debris that can result in damage to the piping. Set valve boxes square to adjacent buildings, walks or parking. Owner to provide deduct/exempt meter as required by water purveyor. Leave a minimum of 3' of additional control wire looped at each valve box. Attach control wires to the adjacent piping with electrical tape, at least every 2'. Run 3 spare wires along entire length of mainline, loop through each valve box to farthest valve box each direction. For irrigation lines located in the right-of-way, the property owner will be responsible for maintaining and locating all irrigation lines. Controller locations may be adjusted . Flow and static pressure was not provided. Design assumption of 75 GPM and 70 PSI static pressure at the meter. Verify in field. SYMBOL MANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTION QTY PSI DETAIL Hunter PROS-00-PRS30 short radius nozzles Shrub Spray, Fixed Riser. 30 psi regulated Shrub Adapter. Co-molded wiper seal with UV Resistant Material. 34 30 5/5 Hunter PROS-00-PRS30 5` radius Shrub Spray, Fixed Riser. 30 psi regulated Shrub Adapter. Co-molded wiper seal with UV Resistant Material. 22 30 5/5 Hunter PROS-00-PRS30 8` radius Shrub Spray, Fixed Riser. 30 psi regulated Shrub Adapter. Co-molded wiper seal with UV Resistant Material. 26 30 5/5 Hunter PROS-00-PRS30 10` radius Shrub Spray, Fixed Riser. 30 psi regulated Shrub Adapter. Co-molded wiper seal with UV Resistant Material. 26 30 5/5 Hunter PROS-00-PRS30 Adjustable Arc Shrub Spray, Fixed Riser. 30 psi regulated Shrub Adapter. Co-molded wiper seal with UV Resistant Material. 2 30 5/5 SYMBOL MANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTION QTY DETAIL Hunter ICV-G 1" 1", 1-1/2", 2", and 3" Plastic Electric Remote Control Valves, Globe Configuration, with NPT Threaded Inlet/Outlet, for Commercial/Municipal Use. 3 4/5 Zurn 950XL 1" Double Check Valve Assembly 1 1/5 Hunter PHC-1200 Wi-Fi enabled, full-functioning controller with touchscreen, 12-Station fixed controller, 120 VAC, Outdoor model. 1 Hunter RFC Rain and freeze sensor, with conduit installation, mount as noted. Normally closed switch. 1 3/5 Point of Connection 1 Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Schedule 40 1/2"541.1 l.f. Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Schedule 40 3/4"71.6 l.f. Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Schedule 40 1"76.5 l.f. Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Schedule 40 1 1/4"77.8 l.f. Irrigation Mainline: PVC Schedule 40 1 1/4"207.6 l.f. Pipe Sleeve: PVC Class 200 SDR 21 42.6 l.f. 2H2Q 4H4Q 6Q 6H 4 4 6 6 Q H F 5 5 5 FHTQ 8 8 8 8 Q T H F 01 01 01 01 4 6 8 01 21 51 71 BF C RF M Valve Number Valve Flow Valve Size Valve Callout # ##" IRRIGATION SCHEDULE NUMBER MODEL SIZE TYPE GPM WIRE PSI PSI @ POC PRECIP 1 Hunter ICV-G 1"Shrub Spray 18.07 22.6 36.4 42.1 1.63 in/h 2 Hunter ICV-G 1"Shrub Spray 19.08 118.3 36.1 44.2 1.55 in/h 3 Hunter ICV-G 1"Shrub Spray 13.25 218.1 36.2 44.3 1.59 in/h Common Wire 207.6 VALVE SCHEDULE JAKE LYON WESTERLY, LLC 320 DAYTON ST, STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 JAKE@WESTERLYRE.COM 1 CITY COMMENTS 8/22/2023 2 SITE PLAN CHANGES 9/6/2023 Attachment 7 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 173 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) SHEET NO: DATE: APRIL 28, 2023 L-5 APPLICANT: ODG PROJECT #: 23-472 DRAWN BY: KL CHECKED BY: KL REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION ORIGIN 1031 185TH AVE NE SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 TEL: 425.346.1905 CA S C A R A A P A R T M E N T S 95 1 6 E D M O N D S W A Y ED M O N D S , W A 9 8 0 2 0 PA R C E L : 2 7 0 3 3 6 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 JAKE LYON WESTERLY, LLC 320 DAYTON ST, STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 JAKE@WESTERLYRE.COM DESIGN GROUP STATE OF WASHINGTON LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT KRYSTAL LOWE LICENCE NO. 1206 # DESCRIPTION DATE OF 5 DRAWING TITLE: IRRIGATION PLAN SERVICE SIDE MAINLINE SIDE 1 2 ENCLOSURE SIZE PLUS 6" LENGTH AND WIDTH 3 HE I G H T A S P E R LO C A L C O D E 4 5 6 7 8 9 REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW W/ ENCLOSURE 1" = 1'-0" REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW DEVICE AS SPECIFIED 1 BACKFLOW ENCLOSURE AS SPECIFIED 2 CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKS, 90 LBS OF CONCRETE EACH 3 GALVANIZED NIPPLES AND ELL AS REQUIRED 4 GALVANIZED UNIONS AT EACH SIDE 5 GALVANIZED RISERS6 4" THICK MIN. CONCRETE PAD 7 GALVANIZED ELL AND NIPPLE, TYPICAL 8 PVC COUPLER OR REDUCER AS REQUIRED, TYPICAL 9 1 FX-IR-FX-BACK-04 ACC CONTROLLER WALL MOUNT 1" = 1'-0" 15 1 2"MINIMUM CLEARANCE FOR DOOR OPENING MODEL ACC-XX00 ADDITIONAL CONTROL WIRE CONDUIT, UP TO 2" SIZE. CONTROL WIRE CONDUIT, UP TO 2 1/2" SIZE. SUPPLEMENTAL GROUND WIRE INSTALL PER ASIC GUIDELINES 3/4" POWER SUPPLY CONDUIT J BOX INSIDE CONTROLLER CONNECT PER LOCAL CODE 2 FX-IR-HUNT-CONT-05 RAIN-CLIK 3" = 1'-0" EXTERIOR WALL (SEE NOTE) MODEL RAIN-CLIK RUN LEAD WIRES TO CONTROLLER NOTE: MOUNT ON ANY SURFACE WHERE IT WILL BE EXPOSED TO UNOBSTRUCTED RAINFALL, BUT NOT IN PATH OF SPRINKLER SPRAY. 3 FX-IR-HUNT-SENS-16 ICV GLOBE VALVE 1" = 1'-0" 18-24" COILED WIRE WATERPROOF CONNECTORS (2) REMOTE CONTROL VALVE MODEL ICV-XXXG FINISH GRADE STANDARD VALVE BOX SCH 80 T.O.E. NIPPLE MAIN LINE PIPE & FITTINGS BRICK SUPPORTS (4) 3/4" MINUS WASHED GRAVEL 4 FX-IR-HUNT-VALV-20 PROS-00-R SPRAY HEAD W/ PVC STREET ELLS 3" = 1'-0" MODEL PROS-00-R RECLAIMED SHRUB ADAPTER MODEL CV-50F-50M CHECK VALVE SCH 80 NIPPLE FINISH GRADE SCH 40 THREADED COUPLER SCH 80 NIPPLE LATERAL TEE OR ELL LATERAL PIPE 1/2" PVC STREET ELLS (3) 5 FX-IR-HUNT-SPRA-05 1 CITY COMMENTS 8/22/2023 2 SITE PLAN CHANGES 9/6/2023 Attachment 7 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 174 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Attachment 8 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 175 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Attachment 8 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 176 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION June 20, 2023 d/Arch LLC Attn: Matt Driscoll mattd@darchllc.com Subject: Letter of Completeness Cascara Townhomes Design Review Application PLN2023-0029 Dear Mr. Driscoll, The City of Edmonds has reviewed the design review application for the proposed 6-unit Cascara townhomes located at 9516 Edmonds Way. for completeness pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.02.002. The City has determined that the application meets the procedural submission requirements and therefore has been determined complete. Please accept this letter as the City’s notice to applicant of determination of completeness on June 13, 2023 pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003. Although it has been determined that the application meets the procedural submission requirements and is therefore complete, additional information may be needed as staff continues with review of the application. Staff will contact you as our review continues if additional information is necessary. Since the application has been determined to be procedurally complete, a notice of application will be posted on the subject property and mailed to adjacent property owners within the next two weeks consistent with ECDC 20.03.002. I will be the main staff contact for your application. If you have questions at any point during the review process, you may reach me at michele.szafran@edmondswa.gov or (425) 771-0220. Sincerely, Development Services Department - Planning Division Michele Q. Szafran Planner Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 177 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF APPLICATION & COMMENT PERIOD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to construct two buildings each with three units for a total of a 6-unit townhome development with associated garage parking for two vehicles. Each building is proposed to be three stories with two bedrooms. Access to the proposed development will be taken off Edmonds Way via a shared driveway. Design review projects which trigger SEPA are Type III-A decisions. The site is located within the RM-EW zone (One dwelling unit per 1,500 square feet of lot area). PROJECT LOCATION: 9516 – Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA. Tax Parcel Number 27033600100900 NAME OF APPLICANT: Matt Driscoll (d/Arch LLC) FILE NUMBER: PLN2023-0029 DATE OF APPLICATION: May 16, 2023 DATE OF COMPLETENESS: June 13, 2023 DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: June 23, 2023 REQUESTED PERMIT: Design Review with SEPA. Notice of Public Hearing will be provided once a date has been scheduled. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Building Permits EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: Preliminary Stormwater Report COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: July 7, 2023 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. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development application can be obtained online at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public_involvement/public_notices/development_notic es under the development notice for application number PLN2023-0029, 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: Michele Q. Szafran, Planner /425-771-0220/ Michele.Szafran@edmondswa.gov Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 178 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) 1,898 158.2 © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet Notes Legend This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 106.210 1:1,275 ZONING & VICINITY MAP 212.4 ReZones PRD RoW Zoning RS-6 RS-8 RS-10 RS-12 RSW-12 RS-20 RS-MP RM-3 RM-2.4 RM-1.5 RM-EW BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 OR WMU BP BN FVMU BC BC-EW CG CW MP1 MP2Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 179 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) MOORE GARY & SHARRY 424 LAKEVIEW RD LYNNWOOD, WA 98087-2140 LINDENSTEIN EDMUND H & JENNIFER L 22808 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98026 ADAMS COLIN M/ALEXANDRA 22806 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020 ROSS, RACHEL S/BRADLEY T 22804 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020 WZL ENTERPRISES LLC 2800 WESTERN AVENUE APT 112 SEATTLE , WA 98121 PUBLIC UTILITY DIST 1 SNO CO 2320 CALIFORNIA EVERETT, WA 98201 FARMER DANIEL T\GASIMOVA DUNYA 437 NE 72ND ST APT 321 SEATTLE , WA 98115 CASCARA LLC 320 DAYTON ST STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 CALDERA GUILLERMO 9512 EDMONDS WY EDMONDS, WA 98020 GETACHEW DESTA/SOLOMON GENET 20204 37TH AVE W LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 COMMERS TESSA\SARTHY JAY 9504 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 DOYLE TIMOTHY P/MCCLOSKEY MARY E 9529 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 HARDIN WILLIAM C 9511 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020 KORN JOSEPH/MELISSA 9524 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020 DUBBELAAR DIRK 9520 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020-5936 DANBERG JENNIFER M/DANBERG KEVIN 9515 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 SANCHEZ GEORGE ANDREW & KISSKEYS-SANCHEZ 9521 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020-5022 EDMONDS WAY LLC PO BOX 60216 SHORELINE, WA 98160 LINNANE SCOTT G & RONNE M & SHARON K 23006 94TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020-5004 THE CASCADIAN IN EDMONDS LLC 901 WESTMINSTER CIRCLE EVERETT, WA 98201 LONG JEFFREY J 4826 45TH AVE SW SEATTLE , WA 98116 HUGHES PATRICIA A & VAN NOORT PETER H 23001 97TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98020 FAIRWAY APARTMENTS LLC PO BOX 713 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 180 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) E v e r e tt D a il y H e r a ld A ffi d a v it o f P u b li c a tio n State of Washington } County of Snohomish } ss Michael Gates 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 1s of general circulation 111 said County, and is a legal newspaper, 111 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 EDH979259 MATT DRISCOLL/ARCH 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 06/23/2023 and ending on 06/23/2023 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. Linda Phillips Notary Public State of Washington My Appointment Expires 8/29/2025 Commission Number 4417 "'""-----~~~~ The amount o $72.24. publication is Subscribed and sworn 'Z<..., c;J£ day of this Washington. City of Edmonds Dcv..:lop111c111 Services 186031703 MICHELE SZAFRAN Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 181 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) C la s s ifi e d P r o o f ,. I J CITY OF ED MONDS NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND COMMENT PERIOD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to construct two buildings each with three units for a total of a 6-unlt townhome developm ent w ith associated garag e pa rking for tw o veliicles. Each building is proposed to be three stories with two bedrooms. A ccess to the proposed develop m ent w ill be taken off Edm onds :J~Avi;,: J;~e1?i-~ri~:~!~n~~~i~; ;~i1~\f~~{!~t~~h~~c~h~riigJ~ EW zone {One dwelling unit per 1,500 square feet of lot area). PROJECT LOCATION: 9516- Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA. Tax Parcel Number 27033600100900 NAME OF APPLICANT: Matt DMscoll (d/Arch LLC) FILE NUMBER: PLN2023-0029 DATE OF APPLICATION: May 16, 2023 DATE Of COMPLETENESS: June 13, 2023 DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: June 23, 2023 REQUESTED PERMIT: Design Review wilh SEPA. Notice of Public Hearing will be provided once a date has been scheduled. OTH ER REQUIRED PERMITS: Building Permits EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: Preliminary Stcmtwater Report COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: July 7, 2023 Any person has the right to comment on this applicatton 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 predectsion hearing, it any, or, if no ope n record predecislon hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project pennit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development appllcation can be obtained online at https:l/www.edmondswa.go v/services/public_involvemenVpubtic_n otices/development_notlces under the developm ent notice for application number PLN2023- 0029, by emailing the City contact listed below, or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-77 1--0220. Please refer to the application number for all inquiries. CITY CONTACT: Michele Q. Szafran, Planner I 425-771-0220 Michele.Szafran@edmondswa,.gov Published: June 23, 2023. EDH979259 Proofed by Phillips, Linda, 06/28/2023 10:49:32 am Page: 2 Attachment 9 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 182 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) From:Szafran, Michele To:Genet Solomon Cc:Desta Getachew Subject:RE: PLN2023-0029 - Notice of Application & Comment Period Date:Tuesday, July 11, 2023 4:06:05 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png Greetings, I have received your email regarding the subject Notice of Application. I will include your comments and information in the staff report as a party of record unless you request not to be included. Your property is highlighted in blue in the city GIS webmap as shown below, the access for the proposed project will be located on the south side of 9516 (between 9530 and 9516). Below is a screenshot of the proposed site plan which is also available on the city website by clicking here and looking for PLN2023-0029 then clicking into the Application Material. Your existing gravel access is depicted on the north side of the clearing limits for the subject property. Attachment 10 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 183 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Regards, Michele Q. Szafran | Associate Planner Planning & Development Department City of Edmonds, WA 121 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 | Phone: 425-771-0220, ext. 1778 The Planning & Development Department is open M-F 8:00am to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital/Remote access including Zoom meetings. In-Person walk-in service is currently available Monday thru Friday from 10:00am-2:00pm. Helpful Info: Web Map: Click Here / Informational Handouts click Here NOTICE OF DISCLOSURE: According to the Public Records Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW, any and all comments and supporting materials received by the City of Edmonds are public records subject to disclosure. Even if the information contains personal information (name, email address and phone number etc.), the City is obligated to disclose public records upon request. In addition, the City of Edmonds will include comments and supporting materials in permit decision records and Attachment 10 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 184 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) may post the information onto its website. From: Genet Solomon <genetsol@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 3, 2023 1:05 PM To: Szafran, Michele <Michele.Szafran@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Desta Getachew <destag@gmail.com> Subject: PLN2023-0029 - Notice of Application & Comment Period Michele, We received a notice regarding the above referenced development. We are the owners of the adjacent property located at 9510 Edmonds Way, Edmonds WA 98020. We would like to know how our property will be impacted as a result of the development. Mainly the driveway that is part of our property. I appreciate any information you can provide. Regards. Genet & Desta | Genet Solomon | Cell: (206) 579-0379 Office: (425) 775-8525 Fax: (425) 670-3550 Email: genet.solomon@century21.com CENTURY 21 Real Estate Center 19020 33rd Ave W Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Attachment 10 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 185 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Page 1 of 2 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: The Cascara Townhomes project includes two three-unit townhouse buildings and site improvements at the vacant 9516 Edmonds Way (zoned RM-EW). The north building would front Edmonds Way and the south building would be behind separated by a drive aisle to access parking within the buildings. An existing curb cut at the west edge of the site at Edmonds Way that currently serves the subject site and the two parcels to the south will be retained and upgraded together with the rest of the project’s frontage. The upgraded access drive will continue to serve the subject site and the two lots to the south, and it will also provide access for the lot to the west. Multifamily projects which trigger SEPA are Type III-A permits, with a decision about the design of the project made by the Architectural Design Board (ADB) following a public hearing. Proponent: Matt Driscoll (d/Arch LLC) Location of proposal: 9516 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA (Tax Parcel # 27033600100900) 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 December 9, 2024. Project Planner: Mike Clugston, AICP, Planning Manager Responsible Official: Mike Clugston, AICP, Planning Manager Contact Information: City of Edmonds | 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 | 425-771-0220 Date: November 22, 2024 Signature: XX You may appeal this determination to Mike Clugston, 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 December 16, 2024. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Mike Clugston to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on November 22, at the subject site, the Edmonds Public Safety Building, and City Hall. Published in the Everett Herald. Uploaded to the Department of Ecology SEPA Portal (SAW). Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies below. CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 186 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Page 2 of 2 The SEPA Checklist, DNS, and associated documents are available at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public_involvement/public_notices/development_notices under the file application number PLN2023-0029, or by emailing the City contact listed above, or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220. Please refer to the application number for all inquiries. Distribution List: This DNS and SEPA checklist were distributed to the following: ☒ Applicant ☒ Dept. of Ecology ☐ City of Everett ☐ 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 ☒ Puget Sound Energy ☐ Dept. of Fish & Wildlife ☒ Snohomish PUD ☐ Dept. of Health – Drinking Water ☐ Snohomish Co. Public Works ☒ Olympic View Water & Sewer ☒ 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 ☐ Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ☐ King County - Transit ☒ South County Fire ☐ Puget Sound Regional Council ☐ King County – Environ. Planning ☐ Swedish Hospital ☐ Puget Sound Partnership ☒ Community Transit ☒ Tulalip Tribe ☐ Other pc: File No. SEPA Notebook Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 187 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) #P71 CITY OF EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Revised on 9/16/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 1 of 29 Purpose of 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 i.214.mpact. 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: Cascara LLC 2. Name of applicant: d/Arch LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 2412 Westlake Ave N., Seattle, WA98109 206.214.8839 Matt Driscoll 4. Date checklist prepared: 08/07/2023 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 188 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 2 of 29 Estimate: Design Review filed on 03/01/2023, Site Development Plan to be filled 10/01/2023; Building Permit to be filled 12/01/2023. (STAFF COMMENTS) 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. N/A (STAFF COMMENTS) 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Geotechnical Engineering Study (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. SEPA Review, Design Review, Zoning code review, Building/Demolition Permits. (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 189 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 3 of 29 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. (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 site is 11,571 SF, and is in the RM-EW zone. Properties across Edmonds Way to the North are zoned BC- EW (Community Business, BC-Edmonds). East and West are multi-family zones, south residential zones. To the Northwest, properties are zoned commercial WMU (Westgate Mixed Used). The project is a 6 townhouses with 12 parking stalls in garage. Tototal building is approximate 11,200 sf. The building is 3 stories of Type VA wood construction. Vehicular access is provided via a single curb cut/driveway in the middle of the site to minimize its impact on vehicular and pedestrian activity. (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 subject parcel, Parcel No. 27033600100900, is approximately 0.29 acres in size and is vacant. It is located on the south side of Edmonds Way. The site is bordered by undeveloped property to the southwest and residential developed properties to the northeast and southeast. SEC 36 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-1F1-6A) BEG SW COR N1/2 NE1/4 NE1/4 TH E 90FT TH N02*54 05W 274.02FT TO SELYMGN CO RD TH NELY ALG SD CO RD 12.46FT TPB TH CONT ALG CRV SD CO RD 91.53FT TH S25*29 40E 130FT TH S48*38 13W 103.96FTTAP WH BEARS S25*29 40E 130FT FR SD CO RD TH N25*29 40W 103.95FT TAP WH BEARS S02*54 05E FR TPB TH N02*54 05W 31.48FT TO TPB SUBJ ESE PUD LESSST HWY (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 190 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 4 of 29 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 northern three-quarters of the site is relatively flat and level. Ground elevations range from approximately 338 feet near the northwest corner of the parcel to elevation 344 feet near the southeast property corner. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 7% (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. Sand with varying amounts of gravel. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 191 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 5 of 29 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. (STAFF COMMENTS) f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion is possible in conjunction with any construction activity. Site work would expose soil but the implementation of a Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control plan would mitigate potential impacts. Once the buildings are operational, no erosion is anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 75% (STAFF COMMENTS) h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Comprehensive Drainage Control Plan approvals (including Construction Best Management Practices, Erosion and Sediment Control approvals) (STAFF COMMENTS) 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. The proposed project could result in localized increases in air emissions (primarily carbon monoxide) due to construction and demolition activities and possible increased vehicular traffic/congestion associated with each project. The proposed project has been designed to conform to the applicable regulations and standards of agencies regulating air quality in Snohomish County. Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 192 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 6 of 29 (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. The project site is adjacent to Edmonds Way, an arterial that carries many cars and buses. Emissions from this roadway could impact this project. (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: Best Management Practices (BMPs) will used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction will be protected from erosion. Erosion control measures may include diverting surface water away from the stripped or disturbed areas. Silt fences and/or straw bales will be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the site. Disturbed areas will be planted as soon as practical, and the vegetation will be maintained until it is established. (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 COMMENTS) (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. No (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 193 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 7 of 29 (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. No fill or dredge material would be placed in or removed from any surface water body as a result of the proposed project. (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) 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 Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 194 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 8 of 29 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. Waste material would not be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. The proposed building would be connected to the City's sewer system and would discharge directly to that sewer system. (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. The project site presently discharges stormwater directly to City storm mains. Stormwater runoff would be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible by implementing Green (which may be in bioretention planters that have 2-inches of ponding and amended soils), the installation of dispersion landscape strips where site layout allows. Roof and landscape runoff will be collected in a network of area drains, catch basins and pipe and conveyed to the existing public storm sewer in Alder Way. Prior to discharge to the public system, storm runoff would be mitigated. (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. We will limit the use of fertilizers, particularly nitrates to avoid sending nutrients to the storm water system. Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 195 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 9 of 29 (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. The project will collect and direct currently unrestrained drainage. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The proposed project would comply with applicable requirements relating to surface water runoff control and water quality including the City's Drainage Control Ordinance. Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) would be implemented to the maximum extent feasible per Seattle drainage requirements. Possible GSI measures may include green roofs, trees, landscape strips. The proposed project would also require City approval of a Comprehensive Drainage Control Plan (including Construction Best Management Practices, Erosion and Sediment Control approvals) as part of the building permit process. (STAFF COMMENTS) 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: _______________________________________________ X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: ___________________________________________________ X shrubs _____________________________________________________________________________ X grass _______________________________________________________________________________ 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: ______________________________________________________________ Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 196 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 10 of 29 (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 197 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 11 of 29 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: Street trees and other plantings would be provided on Edmonds Way. This landscape approach is intended to enrich the pedestrian environment and further activate the site. The project would also include landscape plantings, pavers, and areas for seating. (STAFF COMMENTS) e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Ivy bushes (STAFF COMMENTS) 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: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ____________________________________________________ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: _______________________________________________________ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: ________________________________________________ Typical urban wildlife: crows, squirrels, rats. Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 198 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 12 of 29 (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. No (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Replacement of vegetation will provided habit and cover for wildlife. (STAFF COMMENTS) e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None Known. (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 199 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 13 of 29 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. Electricity and natural gas are the primary sources of energy that would serve the proposed development. During operation, these energy sources would be used for project heating, cooling, hot water and lighting. Solar energy will also be used to augment the electrical requirements. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. The proposed project is not expected to affect solar energy use by adjacent properties. (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 proposed project has been designed to meet or exceed the requirements of the Washington Energy Code. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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. None known Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 200 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 14 of 29 (STAFF COMMENTS) (1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known (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. None known (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. None known (STAFF COMMENTS) (4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None known (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 201 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 15 of 29 (5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: No special emergency services are anticipated to be required as a result of this project. Normal fire, medical, and other emergency services may be needed from Snohomish County. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None (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 hour’s noise would come from the site. Traffic noise associated with Edmonds Way. may be noticeable at certain times of day. (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction-related noise would occur as a result of on-site construction activities associated with the proposed project. Residential uses, which are more sensitive noise receptors, are located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Construction noise would be short-term and would be the most noticeable noise generated by the proposed project. This includes construction activity on-site, at associated off-site construction staging areas, and noise associated with construction-related traffic. The proposed project would comply with provisions of Noise Requirements; no noise variances are anticipated. Once the building is operational, no significant long-term noise impacts are anticipated; the development would Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 202 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 16 of 29 comply with provisions of the Snohomish County. Indirect noise impacts from the proposed project may include increased traffic-related noise associated with vehicles operating in and around the development. (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 203 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 17 of 29 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 project will comply with provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance; specifically: construction hours would be limited to weekdays (non-holiday) from 7 AM to 9 PM and Saturdays and Sundays from 9 AM to 9 PM. (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? No (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: (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Describe any structures on the site. No, vacant. (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 204 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 18 of 29 d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? (STAFF COMMENTS) e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? RM-EW (STAFF COMMENTS) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? (STAFF COMMENTS) g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site? Not applicable (STAFF COMMENTS) h. Has any part of the site been classified critical area by the city? If so, specify. No (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 205 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 19 of 29 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 6-20 (STAFF COMMENTS) j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 0 (STAFF COMMENTS) k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will be reviewed by the Design Review Board and city staff for compliance with all relevant guidelines, standards, and ordinances. The project will comply with zoning standards, which are consistent with land use plans. (STAFF COMMENTS) m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Not applicable (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 206 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 20 of 29 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 6 townhouses (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 0 (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 6 townhouses will be provided to the community (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? Proposed building height 35’ from average grade. (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 207 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 21 of 29 b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: No significant impacts are anticipated with regard to aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed project; no SEPA-protected views will be impacted. The project will undergo Design Review which is presumed to mitigate for aesthetic impacts. (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 amount of light and associated glare is not expected to differ substantially from that which presently occurs from other buildings of similar height in the vicinity of the project site. No significant light and/or glare-related impacts associated with vehicles entering the sites are anticipated. Stationary sources of light include interior lighting, building lighting, path lighting, facade lighting, and security lighting. At times during the construction process, area lighting of the job sites (to meet safety requirements) may be provided, which will be noticeable proximate to the project site. In general, however, light and glare from the proposed project is not anticipated to adversely affect adjacent land uses. Materials and lighting used on the project will be specifically chosen to reduce light spillage and any potential glare. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. Light and glare associated with the proposed project is not expected to cause a safety hazard nor interfere with views. (STAFF COMMENTS) c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 208 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 22 of 29 Light and glare consistent with residential and commercial uses in an urban environment, as well as streetlights, may impact the proposal. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: All exterior ( artificial) lighting would be shielded to minimize spillage beyond the project sites. Low-glare materials will also be used for the exterior of the building. (STAFF COMMENTS) 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Downtown Edmonds is about 1.8 mile to the SW of the site; Lake Ballinger is 2 miles to the East of the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe. No (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 209 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 23 of 29 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: On-site areas for passive recreation will be provided. Bicycle parking for the residents will be provided. (STAFF COMMENTS) 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. No (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. None Known (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. None (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 210 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 24 of 29 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. Not applicable (STAFF COMMENTS) 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 proposed project is located on Edmonds Way. (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? Major buses routes located to the North of the site along Edmonds 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? 12 garaged parking stalls (STAFF COMMENTS) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 211 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 25 of 29 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). Vehicular access is provided via a single curb cut/driveway at the Northwest corner of the site to minimize its impact on vehicular and pedestrian activity. A fire apparatus road is provided at the Weast sides of the site in conjunction with the parking access. A hammerhead terminates this fire apparatus road. (STAFF COMMENTS) e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Ni (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? (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. No Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 212 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 26 of 29 (STAFF COMMENTS) h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. It Is anticipated that the proposed project would generate an incremental need for increased public services due to the number of residents and visitors. To the extent that emergency service providers have planned for gradual increases in service demands, no significant impacts are anticipated. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: None. The potential increase in residential tenants associated with the proposed project may result in incrementally greater demand for emergency services. it is anticipated that adequate service capacity is available within the Neighborhood area. (STAFF COMMENTS) 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 213 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 214 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 28 of 29 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 215 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Revised on 9/19/16 P71_-_SEPA_Checklist.doc Page 29 of 29 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Attachment 11 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 216 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Cascara Townhomes is a 6-unit multifamily project consisting of two 3-unit buildings and related site improvements. Access to the proposed development will be taken from Edmonds Way via an existing shared driveway, which will be upgraded together with frontage improvements. The site is zoned RM-EW. PROJECT LOCATION: 9516 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA (Tax Parcel # 27033600100900) NAME OF APPLICANT: Matt Driscoll of d/Arch LLC (for Cascara LLC) FILE NO.: PLN2023-0029 REQUESTED PERMIT: General Design Review (Type III-A Permit Process, Public Hearing and Decision by Architectural Design Board), SEPA Determination COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: December 9, 2024 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. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development application can be obtained online at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public_involvement/public_notices/dev elopment_notices under the development notice for application number PLN2023-0029, 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. A copy of the staff report will be available at least seven days prior to the hearing. PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION: A hybrid public hearing will be held by the Architectural Design Board on December 9, 2024 at 6 p.m. The physical location is Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Avenue N, 3rd Floor, Brackett Room. Or join the Zoom meeting at: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWUlwM09PZ1k1MHN2eWM1YXphZz09 Or via phone by dialing 253-205-0468 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 217 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) SEPA DETERMINATION: The City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340 for this project. DATE OF ISSUANCE: November 22, 2024 SEPA COMMENTS: Comments are the threshold determination are due by December 9, 2024. SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required fee no later than December 16, 2024 by 4:00 p.m. CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Planning Manager michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 218 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) MOORE GARY & SHARRY 424 LAKEVIEW RD LYNNWOOD, WA 98087-2140 LINDENSTEIN EDMUND H & JENNIFER L 22808 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98026 ADAMS COLIN M/ALEXANDRA 22806 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020 ROSS, RACHEL S/BRADLEY T 22804 96TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020 WZL ENTERPRISES LLC 2800 WESTERN AVENUE APT 112 SEATTLE , WA 98121 PUBLIC UTILITY DIST 1 SNO CO 2320 CALIFORNIA EVERETT, WA 98201 FARMER DANIEL T\GASIMOVA DUNYA 437 NE 72ND ST APT 321 SEATTLE , WA 98115 CASCARA LLC 320 DAYTON ST STE 101 EDMONDS, WA 98020 CALDERA GUILLERMO 9512 EDMONDS WY EDMONDS, WA 98020 GETACHEW DESTA/SOLOMON GENET 20204 37TH AVE W LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 COMMERS TESSA\SARTHY JAY 9504 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 DOYLE TIMOTHY P/MCCLOSKEY MARY E 9529 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 HARDIN WILLIAM C 9511 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020 KORN JOSEPH/MELISSA 9524 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020 DUBBELAAR DIRK 9520 EDMONDS WAY EDMONDS, WA 98020-5936 DANBERG JENNIFER M/DANBERG KEVIN 9515 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 SANCHEZ GEORGE ANDREW & KISSKEYS-SANCHEZ 9521 231ST PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020-5022 EDMONDS WAY LLC PO BOX 60216 SHORELINE, WA 98160 LINNANE SCOTT G & RONNE M & SHARON K 23006 94TH PL W EDMONDS, WA 98020-5004 THE CASCADIAN IN EDMONDS LLC 901 WESTMINSTER CIRCLE EVERETT, WA 98201 LONG JEFFREY J 4826 45TH AVE SW SEATTLE , WA 98116 HUGHES PATRICIA A & VAN NOORT PETER H 23001 97TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98020 FAIRWAY APARTMENTS LLC PO BOX 713 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 219 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) {BFP747893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } FILE: PLN2023-0029 Applicant: Cascara LLC (rep. Matt Driscoll, d/Arch LLC) DECLARATION OF POSTING On the 22nd day of November 2024, the attached Notice of Public Hearing and SEPA Determination was posted at the subject property, the Public Safety Building, and City Hall in accordance the Edmonds Community Development Code. I, Mike Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 22nd day of November, 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 220 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) File No.: PLN20243-0029 Applicant: Mattdriscoll of d/ Arch LLC (for Cascara LLC) SEP A Threshold Determination DECLARATION OF MAILING On the 22nd day of November 2024, the attached Notice of Application was mailed by the City as prescribed by Ordinance to property owners within 300 feet of the site that is the subject of this application. I, Heather Lakefish, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 22nd day of November 2024, at Edmonds, Washington. Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 221 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) E v e r e t t D a il y H e r a l d A ffi d a v i t o f P u b li c a t i o n State of Washington} County of Snohomish } ss M ichael Gates 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 fo r m ore than six months prior to the date of the first publication of the Notice hereinafter refe rred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Snohom ish County, Washington and is and always has been printed in whole or part in the Everett Daily Hera ld and is of general circulation in said County, and is a legal newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99 of the Laws of I 921, as amended by Chapter 213 , Laws of 1941 , and appro ved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohom ish County, State of Washington, by order dated June 16, I 941, and that the annexed is a tru e copy of EDH1 005619 CASCARA PLN2023-0029 as it was published in the regular and entire issue of said paper and not as a supplem ent fo rm thereof for a period of I issue(s), such publication com mencing on 11/22/2024 and ending on 11/22/2024 and that said newspaper was regu larly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The am ount $101.4 8. publication is Subscribed and sworn before me on this ·21._'(VA day of Y\.o v ~. --"LD:01. Notary Public in and fo r the State of Washington. City of Edmonds Development Services I 86031703 MIKE CLU GSTON Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 222 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Classified Proof CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: cascara Townhomes Is a 6-unlt multifamlly project consisting of two 3-unlt buildings and related site Improvements. Access to the proposed development will be taken from Edmonds Way via an existing shared driveway, which wUI be upgraded together with frontage improvements, The site is zoned RM-EW. PROJECT LOCATION: 9516 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA (Tax Parcel# 27033600100900) NAME OF APPLICANT: Matt Driscoll or d/Arch LLC (for Cascara LLC) FILE NO.: PLN2023-0029 ~;~Yte~;o~~:S~i~~1~ i~~~f~~ ~n~s1i"eci~~~i0bY frK~i~ec~;:i Design Board), flEPA Determination COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: December 9, 2024 Any person has the right to comment on this appllcation during publlc comment period, receive notice and participate in any hearings, and request a copy or the decision on the application. ~1~:lnc~~f rha: r:;~::r~tau~l~c~~~:;r~t~r:~:ci~io~m.,eei~~~' :r a~y~ ~~cl~1~ 6~~:~~gr~cr~~~~~~16nry8~~g~~sar~~~1ir~daf~~~~~J~~ ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development appllcatlcn can be obtained online at https://www.edmondswa.gov/servlces/publlc_l1wotvemenVpub1ic n ollces/development_notices under the development notice lor ~~~~c~~~w~~~r:; !.t~~0~3;0&f; ·onJ~;~~9l12~!r1i'.'o~~gt ~=a:,r~e::~i~ ~~I a~~C:~:~~l~u:b1~~~~r s~l~!~q~:;:-p:o~~g~ho~ hearing. ~~~}/; ~~~:~~~h/~~~~r~J!~~ B~a~ib~~ 8~~;~~:~t~c\"J~ al 6 p.m. The physical location Is Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Avenue N, 3rd Floor, Brackett Room. Or Join the zoom meeUrig at: htlps:lledmondswa- gov.zoqm.µs~/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWU!wM09PZ1k1 MHN2e \/VM 1YXph2z09 Or via phone by dialing 253-205-0468 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 SEPA DETERMINATION: The City or _Edmonds has Issued a Determination of Nonslgnlflcance under WAC 197-11-340 for this project. DATE OF ISSUANCE: November 22, 2024 SEPA COMMENTS: Comments are the threshold deierminatlon are due py December 91 2024. SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required fee no later than December 16, 2024 by 4:00 p.m. CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Planning Manager michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 Published: November 22, 2024. EDH1005619 Proofed by Pospical, Randie, 11/22/2024 08:37:01 am Page:2 Attachment 12 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 223 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) Date: November 13, 2024 To: Mike Clugston, Planning Manager From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Taylor Brown, Consulting Stormwater Engineer Subject: PLN2023-0029 –Design Review Cascara - 9516 Edmonds Way Engineering has reviewed the subject application and found the information provided is consistent with Title 18 Edmonds Community Development Code & Engineering standards. Compliance with Engineering codes and construction standards will be reviewed with the building permit application for development of the site. Approval of the design review phase of the project does not constitute approval of the improvements as shown on the submitted plans. The following summarizes the engineering division design review analysis for the subject project. 1. The subject development is required to provide complete frontage improvements per City standards and ADA requirements. A new sidewalk with street trees will be required along the property frontage along Edmonds Way. 2. Olympic View Water and Sewer District are the utility purveyors for this property. Specific development requirements will be determined by the District. 3. A preliminary transportation impact analysis was submitted. A complete fee mitigation compliance review will be completed with future building permit. 4. Preliminary easement documents have been received for a Shared Driveway and Pedestrian Easement with the property to the west. The south portion of the shared driveway has an existing easement, AF #2110719. Maintenance provisions have not yet been added to the easement language. A complete review of these documents will be required with future building permit. 5. A preliminary stormwater plan has been submitted to the City to confirm project feasibility. Stormwater management shall be provided consistent with Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 18.30 and the DOE Stormwater Manual in effect at the time of building permit submittal. Thank you. MEMORANDUM Attachment 13 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 224 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) City of Edmonds Department of Fire Prevention Page 1 of 2 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Date: 06-02-2023 Prepared by: Chris Burt These comments are based on preliminary project review only and subject to change. An actual plan review will occur after a building permit has been submitted. Project Name: Cascara Plan Number: PLN2023-0029 Location: 9516 Edmonds Way Proposed Occupancy Group: R PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ☒ Indicate that the correct address and/or suite designations will be posted on the building(s). (Ref: IFC Section 505) ☒ A fire lane is required. See fire lane handout and make all necessary notations on the plans. Buildings greater than 30’ require a 26’ fire lane. Buildings less than 30’ require 20’ fire lanes Building. Re-paint as needed. (Ref. SCF Fire apparatus access road standard, IFC Section 503) See South County Fire Standards Link below. ☒ 13D Sprinkler systems required. ☒ Fire hydrants are required in accordance with Appendix B & C of the International Fire Code. On the site plan, show all new hydrants and all existing hydrants within 330 feet. NOTE: A minimum of 1 hydrant(s) be required for this project. (IFC Appendix B and C) ☒ Deferred Submittals Required ☒ Sprinkler Attachment 13 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 225 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s ) City of Lynnwood Department of Fire Prevention Page 2 of 2 FIRE COMMENTS 1. 13D sprinkler systems required. One sprinkler system for each townhome unit. Each system requires a separate permit. 6 permits required. 2. One hydrant is required to be located on the same side of Edmonds Way as the project within 150’ of the project. 3. Turn around is adequate. 4. Fire lane is acceptable. South County Fire Standards link Fire Prevention Standards | South County Fire (southsnofire.org) NOTE: All required fire hydrants, water supplies, and fire department access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to any construction, in accordance with Sections 501.4 and Chapter 14 of the 2018 International Fire Code. Standpipes shall be installed and made serviceable as required by chapter 905 of the 2018 International Fire Code. Disclaimer: These comments are intended to assist you with designing your proposal prior to submitting it for permitting. They are intended to identify any “fatal flaws” with your proposal as well as aspects of your proposal that require clarification or further analysis. They are based on a brief, informal review of the plans and other information (if any) that were submitted to schedule your pre- development meeting. However, these comments are not based on a complete review of your proposal and they are not intend ed to identify all code-compliance issues. The complete review will occur following submission of your complete application, and additional concerns, issues or required revisions may be identified at that time. Chris Burt Deputy Fire Marshal Fire Prevention Services 12425 Meridian Ave S Everett Wa 98208 Cell: 425-327-5800 Attachment 13 PLN2023-0029 a Packet Pg. 226 At t a c h m e n t : P L N 2 0 2 3 - 0 0 2 9 S t a f f r e p o r t a n d a t t a c h m e n t s ( C a s c a r a T o w n h o u s e s )