The URL can be used to link to this page

2023-08-31 Architectural Design Board PacketOp E D o Agenda Edmonds Architectural Design Board s71. ,Hv� SPECIAL MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 AUGUST 31, 2023, 6:00 PM 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 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Password: 591531 Call into the meeting by dialing: 253-215-8782 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Continued Phase II Public Hearing for 611 Main St (PLN2022-0085) 4. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Architectural Design Board Agenda August 31, 2023 Page 1 O Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/31/2023 Continued Phase II Public Hearing for 611 Main St (PLN2022-0085) Staff Lead: {enter Staff Lead or "N/A" here) Department: Planning Division Prepared By: David Levitan Background/History On August 24, 2023, the Architectural Design Board (ADB) held the Phase II design review public hearing for a proposed 3-story mixed use development at 605/611 Main St (PLN2022-0085). This followed the Phase I public hearing, which was opened on May 25, 2023 and continued to a special meeting on June 15, 2023. More detail on the process is provided in the attached staff report. On August 23, city staff revised the August 24 ADB meeting packet to include revised materials (Attachments 13-15) that were submitted by the applicant following the publication of the meeting packet on August 17, 2023. At the conclusion of their discussion on August 24, the ADB approved a motion to continue the Phase II public hearing to a hybrid special meeting on August 31, 2023 at 6:00 pm, to be held in the Brackett Room at City Hall and via Zoom. This was intended to provide ADB members and the public additional time to review Attachments 13-15 in the August 24 meeting packet, which are also included in this meeting packet. The Phase II staff report and remainder of the August 24 meeting materials are available via the weblink provided above. On August 24, city staff received email comments from five members of the public, which were forwarded to ADB members in advance of that evening's meeting. Those public comments have been complied and attached as Attachment 16. Notice of the August 31 special meeting was emailed to parties of record immediately following the August 24 Phase II public hearing; posted to the city website, City Hall, and the Public Safety Complex; and will be published in the Everett Herald on August 29. Staff Recommendation Review the Phase II staff report and 15 attachments and complete the design review of the project with a final decision at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and attachment provided in the staff report as well as the Phase 1 meeting materials, staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board approve the proposal under File No. PLN2022-0085 with the conditions listed on pg. 14 of the Phase II staff report (see attached) with the exception of Condition 6, which the ADB voted to remove during their August 24 meeting. The ADB may also establish additional conditions of approval as part of their decision. Narrative Packet Pg. 2 O The Phase II staff report, August 23 staff report addendum (Attachment 12), revised site plan, floor plans and elevations (Attachment 14) and revised landscape plan (Attachment 15) are attached and should be the focus of the ADB's review (and potential decision) at the August 31 special meeting. The ADB approved a motion during their August 24 meeting to remove Condition 6 from staff's recommended conditions of approval in Section III of the staff report, as they believed that recent revisions by the applicant (as illustrated in Attachment 14) adequately addressed these design concerns. The August 24 meeting materials (including a video recording of the meeting) are attached as a weblink for reference. Attachments: Phase II Staff Report Attachment 12 - Staff Report August 23 Addendum Attachment 14 - Revised Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevations Attachment 15 - Revised Landscape Plan Attachment 16 - Public Comments submitted on August 24, 2023 August 24 ADB Meeting Materials and Video Packet Pg. 3 1.a `nc. 1S9" Project: File Number: Date of Report: Staff Contact: ADB Meeting CITY OF EDMONDS 121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION'S REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD "PHASE 2" DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW 611 On Main Ia101F411 N PAF811%%7 August 17, 2023 Michele Q. Szafran, Associate Planner Thursday — August 24, 2023 at 6:00 P.M.* Continued from the June 15th Hearing, Brackett Room, 3rd Floor, Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Or by Zoom at: https://edmondswa-gov.zoom.us/i/88959586932 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Passcode: 591531 Or join by phone: 253-205-0468 I. PROJECT PROPOSAL AND PROCESS Architect Phillip Frisk, representing property owner GBH Holdings, submitted a design review application for a new three-story mixed -use building at 605/611 Main Street to include approximately 2,600 square feet of office space, 18 apartment units and an underground parking garage for approximately 21 stalls. Projects in the Downtown Business zones are subject to district -based design review under the regulations of Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). According to ECDC 20.01.003 and 20.12.010, district -based design review applications that trigger SEPA Packet Pg. 4 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 1.a review are Type III-B decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and design decision by the Architectural Design Board (ADB). The ADB opened the Phase 1 portion of the public hearing on May 25, 2023. After a brief discussion, the Board approved a motion to continue the hearing to a special meeting on June 15, 2023. On June 15, the ADB reviewed and discussed the proposal, took public testimony, and filled out and prioritized the Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 5), as required by ECDC 20.12.005.A. At the conclusion of the meeting, the ADB approved a motion to continue the phase 2 portion of the hearing to August 24, 2023. According to ECDC 20.12.005.13, the purpose of the continuance to the Phase II public hearing is to allow the applicant to revise the initial concept to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. The applicant has summarized their responses to the checklist in Attachment 1 and provided updated building elevations (Attachment 2), site and floor plans (Attachment 3), and landscape plans (Attachment 4) that incorporate the ADB and public comments on the Phase I submittal. Minutes from the June 15 meeting are included in Attachment 6, and a video of the meeting is available here. The ADB is scheduled to complete their design review of the project and make their final decision at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process. The following attachments are included with this Phase 2 staff report and are focused on new or updated materials that were not included in the Phase I meeting packet: 1. Applicant's Phase 2 cover letters 2. Building Elevations Volume Model Revised 3. Site and Floor Plans Revised 4. Landscape Plan Revised 5. Completed Design Guidelines Checklist 6. June 151" ADB minutes 7. Department of Ecology SEPA comment letter 8. Engineering Review Letter 9. Public Comments received after Phase 1 Staff Report 10. Phase 1 staff report (attachments available in Phase I meeting packet) 11. Aerial Image of Site II. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS A. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS The subject property is located at the eastern edge of the Edmonds downtown business core. The property is zoned BD2 (Downtown Mixed Commercial) as are the properties to the west and south. Properties to the north and east are zoned RM-1.5 (Multiple Residential RM-1.5). Uses surrounding the project site are primarily residential with a mix of commercial and office uses to the south and west. Refer to Attachment 11 for an aerial view of the site in relation to the surrounding area. Page 2 of 15 Packet Pg. 5 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 B. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS Because the hearing was continued to a date certain during Phase 1 of the hearing process, no additional public notice is required. However, staff emailed a link to the Phase II meeting packet to parties of record/interest and posted the meeting agenda at the Public Safety Complex and City Hall as well as on the city website on August 17. To date, ten (10) parties have provided written comments on the subject proposal, which are summarized in the Phase 1 staff report and the ADB minutes. Comments received after the publication of the Phase I meeting packet are included in Attachment 9. The commentors are included as parties of record as listed on pg. 15 (Section IV) of this report. Public testimony was provided by five (5) individuals during the Phase I hearing, which is summarized on pages 2-6 of the ADB minutes (Attachment 6). ADB members requested clarification on several topics during the June 15t" public hearing, including concerns related to moving trucks in the alley (and their potential to block neighboring garages) and whether a traffic study would be required. The City issues permits to residents moving in or out of a building to use 3-hr parking for limited periods of time and does not allow alleys to be blocked for this purpose. A traffic study is triggered based on the number of PM peak hour (4-6 pm) trips for a development. The threshold is 25 PM peak hour trips, and the current proposal does not reach the threshold for a traffic study. No further comments have been received as of the date of this staff report. C. TECHNICAL STAFF REVIEW The Phase 1 portion of the application was reviewed and evaluated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue and the city's Building Division, Public Works Department, and Engineering Division. Initial comments by these reviewers were included in the Phase I meeting packet. One SEPA comment was received after the Phase 1 staff report was initially published. The Washington State Department of Ecology indicated that should any environmental contamination be encountered during construction it should be reported to Ecology, and if any underground storage tanks (USTs) are encountered during construction they must be decommissioned in accordance with local fire department regulations (Attachment 7). South County Fire, Public Works, and the Building Division will provide further comments during the subsequent building permit review. The Engineering Division reviewed the Phase 2 resubmittal and noted that several items must still be addressed, including site distance visibility, dumpster enclosure sizing, and parking stall dimensions. These are prescriptive development standards that can be addressed during building permit review but should be considered during the ADB's review as it relates to overall site design. Other technical comments related to the undergrounding of power, storm system control, and transportation will be further reviewed with the building permit phase. Page 3 of 15 Packet Pg. 6 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Downtown Mixed Commercial" within the "Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center" overlay. Goals and policies from the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center related to this project have been included in detail with the phase 1 staff report (Attachment 10). Design objectives for the downtown area addressing site design, building form, and building fagade are provided in the Comprehensive Plan (pages 125-127). Staff finds that the revisions made by the applicant further address urban design goal B, and the underlying policies, including B.6 (with the addition of a canopy for weather protection), B.11 building fagade (by providing additional scale elements to the northern fagade) and B.12 (by increasing the transparency along the street). As conditioned, staff finds the proposal is consistent with the referenced goals and design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. E. DESIGN GUIDELINES CHECKLIST During Phase 1 of the public hearing on June 15, 2023, the ADB established design priorities for the project based on the characteristics of the site and the surrounding area using the Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 5). The applicant has provided responses to the checklist in Attachment 1, while ADB discussion of the checklist is summarized in the June 15 meeting minutes (Attachment 6) and the revised project design's consistency with the guidelines are discussed below, with the exception of guidelines that were determined to be not applicable by the ADB. A. Site Planning. 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics. While the reinforcement of existing site characteristics was deemed a lower priority, the volume of the building has been slightly reduced, allowing for a slight reduction in shadows cast on adjacent structures. 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics. The existing streetscape characteristics include large multi -story residential and commercial buildings close to the adjacent sidewalks. The project maintains that tradition while also providing the pedestrian amenity of a canopy over a portion of the sidewalk. Landscaping between the building and the sidewalk is provided, in keeping with such features found on other buildings in the immediate vicinity. The updated project plans (Sheet A1.01 of Attachment 3) now show that roof eaves along the Main Street side of the building now project approximately 14" into the public right-of-way (ROW). ECDC 18.70.030 notes that such encroachments shall be approved by the ADB but "shall not exceed 30 percent of the length of the fagade on any one side of the building", which the revised proposal currently does not meet. Staff has included compliance with this requirement as a recommended condition of approval in Section III and it should be incorporated into the ADB's decision on the design review. Page 4 of 15 Packet Pg. 7 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street. The entrance to the commercial space is immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and features a covered entry porch along with the canopy over the adjacent sidewalk. Like other buildings in the downtown area, this communicates not only a place of shelter but also an entrance to the building. The entrance to the apartments is from a large plaza accessed from the sidewalk, with signage and another canopy communicating the point of entry to the residential space. 4. Encourage human activity on street. The plaza leading to the entrance of the residential units is of sufficient size to accommodate people gathering there and is just far enough removed from the sidewalk to provide a slightly more secluded environment. The canopy at the entrance to the commercial space also promotes gathering by providing shelter from inclement weather. 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites. The guideline has been addressed by minimizing windows on the north side of the building and maintaining a fifteen -foot building setback from the property to the east. The plaza will also have landscaping at the east side to provide privacy for those on the plaza as well as those on the adjacent property. 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy and interaction (residential projects). The space between the building and the sidewalk will be landscaped to provide privacy to those in the commercial space. The potential for interaction is provided under the canopy at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as at the porch immediately outside the commercial space entrance. There is no residential use adjacent to the space between the sidewalk and the building at ground level. 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential projects). Although there isn't a requirement to provide open space for the residential portion of the building, a large plaza is provided at the residential entrance, to facilitate gathering and interaction of residents. 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property. Vehicular access is provided from the alley, so no significant impact by vehicle traffic on pedestrians is anticipated. Parking is underneath the building and likewise is not seen to have any adverse impact on the pedestrian environment. Staff Analysis The proposed project has been slightly reduced in volume and is proposed to be built within two feet from the street property line with space to provide landscaping along the frontage of the building. The subject site along with the property to the west and the parcels along the south side of Main Street are in a transition area from a Downtown Business zone to residential zones and thus the streetscape begins to change slightly within this transition area. In general, the existing streetscape includes large multi -story residential and commercial buildings. The code requires a side setback of 15 feet from the adjacent residential property to the east. The entries are clearly visible from the street to the commercial space and the Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 8 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 residential space via the proposed plaza. The applicant has proposed an awning over the entrance to add and encourage human activity on the street. The proposal includes at least 75 percent transparent windows along the street front. The proposal minimizes windows on the north fagade and is setback 15 feet from the eastern residential property to help minimize privacy on the adjacent site. The landscaped plaza along the eastern side of the building provides privacy and transition between the residences and street as well as an open space amenity. The approved project design will be required to show compliance with ECDC 18.70.030 as it relates to encroachment into the Main St ROW. B. Bulk and Scale. 1. Provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less- intensive zones. The transition to the less - intensive zoning to the east is accomplished by the fifteen -foot setback mandated by the City, as well as providing landscape screening along the east property line. Residentially scaled treatments are also integrated in the building design, including exterior finishes, windows sizes, and roof overhangs. Staff Analysis The adjacent property to the east is of a different zone (residential multi -family), and the proposal includes a code required 15-foot setback with landscaping. Additionally, the eastern fagade includes slight step backs thus reducing the perceived bulk and scale C. Architectural Elements. 1. Complement positive existing character and/or respond to nearby historic structures. Although noted as a low priority, the project seeks to improve the existing character of the immediate vicinity by providing a large canopy over a portion of the sidewalk, transparency of the ground -floor commercial space, and access to an adjacent plaza. 2. Unified architectural concept. The applicant notes that an architectural rhythm is expressed with the inclusion of brick pilasters dividing equal -width bays of glazing at the ground -floor commercial space, along with a more symmetrical fagade above featuring a pair of cantilevered gables and matching window configurations and supplemental decorative medallions. This provides an overall perceptible architectural concept. 3. Use human scale and human activity. Human -scaled elements include brick pilasters, brick veneer, residentially -scaled siding, windows, and trim. The canopies at both the commercial and residential entrances are about nine feet above the walking surface, commensurate with the pedestrian scale of those elements of the building. 4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials. A brick veneer is featured on the south elevation and includes brick pilasters and pre -cast trim. Other human -scaled materials include lap siding, panel siding with metal reveals, wood trim, and decorative medallions surrounding two window groupings. The window trim for the residential units throughout the building is 2x2 cedar. This is the appropriate size, given the close spacing of pairs of small windows in most units. If larger trim were to be used, the resulting architectural proportions of window trim and window size would not fit with the small scale and close spacing of those windows. In general, window trim should be consistent throughout a building to avoid a haphazard, inconsistent aesthetic. Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 9 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 5. Minimize garage entrances. The ADB determined this to be a low priority given that the alley is the only way to access parking. A twenty -foot -wide driveway will minimize the impact. Staff Analysis While there may not be one cohesive design style in the vicinity, the applicant has revised the plans to include a sloped roof with mixed materials which generally appear to be in line with the architectural characteristics of the surrounding buildings. The applicant has revised the plans to introduce a unified plan by adding more symmetry to the fagade, matching windows, and decorative medallions in a cohesive way. To better achieve architectural consistency, the street fagade could benefit from the addition of a belly band to tie off the ends of the perceived brick pillars. Additional balance may be achieved by adding a belly band mid -way along the north fagade, both of which are included as recommended conditions of approval in Section III. The proposed awning will need to meet the criteria in ECDC 18.70.030.F related to height and projection into the ROW, which will be further reviewed at the building permit stage. The revised site plan includes two projections along the street front with eave projections into the right-of-way that appear to exceed the maximum 30 percent of the length of the fagade. As a condition of approval eaves and projections must comply with the criteria outlined ECDC 18.70.030.D. Overall staff finds that the applicant has made positive changes to the proposal and has also increased the transparency at street front to now meet the 75 percent minimum requirement, and added an awning which helps define the commercial space. The proposal includes architectural concepts, human scale, and durable cohesive materials. D. Pedestrian Environment. 1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry. The entry to the commercial space is directly off the sidewalk under a projecting canopy, with a covered porch underneath the floor above it. The residential entrance is off a generous plaza accessed directly from the sidewalk via stairs and a ramp, with a canopy providing protection at the entrance door. 2. Avoid blank walls. There are no blank walls on the building. Windows on the north elevation are reduced to a minimum to provide privacy to the neighbors to the north. The revised design also features increased masonry veneer and a variety of siding types and colors. Modulation of the north wall is introduced to further reduce the apparent bulk of the building. 3. Minimize height of retaining walls. The height of retaining walls is minimized but is largely dictated by the existing topography of adjacent properties. 6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas. The dumpster enclosure is screened. The transformer must be accessible by PUD personnel and therefore cannot be obscured. 7. Consider personal safety. The entrance to the residential area will be through a secured door, accessed from a large open plaza. Access from the parking level to the building will Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 10 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 also be through a secured door. The parking area will be partially open on two sides, enhancing visibility into and from that space. Staff Analysis The revised project design improves the pedestrian environment along the street front by providing a projecting canopy for weather protection, while the use of landscaping along the street front helps enhance the pedestrian environment. The applicant has revised the plans to address concerns of blank walls by adding balconies to the units, increasing masonry along the northern fagade, with pitched roofs and mixed materials. Staff recommends the addition of a bellyband midway along the northern fagade to help provide more interest, which has been included as a recommended condition of approval. Personal safety is achieved by providing adequate site lighting without being excessive onto adjacent sites as well as having adequate window placement. E. Landscaping. 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of neighborhood. The existing streetscape features landscaping between the sidewalk and most buildings. This would be maintained in the proposed project, along with the addition of street trees. Planters are provided at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as at the access to the plaza and along its east side. Additional landscaping is provided along the stairway from the sidewalk down to the parking level, along the west side of the building. 2. Landscape to enhance the building orsite. The applicant notes that by maintaining and enhancing the existing landscape character of the neighborhood as described above, the proposed landscaping enhances the building and site to provide a more enjoyable pedestrian experience. 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions. The ADB deemed this a low priority, as there aren't any special site conditions that can be taken advantage of. Staff Analysis Staff finds that with the recommended conditions of approval, the revised project design satisfies the Board's prioritization for Site Planning, Bulk and Scale, Architectural Elements, Pedestrian Environment, and Landscaping. Other comments by ADB members have been addressed in the revised plans, such as incorporating sloped roofs with overhangs to provide additional modulation and articulation, the addition of balconies for additional architectural detail and interest, and a canopy for the commercial entrance. The south elevation has been revised to include uniform modulation with increased glazing and brick pilasters, while the brick veneer has been increased along the west and north elevations. F. APPLICABLE CODES ECDC 16.43 regulates uses, setbacks, ground floor requirements, and open space in the Downtown Business zones, the project's compliance with which are addressed in the Phase staff report (Attachment 10). The number of parking stalls remains unchanged but is subject to Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 11 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 further review by the Engineering Division at the building permit stage; however, this is not anticipated to impact the current design review proposal. Sections of code that require additional analysis and consideration by the ADB are included below. A. Height. The maximum allowed height in the BD2 zone is 30 feet, with certain exceptions provided in ECDC 16.43.030.C.3. The elevations in Attachment 2 shows much of the building height at approximately 30 feet, the applicant is requesting a height exception of one foot to allow for an architectural element that visually ties the two projecting gabled roof elements together for a more cohesive look which staff finds consistent with 1:1ybliaE1.7-1191113e al All zoning requirements (and related building, engineering, and public works codes) will be verified through review and approval of future building permits. ECDC 17.115 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure and ECDC 17.120 Bicycle Parking Facilities have been addressed in the Phase 1 staff report (Attachment 10). 1. ECDC 22.43 Design Standards for the BD Zones Design standards applicable to the BD zones are provided in ECDC Chapter 22.43. A. ECDC 22.43.010 Massing and Articulation. Intent- To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Staff Response: The revised plans include a brick base and a sloped roof which convey a visually distinct base and top. The addition of the awning and the mixed pattern along the west side of the south elevation helps to emphasize the commercial entrance. 2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building exceeds the historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as a combination of materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional building widths. Staff Response: Older building widths in the downtown area typically vary from about 30 to 60 feet. The proposed building uses materials as well as vertical and horizontal modulation to create 'widths' that are between 5 and 30 feet wide along the south, west and east building facades. The previous plan provided for the north fagade was approximately 66 feet in width with little articulation or modulation. The applicant has revised the plans to help break up the northern fagade to meet these widths and has added higher brick wainscoting and more modulation and variation in the parapet height and configuration. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to provide a bellyband along the north and south facades. Page 9 of 15 Packet Pg. 12 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 B. ECDC 22.43.020 Orientation to Street. Intent — To reinforce pedestrian activity and orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street through building design. 1. Building frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a parking lot or alley. Staff Response: The building is oriented to Main Street and includes a prominent pedestrian entry to the commercial space along with pedestrian scale details to the south elevation facade. Pedestrian access is also provided directly off Main Street to the residential entry off the eastern fagade of the building. A recessed entry for the commercial space with the addition of a canopy as shown on the revised plan help to further emphasize the entrances. 2. Entrances to buildings in the BD1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street and accessible from the adjacent sidewalk. Staff Response: Entrances to both the commercial and residential spaces are accessible from the sidewalk. 3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of the following elements: a. Higher bay(s); b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet); c. Forecourt and entrance plaza. Staff Response: As noted above, canopies are provided that help emphasize the entrances for the commercial and residential spaces. C. ECDC 22.43.030 Ground Level Details. Intent — To reinforce the character of the streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets. 1. Ground floor, street facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall incorporate at least five of the following elements: a. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets; b. Medallions, c. Belt courses; d. Plinths for columns; e. Bulkhead for storefront window; f. Projecting sills; g. Tile work; h. Transom or clerestory windows; i. Planter box, j. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent. Staff Response: Numerous ground level details provide visual interest, including lighting, precast lintels, masonry, concrete planter, and rowlock courses for the ground floor windows. 2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the sidewalk, as provided for in ECDC 16.43.030. Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 13 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 1.a Staff Response: As shown on sheet A1.01 of Attachment 3 and pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030, the proposal meets the entry/ground floor criteria by being within seven inches of the grade at sidewalk to the commercial space along Main Street. D. ECDC 22.43.040 Awnings/Canopies and Signage. Intent —1) To integrate signage and weather protection with building design to enhance business visibility and the public streetscape. 2) To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to improve way finding for visitors. 3) To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered, and to minimize distraction from overuse of advertisement elements. 1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not provided, then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a metal or other framework. Staff Response: A recessed entry with a projecting canopy is proposed for the commercial space along Main Street while a separate canopy is provided over the pedestrian entrance to the residential units along the east side of the building. 2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage. Front valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns. Staff Response: All proposed canopies are open -sided. 3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted. Staff Response: None of the canopies are marquee, box, or convex in shape. 4. Retractable awnings are encouraged. Staff Response: No retractable awnings are proposed. 5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame store- fronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies should be hung just below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists. Staff Response: The recessed entry proposed for the commercial space along Main Street and the proposed canopy does not appear to conceal architectural details. 6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale, and position, but need not be identical. Staff Response: Not applicable, as the proposal does not include multiple storefronts. 7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are not permitted. Staff Response: Nonstructural awnings are not proposed. 8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Com- binations of sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while minimizing the size of individual signs. Page 11 of 15 Packet Pg. 14 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Staff Response: Signs in the BD zones are subject to the design standards in ECDC 22.43.040. Staff will review signage at the building permit stage. Some wall signs are anticipated and appear to be in compliance with the code. The ADB has previously discussed the potential addition of a mural on the north fagade, which would require a sign permit. 9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements are preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or less are permitted and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage permitted for a business in ECDC 20.60. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one of the required elements under ECDC 22.43.030(B). Staff Response: See #8 above. 10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering. Staff Response: See #8 above. 11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design. Staff Response: Signage will be reviewed for compliance with the applicable design standards of ECDC 22.43.040 and the sign code requirements of ECDC 20.60 when a sign application is submitted. 12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or con- tributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or on a city council -approved historic survey. Staff Response: Not applicable. The subject site is not on the National Register, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, nor on a city council -approved historic survey. 13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An historic sign may be used to meet this standard. Staff Response: See #8 above. E. ECDC 22.43.050 Transparency at Street Level. Intent — To provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building. 1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front shall have transparent windows covering a minimum of 75 percent of the building fagade that lies between an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade. Staff Response: Main Street has a designated street front requirement. As proposed in the revised plans, the ground level fagade along the designated street front complies with the minimum 75 percent transparency for windows. 2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 15 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Staff Response: As conditioned, staff finds that the proposal meets the transparency requirement. 3. Where transparency is not required, the facade shall comply with the standards under ECDC 22.43.060. Staff Response: See section F below for treating blank walls that do not require transparency. 4. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. Staff Response: Not applicable, as the proposal is within the BD2 zone. ECDC 22.43.060 Treating Blank Walls. Intent — To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street. 1. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where windows are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under ECDC 22.43.050). At least five of the following elements shall be incorporated into any ground floor, street facing facade: a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative concrete block); b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall; c. Belt courses of a different texture and color; d. Projecting cornice; e. Decorative tile work; f. Medallions; g. Opaque or translucent glass, h. Artwork or wall graphics; i. Lighting fixtures; j. Green walls; k. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. Staff Response: The east, west and south facades do not propose blank walls and contain numerous windows and mixed materials. As requested by the ADB during the Phase I hearing, the applicant has revised the plans to include higher brick wainscoting as well as additional modulation and variation of parapet height and configuration for added design elements to the north facade. A recessed covered patio has also been introduced. Additional visual interest could be provided by adding a bellyband midway along the north and south facades, which staff has included as a recommended condition. The addition of a mural to the north facade could also provide additional visual interest. 2. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements Chapter 20.13 ECDC contains specific landscaping requirements for new developments, which the ADB and Hearing Examiner are allowed to interpret and modify according to ECDC 20.13.000. Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 16 1.a 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 As conditioned, the proposed landscaping appears to be consistent with the requirements of the Street Tree Plan, ECDC 16.43.030 and ECDC 20.13. III. RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020, when approving proposed development applications, the ADB is required to find that the proposed development is consistent with the zoning ordinance, the design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and the specific design criteria identified by the ADB during Phase 1 of the public hearing. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and attachment to this report as well as the Phase 1 meeting materials, staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board APPROVE the proposal under File No. PLN2022-0085 with conditions as stated in the following recommended motion: THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ADOPTS THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND FINDS THAT THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE DESIGN CRITERIA IDENTIFIED DURING PHASE 1 OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF ECDC 22.43, AND APPROVES THE PROPOSAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS BUILDING AND ENGINEERING DIVISION AND SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENTS 9 & 11 OF THE JUNE 15 MEETING PACKET AND ATTACHMENT 8 TO THIS STAFF REPORT. 2. ANY MURALS WILL REQUIRE A SIGN PERMIT PER ECDC 20.60.015.C. 3. STREET -LEVEL WINDOWS ON BOTH BUILDINGS ALONG MAIN STREET MUST BE TRANSPARENT AND UNOBSTRUCTED CONSISTENT WITH ECDC 22.43.050.B. 4. ALL UTILITY CABINETS MUST BE RELOCATED, BURIED, SCREENED WITH VEGETATION, OR CAMOUFLAGED WITH ART TO REDUCE THEIR VISUAL IMPACT. 5. ADDITIONAL HANGING BASKETS AND STREET FURNITURE MUST BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK IF THERE IS SUFFICIENT ROOM BETWEEN OTHER REQUIRED FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND UTILITIES. 6. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INTEREST TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH FACADES BY INCLUDING A BELLY BAND MIDWAY ALONG THE NORTH FACADE AND ON THE SOUTH FACADE TO TIE OFF THE ENDS OF THE BRICK PILLARS. r�_NTAIul►101FTA BWW-10A1N Ly3•7Sy.Wlaa16721ato] 9.[ 1I 1 1.11 Lai ilk] [e]:rgo] Avd,r_ld Al Ill, COMPLY WITH ECDC 18.70.030.D AND F. 8. STAFF WILL VERIFY COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH ALL RELEVANT CODES AND LAND USE PERMIT CONDITIONS THROUGH REVIEW OF BUILDING AND ENGINEERING 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. Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 17 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 1.a IV. PARTIES OF RECORD City of Edmonds 121— 5t" Ave North Edmonds, WA 98020 Lynda Fireman 600 Bell St. #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Annette Border 600 Bell St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Dale Shoup 600 Bell St. Apt. 301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Greg Brewer Via email John & Jolene Smith Via email Michelle Dotsch Edmonds Resident Via email Theresa Hollis Edmonds Resident Via email Will Magnuson Edmonds, WA Via email Glenn Safadago Attn: GBH Holdings / Applicant Via email Phil Frisk Attn: PWF Architecture, LLC Via email Sea Breeze Condos C/O Cindy Bruce & Steve Beck Via email Kathy Brewer Via email Page 15 of 15 Packet Pg. 18 1.b Date: August 23, 2023 To: Architectural Design Board From: Michele Szafran, Associate Planner Re: Additional info/attachments for Phase II public hearing packet (PLN2022-0085) LO 00 0 0 N N O N z J d On August 17 and August 18, the applicant for 611 on Main (PLN2022-0085) submitted plan revisions and additional information after the meeting packet for the August 24 Phase II public hearing had been published. These revisions provide visual exterior changes, primarily to the north fagade to address site visibility from the driveway to the alley. The staff report included in the meeting packet does not include staff analysis addressing the changes since the changes were submitted after the staff report had been completed. The changes to the north fagade include shifting the trash enclosure further west while also setting the building further back from the alley, thus allowing for increased site visibility, additional landscaping, and more modulation to the north facade. The revised project plans (Attachment 14) now provide 20 parking stalls, which is still in compliance with the required amount of parking (18 stalls). Revised versions of Attachments 3 (Project Plans and Drawings) and 4 (Landscape Plan) are included as new attachments 14 and 15 respectively, while the applicant's responses to the Engineering Division's August 10 comment letter (Attachment 8) are provided in new attachment 13. The final sheet of Attachment 14 includes a revised north elevation. Based on the applicant's proposed revisions to the north facade, staff is recommending that condition #6 be revised as listed below. 6. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INTEREST TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH FACADESS BY INCLUDING A BELLY BAND,IN.41-WAlAY ALONG THE nino�AqAna ND ON THE SOUTH FAqAD-E TO TIE OFF THE ENDS OF THE BRICK PILLARS. Packet Pg. 19 ►A �CENTERLINEOFALLEY m 15.00' AL.LEY — _ - - - — — — _ CDG `-01 LEFT 5ETBACK LINE FOR VEHICLE 516WTLINE 9$. ' �- CENTERLINE OF DRIVEWAY � 100 rn 0 �• °� — •gyp 3'-6"ABOVE GRADE AT TOP OF DRIVEWAY ��/� POST -MOUNTED CONVEX MIRROR 7' ABOVE GRADE �/' — — COVERED PORCH AT STAIRWAY EXIT," o „ N89 59 44 W 8' x 10' DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AT ALLEY LEVEL ELEVATION AT CORNER OF RECTANGLE 6" CURB AT PROPERTY LINE — — �( 89.96' ENCOMPASSING PROP05ED WORK, 4 LOC. 0 0 0 _ Z CONCRETE BOLLARDS 5' O.C. z ' LOW LANDSCAPING ONLY AT DRIVEWAY TO 70"x 70"TRANSFORMER - — @ w PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGHT TRIANGLE FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC — — — — — — - ELECTRIC METER SANK----_ (20 METERS) — — — W _ RIGHT SETBACK LINE FOR VEHICLE SIGHTLINE U, , I 100 I I I 99• I —0 O c0 ro w� 100 ROOF OVERHANG, TYP. � I RETAINING WALL DOWN TO PARKING LEVEL 45" FENCE ON RETAINING WALL I PARKING LEVEL BELOW\ I I � ACCESS TO RISER ROOM STAIRS FROM SIDEWALK DOWN TO PARKING LEVEL 42"WIDE PLANTER ON_ 36"WIDE I, C— Rr I I I^" "I IW 0 to I- I " I I - 59.99' - ON j HiH RAMP DOWN 6" TO COVER D TO COMMERCIAL SPACE CANOPY PROJECTS 4' INTO .L 0 Proposed Building i DASHED LINE IND AT: BUILDING OUTLINE ABOVE F 5T =L OR LEVEL, TYP. DASHED LINE INDICATES EXTENT OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ROOF OVERI-IA MAX. 30" INTO 5ET13ACK NoN U m 24"WIDE LANDSCAPING ALONG DRIVEWAY w U Np2 42"RAIL ING I �CANOPY PROJE TS 10g' 30" INTO 5ETBA K BENCH ENTRANCE TO �0 O APARTMENT UNITS co CO Plaza " \I r%10 5' 'I ON I I I 3' 6" ON 2' CANTILEVER AT UPPER FLOOR LEVEL I ,I 89.96' LANDSCAPING BETWEEN BUILDING AND SIDEWALK LE S89059'39"E R F OVERHANG 14" INTO PUBLIC R.O.W. Jzr / MAIN STREET/' '' 36"WIDE PLANTER ALONG TERRACE .d ADA-COMPLIANT RAMP i II -106 6' FENCE AND LANDSCAPING AT EAST PROPERTY LINE 2 SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING SPACES 4' FENCE AND LANDSCAPING BETWEEN SIDEWALK AND TERRACE i / o oh o i Site Plan Scale: 1" = 10' 1. See survey drawing for existing site conditions. 2. Parcel Numbers: 004342-098-039-00 (west parcel), 004342-098-037-00 (east parcel). 3. Site addresses: 605 & 611 Main Street. 4. Existing buildings to be demolished, new 24-unit, 3-story, Type VA, fully sprinklered (NFPA Type 13) apartment building proposed. 5. Total lot area: 9,889 square feet. 6. Total building area: approximately 18,000 square feet gross. 7. Zoning: Downtown Business, BD2 8. Average grade (97.8 + 99 + 101.9 + 106)/4 = 101.17' 9. Allowable building height = 101.17' + 30' = 131.17' 10. See landscape and civil drawings for additional proposed site improvements WASHINGSON 1�14�141w �41 S:1►ZII i 111 [II 111►� i vs Member of the ^ American Institute of Architects 000 0 O N PR0JECI NAME: o N 611 On Main J a r Cn Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street O Edmonds, WA 98020 d 2 7 a r�udt�i �uNi�tr: N 01.21004 a d 7 C 1) 1t O August 14, 2023 C 9 0 CD SSAMP: W C M rn c 73 REGISTERED a ARCHITECT o 0 LL c IL I K a tS2TAE F WAW. SHINGTON m in d to d' NOTE: d The information contained herein is intended to E 5 be used in conjunction with shop drawings, a approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted a industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. S H [ [ t t 1 t 1 S: Site Plan S d I I I NUMBER: Al 01 Packet Pg. 20 1.c 9O ex Mirror in -i u n main, PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Basement Level Plan Edmonds, Washington 98020 August 14, 2023 (206) 920.3554 1 0 4 8 16 0 0 0 N N O N Z J d N Packet Pg. 21 Y Landscaping Canopy DN r Planter I n� Of o w I a Covered Entry Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' Planter Bike m Bike DN Reception 14' x 20' Storage Landscaping C 0 Cc M Parking Below _mu ILLTransformer Sliding Glass Door & 42" Railing 70" x 70" d0 U Front N Storage Women 17'-6" 14'-6" @ o 105 `° ° 101 103 Studio ADA "Type B" Studio - Studio _ �p Partial Accessibility Co red Porch ADA "Type B" _ @ ADA "Type B" Partial Accessibility r Partial Accessibility 465 SF 520 SF 475 SF 11' Ceiling Men 00 11' Ceiling 11' Ceiling -- -- 3 L)N L7 up �B 0 I I I I Closet uP \_ ' ❑� Dum sters I 00 J 8'x10' Office 102 104 10'x15' Studio Studio ADA "Type B" ADA "Type A" i Partial Accessibility Additional Accessibility 420 SF in 390 SF _ \ 11' Ceiling iv 11' Ceiling I � Elevator � 14'-8" 19'-8° 0o DN I Conference I 12' x 22' I Mail r — — —, — — — — — — — — — — — i L — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — J Line of Building Above Canopy Plaza :m Parking Access Ramp Below rr c a� n 0 04 Bench Floor areas are approximate and measured to inside face of perimeter walls 611 On Main PWF Architecture PC Box 141 First Floor Plan 2,600 SF commercial 6,500 SF +l- Total units: 18 (16 studios, 2 1-bedroom) Edmonds, Washington 98020 August 14, 2023 4 studios 1 1-bedroom Total enclosed floor area: 18,000 SF +I- (206)920.3554 0 4 8 16 LID O O 0 N N O N Z J d c 0 a1 c d IL aD IL 3 C U Packet Pg. 22 1.c 611 On Main Second Floor Plan 12 studios 1 1-bedroom August 14, 2023 7,200 SF +l- Sliding Glass Door & 42" Railing, typ. PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (206) 920.3554 D 4 8 16 LO 0 0 0 N N O N Z J d N C Packet Pg. 23 1.c 611 On Main Third Floor Plan Upper levels of 13 units 3,700 SF +/- August 14, 2023 PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (206) 920.3554 D 4 8 16 LO 0 0 0 N N O N Z J d N C Packet Pg. 24 ARCW TEC TURAL FARAFE T, T YF. FIBER CEMENT PANEL 3 + % " METAL REVEAL 3 ACTUAL OUILOING SIT. 132.17' (EXCEE03 111AX. ALLOWED It_0" FOR 0ECORATIVE ARCPITEGTURAL FARAFET FEATURE) MAX. OUILOING WT, 13L17' 1.c 0ECORA T I vE MEOAL L ION FANEL 3 4" BRICK VENEER FRECA3 T CAFI TAL BRICK FILA3TER fROJECT3 11; TYF AREA OF WINDOW UNIT GLAZING, T YF FIBER CEMSIN FRE CA 3 T BA 3E ENTRY FROM 3I0EWALK OFFICE ENTRANCE OA3PEO LINE REFRE3ENTS 310NALK South Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" /-1I!✓=/-1 1=�✓= 1 VVk--- �-_—I N L l--Il==��✓ 10' ABODE MAIN FLOOR Maximum building height 30' above average grade. Total glazing area between 2' above grade and 10' above main floor level: 295 SF (75.3% of 392 SF of wall area between 2' above grade and 10' above main floor level). 1:12 GOOF 3L OFE -\ North Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 4-11I!l i, / "IN "I Nl__ �==L✓VINI= -t 4—'qN / '�'lN Y "I N""IN VV I I rf I — I\�__ l� /—I �✓ I l� /—i I — WOOS FENCE FLANTER AVERAGE GRADE 1007' - WOOo TRIM PROJECTS 1 " BE FOND 310IN6i, T YF. MENT FANEL 3 + % " 111E TAL �E VEAL 3 PO BOX III 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIARCHItICTURI.00 Member of the American Institute of Architects o 0 O N P R 0 J I C I NAME, o N 611 On Main J a Cn Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 a ''I(UdCl�l IVUNI�CI(: � 01.21004 a as c c T: 0 c� July 31, 2023 CD STAMP: W REGISTERED a ARCHITECT 0 N73 LL c STA7Ei5F WASHINGTON � :3 in a� to r NOTE E The information contained herein is intended to 5 be used in conjunction with shop drawings, a approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted a industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. 08/14/23 SFIIt t I t North & South Elevationc. 06 1 Packet Pg. 25 1.c PO BOX III 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIARCHItICTURI.00 Member of the American Institute of Architects o 0 0 N P R 0 J I C I NAME, 0 N 611 On Main J a Cn Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street 0 Edmonds, WA 98020 a 'R0JECT NUMBER: N 01.21004 `c a m c c T: o c� July 31, 2023 CD STAMP: w _ M REGISTERED a ARCHITECT N73 T LL c TF N1WW7R��:��t: STA7Ei5F WASHINGTON � :3 in a� to r VOTE E The information contained herein is intended to 5 be used in conjunction with shop drawings, a approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted a ndustry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. 08/14/23 �FIIt t I t East & West Elevations SHEET NUMBER: Al 107 Packet Pg. 26 1.c Li co 0 0 N N O N Z J d N Packet Pg. 27 1.c PWF Architecture Z7CENTERLINE OF ALLEY 15.0 0' ALLEYtu V J D rn Z C mso SIDEWALK MAIN STREET SITE LIGHT PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = V-0" o =o o DUMPSTER WALL PACK PO BOX 141 EDMONDS, WASHINGiON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWFRRCHITECTURE.COMCn tj Member of the � American Institute of Architects c N 0 PROJECT NRME; z 611 MAIN ST APTS a T 611 Main Street o Edmonds, WA 98020 a PROJECT NUMBER: 21067 a m c DATE: � October 31, 2021 .o Electrical Consultants, Inc. 19015 36th Avenue West, Suite E Lynnwood, Washington 98036 Phone (425) 775-1799 FAX (425) 774-9870 NOTE: The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. SHEET TIiEE: SITE LIGHTING PLAN SHEET NUMBER: El 01 Packet Pg. 28 1.c PWF Architecture Landscaping UP Line of Building Above US i o Riser uP'RFA - - - - - - 6 COMPACT F1 COMPACT EV EV EV EV EV EV � CAPABLE CAPABLE READY READY READY READY er, LU < Parking } 20 stalls ww UP w J In EV w Q EV READY U EV EV READY Ll --E] cl QL% QL Y" \ J wQ W QpJ W Q v'� Q U Mech. icy J � Elevator wa Q U N �,p,, W Q til m Q w � -0 20' Driveway m Ramp Up to Alley 0 U JW In C J M N POWER -BASEMENT LEVEL N N Lr SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"00 � W Q 0 PO BOX 141 EDMON0S, WASHINGTON 98020 (206)920.3554 P WWW,PWFARCHITECTUPI. C0M Member of the �" '� American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 MAIN ST APTS 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 P R 0 J I C I NUMBER: 21067 DATE: October 31, 2021 a Electrical Consultants, Inc. 19015 36th Avenue West, Suite E Lynnwood, Washington 98036 Phone (425) 775-1799 FAX (425) 774-9870 NOTE; The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. SHEET TITLE: POWER - BASEMENT LEVEL SNEEi NOIIBER: E3100 Packet Pg. 29 FIBER CEMENT PANELS + %"METAL REVEALS DECORATIVE MEDALLION PANELS PRECAST CAP 4" BRICK VENEER METAL CANOPY PRECAST CAPITAL BRICK PILASTER PROJECTS I", TYP. AREA OF WINDOW UNIT GLAZING, TYP. ❑ PRECAST BASE ENTRY FROM SIDEWALK DASHED LINE REPRESENTS SIDEWALK 0 D❑■C ■❑❑■N 9 SF ARCHITECTURAL PARAPET, TYP. RECESSED DOWNLIGHT OFFICE ENTRANCE 611 on Main Preliminary South Elevation August 14, 2023 TRIM, SCONCE LO 00 O O N N O N Z J a Cn c ACTUAL BUILDING PT. 132.17' (EXCEEDS MAX. ALLOWED 1'-0" FOR DECORATIVE ARCHITECTURAL PARAPET FEATU coo �1:12 ROOF SLOPE MAX. BUILDING HT. 131.17' o c L d c,> ❑ ❑ ❑ a. a BER CEMENT PANEL ❑ ❑ ❑ THIRD FLOOR N s a WALL PACK 3 � � c 0 CONO FLOOR WOOD FENCE 43 SF _ 55 SF CONCRETE PLANTER ROWLOCK COURSE AT WINDOW SILL, TYP. DASHED LINE INDICATES 392 SF WALL ENTRY FROM SIDEWALK FIRST FLOOR ELEv. IOL3' AVERAGE GRADE 1007' AREA BETWEEN 2' ABOVE GRADE AND IV ABOVE MAIN FLOOR 0 4 8 16 PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 Packet Pg. 30 ARCNITECTURAL PARAPET (EXCEEDS ALLOWABLE BUILDING NT BY I'-C") WALL PACK STEP LIGHT MAIN STREET SIDEWALK PARKING LEVEL PARAPET, TYP. 611 on Main Preliminary East Elevation August 14, 2023 i GLASS TYP. RAILING, RIDGE AT 131.17' ELEV.--- /-1:12 ROOF SLOPE //—FIBERCEMENT PANELS + %"METAL REVEALS, TYP. RECESSED DOWNLIGHT — (TYP) WOOD TRIM 'Y PROJECTS ICI 'ACK WALL PACK 42'OPE AILING DRIVEWAY F== 0 4 8 16 PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 7" FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE WALL PACK ALLEY Packet Pg. 31 1.c 1.11 ---r QI -lam CACA=CT r1 = �1P AT 1J1191 CI C- 611 on Main PWF Architecture PO Box 141 PreliminaryWest Elevation Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 August 14, 2023 0 4 8 16 r Packet Pg. 32 1.c FISER CEMEP I: I2 ROOF SLOPE —� 1-/VI 11 1/1L1N LJI\11..111 V""""Ill "11n 1 Ill"t,)-1111 L./-11 611 on Main PWF Architecture Preliminary North Elevation PO Box 141 August 14, 2023 Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 0 4 8 WOOD TRIM PROJECTS I" BEYOND SIDING, TYR `SENT PANELS + 'Va "METAL REVEALS NER Packet Pg. 33 1.d SD SS I GI Z � N oCD I0) � rn 2 m z c m AV SD SS - o � o 0 i 59.99' N89°59'39"W 659.70' I /IvIf-%11 V V 1 1 \LL I i i 1z i 0 cg RIM = 99.38' SD SS SS I\UVIUL `t A`t II\LL CRATE FROM OLYMPIC FOUNDRY (TYP.) (206) 764-6200 0 5 10 20 SCALE: 1 INCH =10 FEET PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE/COMMENTS TIDFFQ O CITY APPROVED STREET TREE CHAMAECYPARIS NOOTKATENSIS 'PENDULA' / WEEPING ALASKA CEDAR - THUJA OCCIDENTALIS 'SMARAGD' / EMERALD GREEN ARBORVITAE CUIDI IQQ CALAMAGROSTIS x ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER' / 'KARL FOERSTER' FEATHER REED GRASS ILEX CRENATA 'SKY PENCIL' / 'SKY PENCIL' HOLLY MAHONIA NERVOSA / LOW OREGON GRAPE GROUNDCOVER VINCA MINOR / COMMON PERIWINKLE NASSELA TENUISSIMA / MEXICAN FEATHER GRASS PLANTING NOTES: 2" CAL., SPECIMEN QUALITY, BRANCHED @ 4' 8' MIN. HT., SPECIMEN QUALITY, B&B 4-5' HT., B&B; PLANT ® 3 Y" O.C. 5 GAL. CONT., 18" MIN. HT., SPECIMEN QUALITY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 15-18" HT., FULL & BUSHY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 15-18" HT., FULL & BUSHY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 1 GAL. POTS AS SHOWN 2 GAL. CONT., PLANT @ 30" O.C. 1. ALL PLANTS MUST BE HEALTHY, VIGOROUS MATERIAL, FREE OF PESTS AND DISEASE. 2. ALL PLANTS MUST BE CONTAINER GROWN OR BALLED AND BURLAPPED AS INDICATED IN THE PLANT LIST. 3. ALL TREES MUST BE STRAIGHT TRUNKED AND FULL HEADED AND MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED. 4. ALL PLANTS ARE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER INSTALLATION. 5. ALL TREES MUST BE GUYED OR STAKED AS SHOWN IN THE DETAILS. 6. ALL PLANTING AREAS MUST BE COMPLETELY MULCHED AS SPECIFIED, 2" DEPTH OF BARK MULCH. 7. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND SHALL AVOID DAMAGE TO ALL UTILITIES DURING THE COURSE OF THE WORK. LOCATIONS OF EXISTING BURIED UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE BASED UPON BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION AND ARE TO BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO (1) VERIFY THE LOCATIONS OF UTILITY LINES IN AND ADJACENT TO THE WORK AREA, (2) PROTECT ALL UTILITY LINES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, AND (3) REPAIR ANY AND ALL DAMAGE TO UTILITIES, STRUCTURES, SITE APPURTENANCES, ETC. WHICH OCCURS AS A RESULT OF THE LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION. 8. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING ALL QUANTITIES OF PLANTS REPRESENTED BY SYMBOLS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS BEFORE PRICING THE WORK. 9. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FULLY MAINTAINING ALL PLANTING (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: WATERING, SPRAYING, MULCHING, FERTILIZING, MOWING, ETC.) OF THE PLANTING AND LAWN AREAS UNTIL THE WORK IS ACCEPTED IN TOTAL BY THE OWNER. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETELY GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOR A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS BEGINNING ON THE DATE OF TOTAL ACCEPTANCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROMPTLY MAKE ALL REPLACEMENTS DURING THE NORMAL PLANTING SEASON. 11. AFTER BEING DUG AT THE NURSERY SOURCE, ALL TREES IN LEAF SHALL BE ACCLIMATED FOR TWO (2) WEEKS UNDER A MIST SYSTEM PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 12. ANY PLANT MATERIAL WHICH DIES, TURNS BROWN, OR DEFOLIATES (PRIOR TO TOTAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK) SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND REPLACED WITH MATERIAL OF THE SAME SPECIES, QUANTITY, AND SIZE AND MEETING ALL PLANT LIST SPECIFICATIONS. 13. STANDARDS SET FORTH IN "AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK" REPRESENT GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS ONLY AND SHALL CONSTITUTE MINIMUM QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANT MATERIAL. 14. SAFE, CLEARLY MARKED PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR ACCESS TO ALL ADJACENT PROPERTIES MUST BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. 15. DURING THE GROWING SEASON ALL ANNUALS SHALL REMAIN IN A HEALTHY, VITAL CONDITION THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 16. ALL PLANT MATERIALS QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETE COVERAGE OF ALL PLANTING BEDS AT SPACING SHOWN ON PLANT SCHEDULE. 17. ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE 12" OF TOPSOIL, SEE SPECIFIC SITE NOTE #20 FOR RAISED PLANTERS. 18. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS ARE TO BE WATERED VIA AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM (DESIGN —BUILD). PROVIDE SLEEVING 2x SIZE OF PIPE UNDER ALL HARDSCAPE AND THRU RAISED PLANTERS. 19. INSTALL A WEED BARRIER IN ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS AND ALL ROCK AREAS (SEE SPECIFICATIONS). 20. RAISED PLANTERS TO RECEIVE DRAINAGE ROCK AND TUBING, TIE—IN TO STORM WATER SYSTEM. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO PROVIDE FILTER FABRIC BEFORE INSTALLING 18" OF CEDAR GROVE'S LIGHTWEIGHT #2 BLEND. Know what's below Call before you dig. J 0 NO04 ~_ m m 00 W I • 41 'I � 41 00 O 00 T ul N Lf N M 0 (71 ra m ra 0 ul M WA GTOrl �a E ARCHITECT Y. LY1 _V1iV . -11 V - EXPIRES: 6/28/2025 O N W R W o a 0- Z � z � a � Q � � 0 Q r r Z O J � W L-1 .0 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 8" 2-PLY RUBBER HOSE DOUBLE STRAND 12 GAUGE WIRE COVERED W 2-PLY RUBBER HOSE PAINTED FL CRESCENT ORANGE WHITE FLAGGING (TYP.) TREE WRAP To iol�j� 2 INCHES MULCH 1 4 INCH DEEP SAUCER 8' STEEL TEE POST C° BACKFILL MIX N UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL REMOVE BURLAP & ROPE FROM TOP 1/3 OF THE BALL NOTE: SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH MATERIAL TO USE. TREE PLANTING 1 N.T.S. CHES MULCH E LANDSCAPE NOTES TYPE OF MULCH ) HRUB IS B & B, THEN DVE BURLAP & ROPE rt TOP 1/3 OF BALL (FILL MIX STURBED SUBSOIL 2 SHRUB PLANTING N.T.S. GROUND COVER PLANTING SOIL ROOT BALL 12" MULCH OR E.Q. TO PLANT SPACING HARD SURFACE III /=1=1 1=1 1=1 II=III-III1 NOTE: TAPER MULCH o1' THICKNESS DOWN TO TOP OF ROOT MASS. AGROUND COVER DETAIL (4" POTS AND SMALLER) NO SCALE STEEL LANDSCAPE EDGING RIVER ROCK 2» MULCH AREA TOPSOIL 0 0 n o0 � I I1 I I1 I�III1 I II 11 —III1 I I IIIIII—III I I I IIIIIIIIIIII —III—III IIIIII—III I I 'I � IIIII � II � II 11 —III IIIIII—III I I I I �IIIIIIIII1 I I -III—III III -III ®STEEL EDGING DETAIL NO SCALE IRRIGATION DETAILS F METER METER NOTE: FOR INSTALLATION OF POINT OF CONNECTION WITHIN A STRUCTURE REFER TO THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND MECHANICAL ENGINEER / CONTRACTOR. BOX AMETEK ECONOMY TURF BOX 6 GATE P.V.C. SLEEVE VALV -UNION POINT OF CONNECTION NO SCALE NOTE: ALL FITTINGS TO BE GALV. PAINT ALL GALVANIZED PIPE WITH ONE COAT CARBON ELASTIC PAINT BOX AMETEK 12" JUMBO BOX `V DOUBLE CHECK UNI m:I1Z N UNION ELv l4°a 111 2A PEA 4-6"X6"X16" 2C /FT CONCRETE BLOCK PEA GRAVEL 4" DIAMETER DRAIN LINE RUN TO DAY LIGHT BACKFLOW PREVENTER TEST COCKS TO FACE UP FOR TESTING CUT IN DETAIL POINT OF CONNECTION INSTALLATION OF POINT OF CONNECTION OUTSIDE OF STRUCTURE PVC MINIMUM TWO TIMES THE DIAMETER 18" 24" SLEEVE OF PIPE TO BE INSERTED INTO SLEEVE.) TYP. TYP. AO PLANTER f� / MAIN OR LATERAL -A WIRE STUB -UP AND PLUG PLANTER —� PAVING WIRE SLEEVE (MINIMUM OF TWO INCHES J CURB DIAMETER.) CURB BUILDING 18" 24" TYP. YP. ENTRY WIRE SLEEVE WALK WIRE, MAIN OR LATERAL SLEEVE I MAIN OR LATERAL C} C CC w ¢ w CURB © 24" 18" G Z Y Z TYP. TYP. � SIDEWALKof WIRE SLEEVE CURB LINE OF CURB CURB OR WALK PLANTING PAVING ° 44 TypICgC � �/ �I�C IRRIGATION FLAG TAPE CLOSED VERTICAL STUB -OUT MARKER PIPE OR 1. IRRIGATION WIRE TRENCH ; ° OR 2. METALIC TAPE O \ a a Of o METALIC TAPE U RRIGATION WIRE PVC SLEEVE MAIN LINE OR LATERAL LINE PVC ELL p TYPICAL SLEEVING DETAIL NO SCALE w w cn PVC SUPPLY HEADER TOP OF SLOPE AIR VACUUM RELIEF ASSEMBLY LIN FLUSHING VALVE ASSEMBLY LATERAL TUBING PVC EXHAUST HEADER TOE OF SLOPE CONVENTIONAL SPACING ON TOP 2/3 OF SLOPE f REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY WITH DISC FILTER CONVENTIONAL SPACING AND PRV PLUS 25% ON BOTTOM 1/3 OF SLOPE NOTE: ALIGN LATERALS PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS OF THE SLOPE © SLOPE FEED LAYOUT DETAIL - N.T.S. AMETEK STANDARD BOX (AS REQUIRED) PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE TO BE SET FOR +/- 70 PSI. TRIPPLE SWING JOINT r-UNION ELL ELL 1' QUICK �2 COUPLERL� ELL TEES 3" NIPPLE AND ELL C SCH. 80 MALE ADAPTER :3 MAIN LINE QUICK COUPLING VALVE FOR WINTERIZATION BLOW-OUT AND PRESSURE TESTING QUICK COUPLING VALVE SET FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE IN LAWN AREA 3" ABOVE SIDEWALK, CURB, ETC. / / FINISH GRADE IN OTHER AREAS FINISH GRADE LAWN AREAS 12" MAX. _ FINISH GRADE SHRUB AREAS A,, ROUND PLASTIC BOX AND COVER —III STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP - - SIZE AND LENGTH AS REQUIRED f1 I llrL: ' SCH. 80 PVC NIPPLE PEA GRAVEL SCH. 40 PVC ELBOW ( SCH. 40 PVC STREET ELBOW PVC SUPPLY LINE (SxSxT) SCH. 80 PVC NIPPLE SIZE AND FITTING LENGTH AS REQUIRED 12" / PVC SUPPLY LINE SCH, 40 PVC STREET ELBOW 1-1/2" PVC PIPE STAKE (SCH. 40 MIN. 36" LONG OR AS SITE REQUIRES NOTE: USE TEFLON TAPE ON ALL THREADED FITTINGS TYPICAL QUICK COUPLING VALVE ASSEMBLY NO SCALE BOX TO BE PLACED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO SIDEWALK, CURB, ETC, HARDSCAPE EDGE 12" OR AS NOTED 12"X18" PLASTIC BOX AND COVER WITH LOCK TOP p CURL TYPE EXPANSION LOOP (MIN 24") N \ p P WATERPROOFED WIRE CONNECTION ,% I- CHRISTY'S I.D. TAG (STANDARD), x x x x,, x x x x' x x NON -PRESSURE SECURE TO SOLENOID LINE FITTING PIGTAIL FINISH GRADE 3/4" n LAWN AREA PVC LINE PIPE FINISH GRADE SHRUB AREA ii i ,/ %/` /°o SOLENOID 3' 08 12" MAX. o,p �o FLOW ADJUSTMENT o o° °oO�' � TOP OF VALVE �� ql o� PEA GRAVEL (MIN. 0 C, 3 CU. FT.) 18" MIN. PVC SCH. 40 MALE ADAPTOR (TYP. 2 PLACES) PVC LINE PIPE PVC ELBOW PVC LINE PIPE PVC SUPPLY LINE FITTING(SxSxT) COMMON WIRE NOTE: CONTROL WIRE 1. VALVES ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN SHRUB AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. WHEN MORE THAN ONE VALVES IS LOCATED IN THE SAME AREA, PROVIDE A SPACE A MIN. OF 3 FEET APART. 3. USE TEFLON TAPE ON ALL THREADED FITTINGS. TYPICAL REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY NO SCALE (STRAIGHT TYPE) LOW VOLUME APPLICATION COMPONENTS LINE FLUSHING VALVE #F-TLFV-1 COMPRESSION RING BLANK TL (TYP.) I I I —LATERAL (OR EXHAUST HEADER) TEE �o o A STALL PER SPECS) oDOL, _ 0 0 °0 SHUT-OFF VALVE /4 GRAVEL UMP #TLSOV (BLANK 1 CUBIC FOOT TUBING MAY BE ATTACHED TO OUTLET) BRICK SUPPORTS (THREE) E LINE FLUSHING VALVE SECTION - N.T.S. FINISH GRADE 180 2-WAY TEE SEE SPECS TUBING SEE SPECS 3/4" SCH 80 PVC NIPPLE-- . PVC TEE (SxSxT) PVC PIPING F START CONNECTION W PVC RISER SECTION - N.T.S. 3/4" DISC FILTER PVC MAINLINE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE 1" FPT 3/4" PRV 45 PSI LF FLD 2" MINIMUM CLEARANCE t, OR POLY U � � - � O OO OO OO OO O O o 0 00 00 00 0 0 U -PVC OO OO OO OO OO O LATERAL LINE O 00 00 00/00 0 0 c 000000000 0000000000c .. > (j0 Oo0 OHO OHO Ono Coo 0 o Oro OHO OHO Oho �o f1" BRICK SUPPORT 1 CU. FT. PEA x 3/4" SCH 40 RED BUSHING TxT 12" x 18" (1- EA. CORNER) GRAVEL SUMP VALVE BOX LOW FLOW ZONE CONTROL VALVE KIT N.T.S. 10 MULCH 3 02 FINISH GRADE 4 ( GRATED CAP 1 ® HUNTER 0.25 or 0.50 GPM PCB BUBBLER (OPTIONAL) 2 05 HUNTER HCV CHECK VALVE 9 (OPTIONAL) 5 © PATENTED STRATA ROOT SYSTEM 07 HUNTER SWING JOINT 6 (OPTIONAL) 7 ® LATERAL TEE OR ELL/PIPE 09 ROOT INTRUSION BARRIER # �/ o NOTE: INSTALL HUNTER 9 000 o000 00000 FILTER SLEEVE- #RZWS-SLEEVE 18" AND 36" ROOT ZONE WATERING SYSTEM WA (RZWS) M DETAIL - N.T,S. TT]OJ[xJ" IRRIGATION DETAIL FINISH GRADE 6" ROUND VALVE BOX AIR VACUU RELI F VALVE 3/4"M x 1 /2"F Tx REDUCTION BUSHING 3/4" PVC COUPLING (TxT) 3/4" SCH 80 RISE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) BRICK SUPPORTS °o u po°o (THREE) °O° O°O° 3/4" CRUSHE �� l GRAVEL SUMP POLY TUBING CLAMPED TO PVC STAINLESS STEEL INSERT FITTING CLAMPS AIR /VACUUM RELIEF POLY) (PLUMBED TO POLY) - N.T.S. SECTION - N.T,S, MANUAL FLUSH VALVE PLUMBED TO PVC OR POLY (TYP) PVC OR POLY EXHAUST HEADER PERIMETER LATERALS 2" TO 4" FROM EDGE Techline@ CV DRIPLINE Techline@ START CONNECTION REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH DISC FILTER AND PRV PVC OR POLY SUPPLY HEADER AREA PERIMETER START CONNECTION PTER Techline CV CENTER FEED LAYOUT S&wM- NOT TO SCALE DETAIL — C102 "'ISH GRADE SPECS FOR DEPTH SEE PLANS FOR LATERAL SPACING SUB GRADE H SUBGRADE INSTALLATION N.T.S. MANUAL FLUSH VALVE PLUMBED TO PVC OR POLY Techline@ CV DRIPLINE Techline@ START CONNECTION MALE ADAPTER EXHAUST HEADER Techline@ TEE \ REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH DISC FILTER AND PRV AREA PERIMETER SUPPLY HEADER K Techline CV IRREGULAR AREAS: Triangular S&wM- NOT TO SCALE DETAIL — C104 ibO J Z o �_ 10 U N 1 N W 03 cow 00 G✓ m -m 0 C rn N z N a30 N ID 0 U 00 0 00 T Ln r\ N N r) M 0 00 rn 2 m ra ul ra M WA! 11 1:,1`0 VI tl�� Ci'9 tif^i N41V k i'YF F4A V4VW EXPIRES: 6/28/2025 V ) J_ Q W 0 o N z O W 0 — W o Q � Z Z Q Q C + r 0 o Q W a— W Q �0 V ) Q Z Q J L-2.0 Know what's below Call before you dig. I Packet Pg. 35 1.e From: Will Magnuson To: Levitan, David; Martin, Michelle; Citizens Arch Design Board Cc: Szafran, Michele; McLaughlin, Susan Subject: Re: FW: Updated Meeting Packet/Materials for August 24 ADB Meeting Date: Thursday, August 24, 2023 12:07:37 PM Attachments: 23-08-24 ADB Main St ants wm comments.Ddf Greetings, Please find my attached comments for today's ADB meeting for phase 2 review of the Main Street apartments. Thank you, Will Magnuson Edmonds, WA On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 4:26 PM Levitan, David <David.Levitan(aedmondswa.gov> wrote Good Afternoon Parties of Record: Below is information on updated meeting materials for the 611 on Main project (PLN2022- 0085), which is scheduled for a Phase II design review public hearing before the Architectural Design Board on August 24, 2023 at 6 pm. David Levitan I Planning Manager Planning and Development Department City of Edmonds, WA 425-771-0220, ext. 1223 david.levitan cnr edmondswa.gov From: Levitan, David <David.Levitan@EdmondsWa.Gov> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 4:20 PM To: Levitan, David <David.Levitan@EdmondsWa.Gov> Cc: McLaughlin, Susan<susan.mclaughlin&edmondswa.gov>; Szafran, Michele <Michele.Szafrangedmondswa.gov>; Martin, Michelle <MichelIe.Martin&edmondswa.gov> N N O N Z J IL r co C Packet Pg. 36 1.e Subject: Updated Meeting Packet/Materials for August 24 ADB Meeting Importance: High Good Afternoon ADB Members (bcc'd): Following the publication of your August 24 meeting packet, the applicant submitted additional materials reflecting changes to the project design, which are summarized in the staff report addendum (attached and included in the updated meeting packet). The updated meeting packet (with new attachments 12-15) is available through the same links provided below. This new information will also be sent to parties of interest/record. Please let me know if you have any questions. David Levitan I Planning Manager Planning and Development Department City of Edmonds, WA 425-771-0220, ext. 1223 david.levita@edmondswa.gov From: Martin, Michelle <Michelle.Martin(cr�,edmondswa.gov> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 3:31 PM To: Citizens Arch Design Board <citizens-archna.edmondswa.gov> Cc: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw&gmail.com>; McLaughlin, Susan <susan.mclaughlin c&edmondswa.gov>; Szafran, Michele <Michele.Szafran(g edmondswa.gov> Subject: Next meeting agenda - ADB August 24th @ 6pm N N O N Z J a r CO c M 2 Packet Pg. 37 1.e Greetings ADB members, The agenda packet for the next meeting to be held before the Architectural Design Board is N available for your review below: a Architectural Design Board CO Regular Meeting E Thursday, August 24, 2023 6:00 PM 2 121 5th Ave N - City Hall - 3rd Floor, Edmonds, WA 98020 Download PDF Agenda Packet I View Web Agenda Packet Download PDF Agenda Cover I View Web Agenda Cover Regards, 7&64d& 7&,rew 1 Senior Administrative Assistant City of Edmonds Planning & Development 425-771-0220, ext 1335 Michelle.Martin(a)eedmondswa.gov The Development Services Permit Center is open M-F 8:00am to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital/Remote access. In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 10:00am to 2:00pm: appointments are encouraged. For general service: Phone 1 425.771.0220 1 Email Deyserv.admin@edmondswa.gov Packet Pg. 38 1.e Greetings, c N Z The Main Street Apartments building exterior appearance is marginally improved. The sloped a roof line and eclectic building elements are improved over the bland rectangular structure N previously proposed. I still feel there are numerous design challenges with this project, but I would like to focus on the entry elements beginning with the commercial entry. M The commercial component in the BD zone should include a prominent entry and outdoor space for relief from the sidewalk. This outdoor space should provide room for commercial use as a public space. The proposed commercial entry is located below grade accessed by a minor ramp to a landing at the single commercial entry door on the SW corner of the building. A small canopy brings more attention to the commercial entry but the outdoor space including a ramp and landing do not "promote gathering by providing shelter" as stated in the narrative. This commercial entry space is no more than a circulation space with ramp and is not a "porch" as described. The commercial glazing is minimal, further reducing the commercial element on the site. Additionally, this commercial space has evidently been designed for a specific tenant who has not yet been announced. The residential entry is merely accessible from the sidewalk and not prominent from the sidewalk or street. The site and sidewalk grades will likely pose challenges to this design but there is a larger safety issue related to this below grade entry. The narrative provided by the development provides a couple descriptive statements. (1) "the entrance to the apartments is from a large plaza accessed from the sidewalk with signage and another canopy communicating point of entry to the residential space". (2) "the plaza will also have landscaping at the east side to provide privacy for those on the plaza as well as those on the adjacent property". So this means the residential entry requires signage to locate it and once descending the stairs or ramp into the entry circulation area (described as a plaza in the narrative) the entrance is screened from view to provide privacy. This does not sound like a safe passageway to the front door. Lighting this area will be restricted to avoid disturbing tenants and neighbors. Security cameras are a liability unless monitored 24/7, so I believe this residential entry is a liability for the project. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to provide additional comments. I feel the ADB is more than challenged in this process to assess the needs of the community and the intent of BD design guidelines. Additionally, I am disappointed the planning department summarized a recommendation for the ADB to approve the project design while recognizing numerous project design deficiencies still requiring attention. Thank you, Will Magnuson Packet Pg. 39 1.e From: Martin, Michelle To: Szafran. Michele; Cluaston. Michael Cc: Levitan, David Subject: FW: re ADB Date: Thursday, August 24, 2023 12:14:23 PM FYI -----Original Message ----- From: Shirley Oczkewicz <socz@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2023 10:09 AM To: Martin, Michelle <michelle.martin@edmondswa.gov> Subject: re ADB Please add my total objection to the public comments re the 611 Main St. Mixed -Use proposal. "Boxes" such as this shouldn't be allowed in the Edmonds bowl! Shirley Oczkewicz Edmonds N N O N Z J a r Co c Packet Pg. 40 1.e From: Lynda Fireman To: Levitan, David Cc: Szafran, Michele Subject: Comments for the ADB meeting 8.24.23 Date: Thursday, August 24, 2023 12:49:38 PM Attachments: 8.24.23 Comments PLN2022-0085 to ADB Paae 2.odf 8.24.23 Comments PLN2022-0085 to ADB Page 1.12df Please forward this to the ADB this afternoon before the ADB meeting this evening. Thank you, Lynda Fireman From: Lynda Fireman <lynda.fireman@outlook.com> Sent: August 24, 2023 12:38 PM To: Lynda Fireman <lynda.fireman@outlook.com> Subject: Files from Lynda Fireman N N O N Z J d r N C Packet Pg. 41 1.e August 24, 2023 To: The Architectural Design Board Comments on Proposal: File No, PLN2022-0085, 605 & 611 Main Street From: Lynda Fireman 600 Bell Street have to begin by saying that the whole process concerning 605/611 Main has been very disrespectful and a waste of time, resources and money to all concerned — The Planning Board, The Edmonds City Council, The Architectural Design Board, and the Citizens of Edmonds. Then, on Wednesday, August 23rd at 4:26, 1 received an e-mail from David Levitan saying that there was an updated meeting packet for tonight's meeting. I doubt that many "Parties of Record" and even the ADB noticed this. The attachment was a 1-page letter showing that the changes were submitted August 17th & 18th. The changes are not on all the drawings — it's very confusing. The plans have not been done correctly, completely and with attention to detail. With all of that, the Planning Board is still recommending that the ADB approve it as it. How can that be? This meeting should have been postponed immediately at this point and I'm asking for that to happen now. We should all have had this information at least a week before the meeting. This project is being treating as a game by the Architect and the Developer. It's all smoke and mirrors. Instead of beginning with a thoughtful, well -designed building that fits into our quaint & historic downtown, we're now coming up on 2 years with another (I believe it is the 51h) rendition, every one of which has been different and with different problems and a lack of attention to detail or consideration of those who will live there or those who are impacted by this building. It's being dragged out hoping that we'll lose interest or that time will run out and they won't have to make changes. There are some improvements to the building but it still needs many changes and it is not at the stage of completion. It's difficult to comment on the new changes as the drawings are not consistent. Even before I received the latest rendition, which shows a complete lack of attention to detail, I have concerns about: Elevator: There is still no elevator to the 2nd floor. The ADA Units and compliance: Note: My husband became disabled a few years ago. From experience, I realize how vulnerable the disabled are and how easy it is for others to disregard their needs and safety. 1. For safety, the outside ramp should have remained as it was with the switch back. Although you say the new straight design is ADA compliant, there are no measurements of the elevation from the sidewalk and the straight design seem too short, too steep and too dangerous for someone using a cane, a walker, a scooter or wheelchair. Taking this away for a little space should not be done. 2. Units 102 & 104 each only have one small window overlooking the parking ramp. What is the actual size and where is it located in the suite? Can it be made bigger? These units look very claustrophobic as there is no available common space in the building. 3. What is the door width going into these units? Will it accommodate wheelchairs? N N 0 N Z J d r c r r �o L .0 a� c •L a� x a CD a a� c c 0 U Packet Pg. 42 1.e The Lofts: You don't give the ceiling heights of the lofts. What are the ceiling heights in the level 2 kitchens and the level 3 loft areas? Are they to code and can they be reduced, in total, by the 1 foot you're asking for in elevation? • Why so many small windows? What is the actual size of all the windows? Other Comments: 1. The Architect's Design Review is almost word for word to parts of The Planning Department report. Who wrote it? 2. The Site plan still says 24 units, not 18 (again, attention to detail). 3. How will refuse from ADA apartments be addressed? Sound Disposal will not bring up and return garbage cans to the parking area. I asked. 4. Thank you for clarifying that: The City issues permits to residents moving in or out of a building to use 3-hr parking for limited periods of time and does not allow alleys to be blocked for this purpose. 5. How big is the new covered porch and how is it accessed? I can only see stairs from the first floor. Is it ADA accessible? 6. What is the "slight reduction in shadows cast on adjacent structures" actually mean? What are the specifics? 7. All the multi -story condos on both sides of Main between 61" & 71h have set -backs. They are not on the lot line. There is landscaping, not a row of shrubs. 8. The entrance to this apartment has a "small" concrete Plaza, not "large" or "generous" and it is not "conducive to socializing" and does not "maximize an open space opportunity" because the design does not allow for open space. 9. An alley is a right of way and not a set back and the plan does not minimize intrusion on the condos behind or the residence to the West. 10. The Bulk and Scale does not provide a "sensitive transition" to surrounding properties whatever that means. Landscape screening is very minimal. 11. Only a single, row of small shrubs along approximately half the perimeter does not reinforce or enhance the existing landscape character of the neighborhood. The new design on the alley is not clear or consistent on the drawings 12. The alley is still a problem. The conflicting drawings are not clear. There needs to be "clear" "picture renderings" (not just the drawings) of all sides of the building i.e., each side straight on, including the North side, not from above or on an angle, and including measurements - nothing hidden. Decisions cannot be made from the incomplete, unclear, inconsistent information given. 13. "STAFF WILL VERIFY COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH ALL RELEVANT CODES AND LAND USE PERMIT CONDITIONS THROUGH REVIEW OF BUILDING AND ENGINEERING 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." Considering the ongoing problems with this project, what does "minor changes" or "substantially similar" actually mean? What oversight does the ADB have even if the Planning Board considers them minor? Will they be made public to the Parties of Record? N N 0 N z J d c cc r r to L 0 c �L cu a� x a as CU a as c c 0 U Packet Pg. 43 1.e From: michelle dotsch To: Levitan, David Cc: Martin, Michelle Subject: Re: FW: Updated Meeting Packet/Materials for August 24 ADB Meeting Date: Thursday, August 24, 2023 1:47:27 PM Good Afternoon David, This is a written public comment for the ADB meeting tonight based on the emails you and Michelle Martin sent above: I am writing this in reply to a brand new ADB agenda packet sent yesterday, Wednesday, Aug 23 at 4:21 pm to the members of the public parties of record and the ADB members themselves only hours prior to the 2nd public hearing of a major development on 611 Main that has generated much public interest. The developer and architect had months to put together the required completed information for the 2nd public hearing that was sent to the public and ADB members, logically assumed to be the complete and final packet, to review 1 week prior to the 2nd public hearing. I received this packet on Thursday, Aug 17 at 3:31 pm from Michelle Martin as seen via the email chain above. Please advise the developer/architect as well as the ADB members, that a new packet delivered hours prior to a long -planned 2nd public hearing is not sufficient time for anyone to be able to review and have a clear understanding of what is being presented to make an informed decision and input. I, for one, did not have the additional time starting from late last night when I saw the email, let alone have time to flush out the new vs old information in it, to be able to provide competent public comments on this project with the new information received with only hours to prepare. This made my original input I had planned to use for tonight's hearing no longer valid. This is very disrespectful to the parties of record involved. There is no rush to hold this hearing tonight and if the developer/architect and subsequently the staff, did not have sufficient time to properly put together a complete packet the week prior to a public hearing, then it should be extended to another date. There should be no decision made on this project tonight. Thank you for considering my quickly typed comments for this 2nd public hearing process. There should be all efforts made by those putting on a public hearing process to allow for well-informed ADB members, public and staff themselves, to make this critical step a success for all involved. The burden is on the one putting a project out for public hearing to have all of their information ready in a reasonable amount of time, and I think we can all agree that hours, not days prior, is not a reasonable amount of time. Michelle Dotsch Edmonds Resident and Party of Record On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 4:26 PM Levitan, David < David. Levi tan nedmondswa.gov> wrote Good Afternoon Parties of Record: N N O N Z J a r Co c M 2 Packet Pg. 44 1.e Below is information on updated meeting materials for the 611 on Main project (PLN2022- 0085), which is scheduled for a Phase II design review public hearing before the N Architectural Design Board on August 24, 2023 at 6 pm. N David Levitan I Planning Manager Planning and Development Department City of Edmonds, WA 425-771-0220, ext. 1223 david.levitan c&edmondswa.gov From: Levitan, David <David.Levitan@EdmondsWa.Gov> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 4:20 PM To: Levitan, David <David.Levitan@EdmondsWa.Gov> Cc: McLaughlin, Susan<susan.mclaughlin(cr�.edmondswa.gov>; Szafran, Michele <Michele.SzafranQedmondswa.gov>; Martin, Michelle <Michelle. Martinkedmondswa.gov> Subject: Updated Meeting Packet/Materials for August 24 ADB Meeting Importance: High Good Afternoon ADB Members (bcc'd): Following the publication of your August 24 meeting packet, the applicant submitted additional materials reflecting changes to the project design, which are summarized in the staff report addendum (attached and included in the updated meeting packet). The updated meeting packet (with new attachments 12-15) is available through the same links provided below. This new information will also be sent to parties of interest/record. Please let me know if you have any questions. z J a r CO c M 2 Packet Pg. 45 1.e N N O N Z J David Levitan I Planning Manager a r Planning and Development Department City of Edmonds, WA Cn 425-771-0220, ext. 1223 david.levitann,edmondswa.gov From: Martin, Michelle<Michelle.Martinggedmondswa.gov> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 3:31 PM To: Citizens Arch Design Board <citizens-arch(aedmondswa.gov> Cc: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw(c gmail.com>; McLaughlin, Susan <susan.mclaughlin o,edmondswa.gov>; Szafran, Michele <Michele.Szafrann_ edmondswa.gov> Subject: Next meeting agenda - ADB August 24th @ 6pm Greetings ADB members, The agenda packet for the next meeting to be held before the Architectural Design Board is available for your review below: Architectural Design Board Regular Meeting Thursday, August 24, 2023 6:00 PM 121 5th Ave N - City Hall - 3rd Floor, Edmonds, WA 98020 Download PDF Agenda Packet I View Web Agenda Packet Download PDF Agenda Cover I View Web Agenda Cover Regards, M;4e Xaa m I Senior Administrative Assistant Packet Pg. 46 1.e City of Edmonds Planning & Development 425-771-0220, ext 1335 Michelle.MartinUedmondswa.gov The Development Services Permit Center is open M-F 8:OOam to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital/Remote access. _i �i . s . � •i � a ai 1 Ilea � ll�i� �� i �.� , , encouL4ed. For general service: Phone 1 425.771.0220 1 Email Deysery.admin@edmondswa.gov N N O N Z J a r CO c Packet Pg. 47 1.e From: Lila Param To: Martin, Michelle Subject: Fw: There is a new comment to Architectural Design Board Aug. 24 to continue public hearing on Main Street apartment building Date: Thursday, August 24, 2023 12:21:05 PM Dear Ms. Martin and Architectural Design Board - I live in a condo in downtown Edmonds. I moved here over 12 years ago because of it's charming, small town feel and walkable design. All the buildings downtown around the fountain (with the exception of the monstrosity that is attached to the new Edmonds Commons) have some character, something that is interesting and has some history. Building a big, ugly box store/apartment building in the immediate downtown area really does go against everything that Edmonds downtown currently is. Are you going to allow some developer that really doesn't care about the character of our downtown to ruin it? This building as proposed will block the ally between Main and Bell every time anyone has to move in or out of that building unless you are proposing to block Main St in front of the building for these events. Traffic is already packed on weekends when you want everyone to gather in the downtown area, so this could be a nightmare. And if you are thinking that this will solve affordable housing for the "missing middle" then you haven't looked at housing prices in the bowl, especially near the fountain, in a long time. My concerns are: 1. The building is too close to Main St and the ally behind it. This will cause lots of traffic problems and make it difficult for those folks that live across the ally from the proposed building to get into and out of their driveways. 2. It's just plain ugly! It is about as esthetic as a Costco 3. 1 thought all 3 story buildings had to have a 5 foot architectural feature on the roof. This building doesn't have any architectural features at all, much less on the roof. 4. Although they are going to do a big dig and have underground parking, there will only be one space for each apartment when most likely 2 folks will live in each unit and have 2 cars. Where are those cars going to park? 5. A developer is trying to squeeze as many units as he/she can into that space and make a ton of money then run and leave those of us who live here to live with and deal with the consequences. Please reconsider this design and at least require them to maintain the standards of design that make Edmonds Edmonds. Please be on the side of the residents of this city, not the developer. Thank you, Lila Param ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: My Edmonds News <myedmondsnews@gmail.com> To: "IiIa. param@yahoo.com" <lila.param@yahoo.com> Packet Pg. 48 1.e Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 09:32:03 AM PDT Subject: There is a new comment to Architectural Design Board Aug. 24 to continue public hearing on Main Street apartment building There is a new comment on Architectural Design Board Aug. 24 to continue public hearing on Main Street apartment building. Comment link: https://myedmondsnews.com/2023/08/architectural-design-board-aug-24-to-continue- public-hearing-on-main-street-apartment-building/#comment-502633 Author: Shirley Oczkewicz Comment: Thanks, Roger, for the email address for reaching the ABD re this proposed uglification of Edmonds. I hope many object to it via email or at the meeting. "Boxes" in the bowl shouldn't be allowed. Permalink: https://mvedmondsnews.com/2023/08/architectural-design-board-aug-24-to-continue-public-hearing-on-main-street- apartment-building/ Manage your subscriptions I One click unsubscribe Packet Pg. 49