20130807 ADB Findings, Conclusions and Decision.pdfary OF EDIVIONDS
121 5ch Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 + Fax: 425.771.0221 ® Web: w}o i..edi" ondswa,t v
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ® PLANNING DIVISION
{Ile. 189.,
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
Proposal: Point Edward Building 10 located at 50 Pine Street
File Number: PLN2013( 22
Frorn
Bryan Gootee, Chair, City of Edmonds Architectural Design Board
Date: August 7, 2013
The applicant has applied for a revision to the design of Building 10 of the Point Edwards
development, which is the last of the buildings to be constructed for the Point Edwards multi-
family master plan development. The Point Edwards development was originally approved by
the ADB under file number ADB-2002-226 for 295 units. In 2005, the ADB approved an
increase in the number of units at Point Edwards to 350 units, which is still below the maximum
419 units allowed by the Point Edwards Master Plan. To date, 261 residential units have been
constructed at Point Edwards. Building 10 was also the subject of further design review in 2006
under file number ADB�2006-97. The 2006 design for Building 10, consisting of an angled
building with west (four-story) and east (five -story) wings, a level, modulated roof and 69 multi-
family units, was approved by ADB and building permits were issued by the City for the
approved design in 2008. The project did not proceed at that time under the 2006 design.
Currently, the applicant has proposed to revise the design of Building 10 from what was
approved by the ADB in 2002 and 2006, including an increase to the number of units provided
within Building 10, although the current design has a smaller footprint and is somewhat less in
overall bulk than the version approved in 2006. The proposed Building 10 as first presented to
the ADB would have contained 89 units, but has been further modified in response to ADB
guidance to hold 85 units for a total of 346 units at the Point Edwards site, four fewer than
allowed by the City under prior approvals.
The current version of Building 10 underwent pre -application review by City staff from all
affected City departments and two pre -application meetings were held on May 24, 2012 and
September 13, 2012. Following pre -application review an initial design review application was
submitted to the City on November 12, 2012 Under PLN 20120040. The pending design is a
modification of the initial design based on design guidance supplied by the Architectural Design
Board during its public hearing on December 19, 2012.
Two conditions of the original twelve conditions of approval under ADB-2002-226 for Point
Edwards were:
® Staff shall confirm the landscape plan has not significantly changed from the current
proposal or it must return to the Board for final approval; and
® Staff shall confirm that the materials and colors used are consistent with the design of the
development or they must be brought back to the Board for final approval.
(Attachment 4)
Originally, the surface parking lot associated with Building 10 contained 27 parking stalls. The
current proposal includes a surface parking lot with 74 parking stalls. Additionally, the proposed
landscaping, which is defined by both hardscape and softscape, for the revised Building 10
includes a water feature and patio area in an area previously designated as a softscape landscaped
area. The increase in surface parking and proposed addition of the water feature and patio area at
the east end of Building 10 were significant changes to the landscaping previously approved by
the ADB, and thus the proposed revisions were referred back to the ADB by the Planning
Division for further review, first under PLN 20120040, and now under the pending design
application.
The Planning Division Report & Recommendation to the Architectural Design Board issued May
9, 2013, states "While the colors of the proposed Building 10 appear to be consistent with
previous approval, the design and materials for the proposed Building 10 have changed from the
original and subsequent ADB approvals of Point Edwards and Building 10. This change in
design and materials is a second reason why the current proposal is being referred back to the
ADB for further review."
Under the initial design application for Building 10 in November 2012, the Architectural Design
Board reviewed the initial design iteration of Building 10 that followed pre application review,
and held a public hearing during the December 19, 2012 ADB meeting. After hearing
approximately three hours of testimony and deliberations, and posing questions to the applicant's
architects and the applicant, the ADB moved that the public hearing be continued to a future date
and that the applicant further modify the design proposal for Building 10 as follows:
1. The design of Building 10 should be more consistent with the other development
approved and constructed at Point Edwards under the Point Edwards Master Plan.
2. Additional landscaping should be provided along the rockery or in the parking lot along
the south side of the surface parking lot.
3. The applicant should take into consideration the following design elements present in the
existing Point Edwards buildings: residential fenestration, broad overhangs, more human
scale, distinction between floor -to -floor heights, and Pacific Northwest elements and
materials.
4. The applicant must submit samples of the proposed materials.
Page 2 of 25
The design revision was underway in accordance with the ADB's guidance from the December
19, 2012 public hearing when City staff brought to the applicant's attention an issue with regard
to the City's historic SEPA review for the Point Edwards project that resulted in the City
changing its earlier position and requiring that an entirely new environmental assessment be conducted
for the proposal. In addition, the City determined that a new traffic impact analysis would be required for
Building 190 since the City had not done updated traffic impact analysis when it increased the allowed
density for Point Edwards to 350 units in 2005.
In discussions regarding the City's discoveries and changed requirements for SEPA and traffic review,
the City and the applicant concluded that the SEPA issue and changed requirements created potential
problems under the statute and City Code that could have increased the risk of a procedural
challenge if the proposal went forward under the initial application. To reduce that risk and
better align the processing of the proposal with statutory and Code requirements, the applicant
withdrew the Building 10 application under PLN20120040 and prepared to submit a new
application with SEPA review, the new traffic study, and a design incorporating the ADB
guidance supplied at the December 2102 public hearing.
The applicant withdrew PLN20120040 on March 25, 2013 and submitted a new application for
the same proposal, as redesigned at the ADB's direction, on March 26, 2013, together with a
fully updated SEPA checklist and a comprehensive traffic impact analysis for Building 10. While
technically a new design review application, the applicant completed the design revision that was
already underway in response to the ADB's comments on the initial application (PLN20120040)
and re -submitted it with the additional supporting documentation required by the City.
Accordingly, PLN20130022, while a new application in form, is in content and by intent a
continuation of the design process initiated by the applicant with the City in May 2012 and first
reviewed by the ADB at its public hearing on December 19, 2012. The new application
(PLN20130022) proposes a revised design for Building 10 than was proposed initially
(PLN20120040), due to the ADB's input at the December 2012 hearing. The height, footprint,
and overall bulk of the current proposal are unchanged, surface parking is modestly reduced in
the revised proposal now under review, and the unit count has gone down from 89 to 85 due to
stepping back of the upper floor of the building's east wing and other design adjustments
following ADB guidance Principally, the architectural and design vocabulary of the structure
and associated landscaping has been modified in response to the ADB's earlier input for design
revision. The updated design packet and associated materials submitted by the applicant for this
design iteration likewise are on the foundation of the initial design application, adjusted as
necessary to reflect the resulting changes.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant: Joe Kolmer of Weber Thompson
2. Application Date: March 26, 2013
3. Owner: Edmonds Pine Street, LLC
Page 3 of 25
4. Hearing: The Architectural Design Board conducted a public hearing on the subject
application on May 15, 2013 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Public
Safety Complex.
5. ADB Decision: The ADB voted to approve the proposed Building 10 design following the
May 15, 2013 public hearing.
6. Appeals: Three appeals of the ADB May 15, 2013 decision were received by the City of
Edmonds.
7. Closed Record Appeal Hearing: The Edmonds City Council held a closed record hearing of
the appeal on subject application on July 2, 2013.
8. Remand: After the applicant indicated on the record its willingness to sign a written
statement waiving the deadline for issuance of a final decision in the code and waiving the
limitation on one open record hearing and one closed record appeal, the City Council voted
to remand this matter back to the ADB for entry of Findings of Fact and Conclusions
consistent with the ADB's vote. The applicant executed a written waiver dated [insert].
9. Remand Hearing: The ADB reviewed staff s proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions on
August 7, 2013 along with proposed revisions to staff s proposed Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law that were submitted by the applicant and other parties of record. Having
reviewed these multiple versions, the ADB voted to adopt these Findings and Fact and
Conclusions of Law and Decision on August 7, 2013.
Substantive:
10. Zonin4: The subject project is zoned Master Plan Hillside Mixed -Use (MP1), ECDC Ch.
16.75 pursuant to a contract rezone as described in Ordinance No. 3411, with an effective
date of August 2, 2002, and the conditions described therein. Among the conditions of such
contract rezone are that the Project comply with the restrictions of the MP 1 zone and subject
to and consistent with the provisions of the Site Master Plan for Point Edwards as presented
to the Edmonds City Council as Exhibit 1 in Agenda Memo #7 on June 18,2002 ("Site
Master Plan for Point Edwards").
11. Site Description: The parcel where Building 10 would be located is approximately 2.1 acres
(91,688 square feet). The overall size of the Point Edwards upper yard site (the area zoned
MP1) is approximately 24.06 acres. The site where Building 10 would be located is vacant
and was previously cleared. The subject site is part of the Point Edwards Master Plan and
contract rezone which originally included ten multifamily residential structures, nine of
which have been completed comprising a total of 261 units and two amenity centers.
12. Proposed Use: Eighty-five (85) unit multifamily residential building with 21,000 GSF of
structured parking (70 parking stalls) and 74 surface parking stalls.
13. Height: The proposed building height elevation of 191.02 is 40 feet above the average grade
elevation of 151.02.
Page 4 of 25
14. Setback: The subject property is a corner lot. The application shows a 15 foot street setback
from Pine Street and 10 foot side setback from the southern property line. The proposed
building and patios are located within the required zoning setbacks.
15. The proposed development plan would eliminate one of the two curb cuts into the project site
previously proposed and approved for a building on the subject site. _
16. The outdoor amenity area provided on the east end of the building provides an area for
seating and barbequing for residents of the building.
17. The exterior pathways, parking areas and main entry to the building will be illuminated to
create a safe environment for residents, with exterior lighting down -facing and shrouded to
minimize glare and off -site lighting impacts.
18. The Town of Woodway submitted a lighting agreement with the previous developer of the
Point Edwards property which called for decorative street lights along the north margin of
Pine Street as a voluntary measure by the developer not required by the City of Edmonds.
This decorative lighting along the north side of Pine Street has been installed as well as
through the rest of the Point Edwards development. However, the light standards installed
along the south side of Pine Street are not of the same style, but rather consist of the City of
Edmonds standard street lighting fixtures for public streets such as Pine Street. The City was
not a party to the aforementioned agreement between Woodway and the developer, which did
not address lighting along the south side of Pine Street.
19. The applicants have added trellises with climbing plantings within the surface parking area at
the request of City staff and the ADB to help reduce the visual impact of the parking lot. An
existing rockery along the southern edge of the surface parking area is a hindrance to
providing more landscaping along the southern edge of the parking area. The Town of
Woodway suggested adding a landscape trellis feature on top of this rockery to further reduce
the visual impact of the parking area.
20. A variety of materials and colors combine with hipped roof forms which extend above the
main parapet to create modulated roof forms that help break up the massing of the roof.
21. The design of Building 10 provides variation in building materials and colors from the
foundation to the roof.
22. The ADB finds that the applicant responded to the design guidance provided on the previous
application (file number PLN20120040) at the December 19, 2012 and that the revised
design proposal under PLN20130022 addresses effectively each item of that guidance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Procedural:
Authority of the Architectural Design Board: Pursuant to ECDC 20.11.010, proposed
developments that require a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination
(those that are not categorically exempt from SEPA) are reviewed by the ADB in a public
Page 5 of 25
hearing. According to ECDC 20.01.003, review by the ADB in a public hearing format is a
Type III-B decision, which is appealable to the City Council.
Conclusions (and mixed findings and conclusions) regarding the proposal's compliance
with the design review criteria:
2. The ADB finds and concludes that the proposal is consistent with the criteria listed in
ECDC 20.11.030 in accordance with the techniques and objectives contained in the urban
design chapter of the community culture and urban design element of the comprehensive
plan.
3. The urban design chapters shall be used to determine if an application meets the general
criteria set forth in this chapter. ECDC 20.11.020.
4. The ADB considered the Urban Design, General Objectives and has concluded that the
proposal is consistent with those criteria. Below, the ADB makes findings and conclusions
regarding the proposal and the proposal's compliance with specific criteria from the Urban
Design, General Objectives. The bold italicized sentences, below, are directly excerpted
criteria from the Urban Design, General Objectives (page citations are to the Comprehensive
Plan). The plain text is the ADB's conclusion related to each criterion.
a. Criteria and Comprehensive Plan.
C.1 Design Objectives for Vehicular Access
C.l.a. Reduce the numbers of driveways (curb cuts) in order to improve pedestrian,
bicycle and auto safety by reducing the number of potential points of conflict. (page
93)
As noted in Finding 15, the proposed development plan would eliminate one of the
curb cuts into the project site. The proposal contains the minimum number of curb
cuts that would be required for vehicular access for structured parking. Therefore, the
proposal satisfies criterion C.l.a.
C.I.b. Provide safe routes for disabled people.
ADA accessible parking is provided in the parking areas and the building will be
required to meet ADA accessibility standards.
C.I.c. Improve streetscape character to enhance pedestrian activity in retaillmulti-
family/ commercial areas.
Proposed landscaping will enhance the streetscape character and the proposed
outdoor amenity garden and terrace area will also help add to the streetscape and
enhance pedestrian activity.
s See Edmonds Comprehensive Plan chapter entitled "Urban Design, General Objectives,"
beginning on page 92 of the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 6 of 25
C.2 Design Objectives for Location and Layout of Parking.
C:2.a. Create adequate parking for each development, but keep the cars from
dominating the streetscape. (page 94)
The proposed Building 10 would comply with the City of Edmonds parking standards
as detailed in chapter 17.50 ECDC. Many comments have been submitted about the
availability (or lack) of on -street parking. Two of the purposes of the off-street
parking regulations as enumerated by ECDC 17.50.000 are "to reduce street
congestion and avoid crowding of on -street parking space" and "to protect adjacent
property from the impact of a use with inadequate off-street parking." By complying
with the off-street parking standards in chapter 17.50 ECDC, the proposal should
keep cars from dominating the streetscape. Additionally, the elimination of the curb
cut along the north side of the proposed Building 10 will allow for approximately 3
additional on -street parking spaces. Therefore, the proposal satisfies criterion C.2.a.
C.2.b. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings closer to
the street and defining the street edge.
The proposed building and patios meet required setbacks, and access points are
consistent with this guideline. The building is in proximity to Pine Street, helping to
define the street edge, but for the most part is set back farther from the street than
required, appropriate for residential neighborhoods. There are no retail or
commercial components of the proposal favoring building placement closer to the
sidewalk and fronting street. (See also response to C.2.d below)
C.2.c. Improve the project's visibility from the street by placing parking to side and
rear.
Off-street parking, which is screened by landscaping, has been provided at the
rear (or south side) of the building; additional parking is located within the
building structure.
C.2.rl Provide direct pedestrian access from street, sidewalk, and parking.
Direct pedestrian access is provided to the parking area from the sidewalk on the west
side of the proposed building and a walkway to the southern entrance is provided
along the south side of the building. Direct pedestrian access is also provided from
the sidewalk on the north side of the building to the entrance between the eastern and
western portions of the building as well as to the outdoor gathering and amenity area
on the east side of the building.
Page 7 of 25
C.2.e. Integrate pedestrian and vehicular access between adjacent developments.
The overall layout of the Point Edwards development was approved under ADB-
2002-226 and not subject of this review.
C.3 Design Objectives for Pedestrian Connections Offsite
The overall layout and circulation of the Point Edwards development was
approved under ADB-2002-226 and not the subject of this review.
C.4 Design Objectives for Garage Enhy/Door Location
C.4.a Ensure pedestrian safety by allowing cars the space to pull out of a
garage without blocking the sidewalk
Garage access has been reduced to a single entry point at the west end of the
building. The distance from the garage door at this access point to the City
right-of-way is approximately 40 feet, allowing adequate room for safe entry
and exit without obstructing or blocking the sidewalk. Surface parking access,
also at the west end of the site, utilizes a roundabout style landscaped island to
aid in slowing the speed of vehicular traffic and facilitating coordinated
circulation. A drop-off area has been incorporated outside the lobby, which is
located where the east and west building wings meet.
C.4.b. Improve pedestrian safety by reducing points of conflict/curb cuts. (page
94)
As noted in Finding 15, the proposed development would eliminate one of the
previously approved curb cuts into the project site. This, together with the matters
noted in the preceding criteria C.4.a reduces points of conflict and satisfies
criterion C.4.b.
C4.c Reduce harsh visual impacts of multiple and/or large garage entries/doors
and access driveways. Reduced the quantity of entries/doors visible to the
street.
The remaining garage door, which is located down and away from the street, is
concealed in part by finished grade; visual impact is softened by landscaping at
both sides of the door. The color of the door blends with adjacent materials.
As noted at CA.a, access points to structured parking have been reduced to one
location. Surface parking also incorporates landscape elements, including
planted islands with trellises at the center of the layout.
C5 Design Objectives for Building Entry Location.
Page 8 of 25
C.5.a. Create an active, safe and lively street -edge.
The proposed outdoor amenity area on the east side of the proposed building
helps to create an active and lively street -edge. The exterior pathways, parking
areas and main entry to the building will be illuminated to create a safe
environment for residents.
C. 5.b. Create a pedestrian friendly environment.
Clearly defined pedestrian paths lined with landscaping and low impact light
have been incorporated into the site design. Outdoor amenity areas create a
lovely and comfortable viewing environment for the residents, and help to
soften and complement the building. The protected drop off area at the main
entrance on the south side of the building and covered approach to the entry
also accommodate pedestrian movement and access.
C.S.c. Provide outdoor active spaces at entry to retail/commercial uses.
No retail or commercial space is proposed.
C.5.d. Provide semi-public/private seating area at multi family and commercial
entries to increase activity along the street.
An outdoor amenity area is provided for on the east of the end of the building that
includes a fire pit and barbeque area with associated seating areas. Terraced
hardscape provides a variety of semi -private gathering and seating areas.
C.6 Design Objective for Setbacks
C.6.a. To create and maintain the landscape and site characteristics of each
neighborhood area.
The landscaping provided in the setback areas is consistent with the landscaping
throughout the Point Edwards development and with the conceptual landscape
plan for the Point Edwards development approved under ADB-2002-226. Other
previously constructed residential buildings within Point Edwards are stepped into
the sloping site and oriented along the adjoining streets as this building is
proposed to be situated,
Page 9 of 25
C.6.b. To create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie
each site to its neighbor.
Building 10 will be the only building located on the south side of Pine Street in
the Point Edwards development. While there are no adjacent buildings to
Building 10, the proposed street setback for Building 10 is consistent with other
buildings on the Point Edwards development. Bay modulation, deck elements,
colors, materials, and fenestration help to tie the proposal to the surrounding
buildings and neighborhood.
C.6.c. To provide enough space for wide, comfortable and safe pedestrian routes to
encourage travel by foot.
Pedestrian routes for the Point Edwards development were approved under ADB-
2002-226. The sidewalks, amenity areas, drop-off, and covered entry features of
the proposed building provide sufficient space for pedestrians and satisfy this
criterion.
C.6.d. To encourage transition areas between public streets and private
building entries where a variety of activities and amenities can occur.
The proposed landscaping in the setback provides a transition to the private patio
areas on the ground floor of Building 10 as well as the outdoor amenity area on
the east side of the building.
C.7 Design Objectives for Open Space
C.7.a. To create green spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the
development and encourage outdoor interaction.
The overall open space plan for the Point Edwards development was approved
under ADB-2002-226 and included a number of view points and walking paths
through the development. This proposal includes a garden terraced amenity area
with gathering and seating spaces, plantings, water feature, fire pit, and BBQ that
provide open green spaces, enhance visual attributes of the proposal and
surrounding Point Edwards neighborhood, and invite and encourage outdoor
activity and interaction.
C.7.b. To provide places for residents and visitors to meet and to interact.
Amenity areas have been incorporated into the project at multiple floors and
site locations. Both the Fitness and Garden Room spaces utilize articulated
window wall partitions, finish materials, and extensive glazing to help break
Page 10 of 25
down the transition between indoor and outdoor spaces. Seating areas have
been added adjacent to the elevator lobbies, which take advantage of Puget
Sound and mountain views, and allow light to penetrate into the common areas
of the building.
C. 7.c. To provide an area for play, seating and other residential activities.
As noted in Finding 16, the outdoor amenity area provided on the east end of
the building provides an area for gathering, seating and barbequing for
residents of the building. This area satisfies criterion C.7.c.
C.8 Design Objectives for Building/Site Identity
C.8.a. Do not use repetitive, monotonous building forms and massing in large
multi family or commercial projects.
A variety of materials, colors, modulation, and landscaping have been
employed to help break down the scale of the building, articulate the facade,
and present an interesting and distinctive design that also integrates with the
surrounding neighborhood. The top floor of the building's north and east sides
has been set back, which helps modulate height and allow for generous roof
overhangs, emphasizing a horizontal orientation for the building. A window
wall slot, or setback, has been designed at the north side of the building where
the west and east wings join, dividing the facade into 2 separate pieces.
Terraces, Juliette balconies, and fenestration strategies add texture to the
facade, and help tie the building's material palette together. The color and
material selections connect with the choices for predecessor buildings in Point
Edwards and connect the proposal with its surroundings without sacrificing
design originality.
C 8.b. Improve pedestrian access and way -finding by providing variety in
building forms, color, materials and individuality of buildings.
The proposed Building 10 will provide slightly different architectural detailing
than the other buildings constructed at Point Edwards. The materials and patterns,
while using the same color palette also provide variation from other buildings at
Point Edwards giving Building 10 its own identity, but tie in and coordinate with
existing structures, landscaping, and neighborhood ambience Material and color
selections help to define the functions or use of each space (for example amenity
areas and building entry).
Page 11 of 25
C.8.c. Retain a connection with the scale and character of the City of Edmonds
through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms, masses or building
elements.
While the design of Building 10 is slightly different than the other buildings at
Point Edwards and has a distinctive design identity by expressing a four and five
story height from the north facade, Building 10 is generally consistent with the
proportions, forms, and masses of the other buildings associated with the Point
Edwards development as illustrated by the five and six story groupings of existing
building construction showing the bulk and scale of the Point Edwards
development as a whole. Proposed Building 10 represents a consistent and
coherent addition to the overall design and corresponds with surrounding
buildings in Point Edwards. See response to criterion DAe below.
C.8.d Encourage new construction to use design elements tied to historic
forms or patterns found in the city.
See response to criteria C.8.c above and D.l.b below. Building 10 is
compatible with the surrounding and pre-existing Point Edwards development
and previously approved and constructed buildings in colors, materials,
proportions, forms, and massing, while retaining a distinct design identity (see
response to criterion E.l.a below). It will be the final building of the Point
Edwards master planned development approved by the City in 2003 and
developed in successive phases. Point Edwards and Building 10 have taken
design cues predominantly from surrounding Edmonds buildings and features,
and presents a compatible addition to the existing community of which it is a
part, all of which is a coherent whole. The building elements and features,
such as overhangs, step backs, muted coloration, cornices, and roof features are
compatible with existing and historic patterns found in Edmonds, and, above
all, with the surrounding context of which Building 10 will be a part.
C.9 Design Objectives for Weather Protection.
C.9.a. Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public sidewalks
in downtown.
The subject property is not located in the downtown commercial area.
C.9.b. Protect shoppers and residents firom rain or snow.
Covered areas are provided at all building entries and terraces. A canopy extends
between the surface parking drop-off area to the building's main lobby.
Page 12 of 25
C.9.c. Provide a covered waiting area and walkway for pedestrians entering a
building, coming from parking spaces and the public sidewalk in all areas of
the City.
A wood, metal, and glass canopy extends to surface parking at the drop-off
area to guide pedestrians to the building's main lobby.
C.10. Design Objectives for Lighting.
CIO.a. Provide adequate illumination in all areas used by automobiles, bicycles
and pedestrians, including building entries, walkways, parking areas, circulation
areas and other open spaces to ensure a feeling of security.
As noted in Finding 17, the exterior pathways, parking areas and main entry to
the building will be illuminated to create a safe environment for residents.
Therefore, the proposal satisfies criterion C.10.a.
C.10.b. Minimize potential for light to reflect or spill off -site.
The lighting plan indicates lights will be directed downwards and landscaping
should help minimize illumination spill off -site. The proposal strikes an
acceptable balance between adequate illumination for security and navigation
and minimization of off -site impacts.
C.10.C. Create a sense of welcome and activity.
The exterior pathways, parking areas and main entry to the building will be
illuminated and create a sense of welcome and activity, which is enhanced by
the visible amenity area on the eastern end and the covered entry behind the
building on the south side off the parking area.
C.10.d. Provide adequate lighting for signage panels.
The proposed building does not include any commercial signage. Building
monument signage at the street and sidewalk will have low level lighting
focused on signs to aid in way -finding.
C I L Design Objectives for Signage.
See C.IO.d.
Page 13 of 25
C.12. Design Objectives for Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical.
C.12.a. Hide unsightly utility boxes, outdoor storage of equipment, supplies,
garbage, recycling and composting.
Recycling and garbage facilities are located in a room within the parking
garage. Equipment and storage are also in the garage or at closets located off
secondary corridors.
C 12.b. Minimize noise and odor.
With the location of recycling, garbage and storage facilities within the parking
garage, noise and odor should not be discernable offsite.
C12.c. Minimize visual intrusion.
With the location of recycling, garbage and storage facilities within the parking
garage, they will not be visible from the outside of the building.
C.12.d. Minimize need for access/paving to utility areas
See response to criterion C.12.a.
C.13. Design Objectives for Significant Features.
C.13.a. Retain significant landscape features and unique landforms such as rock
outcroppings and significant trees.
Aside from the boulder retaining wall along the south property line (which will
remain), no significant landscape features are located on the: subject property.
C.13.b. Limit potential future negative environmental impacts such as erosion,
runoff, landslides, and removal of vegetation and/or habitats.
The development will be subject to the City's storm water regulations which
will mitigate impacts of erosion and runoff. The development is also subject to
the City's critical area regulations which will help mitigate other
environmental impacts. The City of Edmonds issued a Determination of
Nonsignificance for the proposed Building 10 noting that the proposed
development will not have any significant environmental impacts.
C.13.c. Buffer incompatible uses.
Building 10 is located within the Point Edwards development, which is a multi-
family development and the building is the last of the buildings approved under
Page 14 of 25
ADB-2002-226 so the building is compatible with the rest of the Point
Edwards development. Landscaping is provided along the southern property
line to buffer the development from the single family property just to the south
of the site. Condition #2 will further help buffer the site from the adjacent
single family property. The difference in elevation with the site occupied by
the adjoining single family dwelling being substantially higher than the subject
property also provides natural buffering and view preservation.
C.13.r1 Integrate buildings into their site by stepping the mass of the building
along steep sloping sites.
The proposed building is stepped into the hillside with the southern (uphill)
facade of the building extending above grade at two stories in height, so that
the building visually steps down from south to north along the most steeply
sloping aspect of the site
C.14. Design Objectives for Landscape Buffers.
C.14.a. Create a visual barrier between different uses.
Building 10 is located within the Point Edwards residential development and is
the last of the approved buildings for the Point Edwards site. Single family
development is located just south of the Building 10 location in the Town of
Woodway. Landscaping and trellises will help create a visual barrier between
Point Edwards and the single family neighborhood to the south in Woodway.
The difference in elevation from the subject site to the higher developed grade
above it in Woodway at the top of the slope contributes to a natural visual
barrier and buffering effect between this site and the existing residential use in
Woodway.
C.14.b. Maintain privacy of single family residential areas.
Landscaping, trellises, and canopies are a few of the methods implemented to
help screen uses from one another. The building is stepped into the steep slope
so that it presents only two visible floors from the south, which also are below
the level of the adjoining residence in Woodway.
C. 14.c. Reduce harsh visual impact of parking lots and cars.
The proposal includes landscaping features to the south of the building,
including trellising and plant material in the surface lot itself, to soften visual
impact and add color and natural material. An added trellis or additional
Page 15 of 25
landscaping would further reduce the visual impact and this has been provided
for as a condition of approval. This is also consistent with the ADB
recommendation #2 to the applicant regarding the design of Building 10 from
the December 19, 2012 ADB meeting. The ADB concludes that conditioning
the approval on the provision of this additional trellis feature and the
applicant's consultation with the adjoining residential neighbor in Woodway
regarding additional landscape screening for that property is necessary for the
proposal to satisfy criterion C.14.c. and that the project as presented by the
applicant does meet that criterion with the imposition of Condition 2, below.
C.14.d. Landscape buffers should reinforce pedestrian circulation routes.
The overall pedestrian circulation routes were approved under ADB-2002-226.
The proposed landscaping is consistent with and appears to reinforce the
existing pedestrian circulation routes.
C.14.e. Landscape buffers should not be designed or located in a manner that
creates an unsafe pedestrian environment.
The proposed landscaping does not appear to create an unsafe pedestrian
environment. Sidewalks and pedestrian passageways are open and
unobstructed by proposed landscaping.
C.14.f. Minimize heat gain from paved surfaces.
The trellises within the surface parking area as well as the trees within the
landscape islands in the surface parking lot will provide shading and filtering
of sunlight and should help to minimize heat gain from the paved surfaces.
C.14.g. Provide treatment of runoff from parking lots.
Building 10 is subject to the City of Edmonds storm water requirements which
regulates runoff from the parking area as well as the rest of the development.
Compliance with storm water regulations and requirements will be addressed
in the building permit and construction stages of the project.
Design Objectives for Building Form.
Building height and modulation guidelines are essential to create diversity in building
forms, minimize shadows cast by taller buildings upon the pedestrian areas and to ensure
compliance with policies in the city's Comprehensive Plan. Protecting views from public
Page 16 of 25
parks and building entries as well as street views to the mountains and Puget Sound are an
important part of Edmonds character and urban form.
DJ Design Objectives for Height
D.I.a. Preserve views to mountains and Puget Sound to the west.
From within Edmonds, the views to the mountains and Puget Sound should not
be impacted. Some residences to the south in the Town of Woodway will have
their views impacted by the development, as zoning allows per the 2002 Point
Edwards Master Plan. The presentation of the building from above looking
west and north is only two floors since the structure is stepped into the hillside
and only two stories are exposed on the Woodway side.
D.I.b. Maintain the smaller scale and character of historic Edmonds.
See response to criterion C.8.d above. The proposed building is compatible
with the surrounding Point Edwards project of which it is a part, under the
approved Point Edwards Master Plan. The project and this site are outside the
historic downtown waterfront core of Edmonds. While a substantial structure
like the other nine residential buildings in the approved development, its mass
is modulated and softened by color and material choices, vertical and
horizontal breaks and variations in the building fagade, varied roof features and
step backs. The building is consistent with the Point Edwards project as a
whole, conforms with all zoning bulk and use standards, and is not
incompatible with scale and character of the City of Edmonds as a whole. The
design of the building draws on elements and patterns found in Point Edwards,
which itself
D.I.c. Minimize blockage of light and air to adjacent properties or to the
sidewalk area.
The proposed building is wrapped by Pine Street and set well back from other
Point Edwards structures. The natural slope of the site and adjoining terrain in
Point Edwards and its location beneath adjoining development in Woodway
should minimize light and air blockage. Open spaces on all sides of the
building, street corridors, and the parking area behind will serve to limit any
such interference or blockage.
Page 17 of 25
D1.d. Maintainlprotect vieiv from public places and streets.
Views from public places and streets should not be impacted by the
development.
A Design Objectives for Massing
D.2.a. Encourage human scale elements in building design.
Textures and materials, as well as detailing of material transitions, trim,
balconies, and roof overhangs provide fine-grain of human -scaled elements on
the building. The covered entryway and amenity areas, with semi -private
seating areas, water feature, barbequing area, and fire pit offer additional
human -scale and focus to the overall building design.
D.2.b. Reduce bulk and mass of buildings.
The building is articulated for the most part with elements of varying materials,
colors, bays, and roof hipped roof forms. The above -grade footprint has been
reduced 25% from the previous 2006 approved design iteration, and the slot (or
setback) created where both buildings wings meet helps to reduce bulk and
scale further at the structure's core. The top floor of both east and north
facades has been set back to further reduce building mass. Topography play a
significant role in adjusting the scale of the building as well, since it steps into
the site and presents only two floors above ground along the entire south
elevation (both wings) of the building and three stories at the west elevation.
D.2.c. Masses may be subdivided vertically or horizontally.
The change in materials and colors at the top -floor step -back help divide the
mass of the building horizontally. Strong articulation of the building facade
and the modulated roof design help break up the mass vertically.
D.2.d. Explore flexible site calculations to eliminate building masses that have
one story on one elevation and four or greater stories on another.
The height calculation methodology used is consistent with the zoning code
and with past City practice as stated by City staff.
Page 18 of 25
D.3 Design Objective fof• Roof Modulation
D.3.a. To break up the overall massing of the roof.
As noted in Finding 20, a variety of materials and color combine with hipped
roof forms, which extend above the main parapet, to help break up the massing
of the roof, and constitute an approved modulated roof design. Criterion D.3.a.
is satisfied.
D.3.b. Create human scale in the building
See response to criterion D.2.a above.
D.3. c. Use roof forms to identify different programs or functional areas ivithin the
building.
Gabled and other roof forms are used to accentuate and mark entries at the
main residential lobby and secondary amenity areas. Additionally, hipped
roofs are used to show living areas, potentially with coffered or vaulted
ceilings, adjacent to bedrooms in residential units, with standard ceilings and
corresponding flat roofs. The roof section over the recessed glassed hinge
between the east and west wings
D.3.d. Provide ways for additional light to enter the building.
Strategies incorporated into the building design for increased natural daylight
include generous glazing at living and amenity areas, a full height window wall
adjacent elevator lobbies (to bring light into the building's common areas), and
translucent treatments at some of the building's canopies.. Light wells have
been incorporated into a number of the south facing units at the east wing.
D.4 Design Objectives for Wall Modulation
D.4.a. To let more light and air into the building.
Bays of various configurations (similar to other Point Edwards structures) have
been created that allow additional daylight and fresh air to penetrate into the
building. This is especially achieved at the "notch" between the east and west
wings of the building.
Page 19 of 25
D.4.b. Break up large building mass and scale of a facade.
The above -noted strategy at D.4.a is employed successfully on all facades of
the building to avoid the monotony of long, blank facades. Balconies and
decks contribute to the articulation and breaking up of mass, producing a sense
of smaller, more intimate scale. Additionally, east and north facades have been
stepped back at the top floor.
D.4.c. To avoid stark and imposing building facades.
See discussion at criterion D.2.b above.
D.4.d1 To create a pedestrian scale appropriate to Edmonds.
As noted at D.2.b discussion above.
D.4.e. To become compatible with the surrounding built environment.
The building uses compatible architectural vocabulary with existing Point
Edwards multifamily buildings, amenity buildings, and the Woodway
residence to the south, to provide a balanced response to the existing site
character and surrounding built environment. Landscape elements mimic those
of the surrounding Point Edwards development and further integrate the
proposed development.
Design Objectives for Building Facade.
Building facade objectives ensure that the exterior of a building — the portion of a building
that defines the character and visual appearance of a place — is of high quality City of
Edmonds.
E.I Design Objectives for Building Facades
E.I.a. Ensure diversity in design.
The proposed Building 10 will provide a slightly different design presentation
and form than the other buildings constructed at Point Edwards and will be
compatible but distinctive in comparison with the existing buildings in the
project. The analogous color and material palette provide a connection to other
buildings at Point Edwards while retaining individual character and giving
Building 10 its own identity.
Page 20 of 25
EJA Reinforce the existing building patterns found in Edmonds.
Materials, modulation, and roof forms are consistent with many other
structures found within Point Edwards, in the adjoining large residence directly
above the site to the south, and throughout the City of Edmonds.
E.I.c. Improve visual and physical character and quality of Edmonds.
The building will provide a high level of construction quality and materials,
design originality and sophistication.
E.I.d. Improve pedestrian environment in retail/commercial areas.
The subject property is not located in a retail/commercial neighborhood.
E.I.e. Create individual identity of buildings.
See discussion of criteria C.8.a, C.8.b, and E.l.a. Building 10 will fit into its
surroundings in the Point Edwards development, but offers its own identify as
a building that encompasses design elements from both the existing residential
and amenity buildings in the project, as well as taking cues from the large
hipped roof home above it to the south in Woodway, and other existing
structures in Edmonds. The proposal as redesigned by the applicant with the
guidance offered at the December 19, 2012 public hearing is more consistent
and compatible with its surroundings and the rest of Point Edwards, but has not
lost its individuality in design and satisfies each of these aspects of the design
criteria.
E.2 Design Objectives for Windoiv Variety and Articulation
Windoivs help define the scale and character of the building. The organization and
combinations of window types provide variation in a facade as well as provide light
and air to the interior. Small windows are more typically utilitarian in function,
such as bathroom or stairway windows, etc. and can be grouped to provide more
articulation in the facade.
Strategies incorporated into the building design for increased natural daylight
include generous glazing at living and amenity areas, a full height window wall
adjacent elevator lobbies (to bring light into the building's common areas), and
translucent treatments at some of the building's canopies. Light wells have
been incorporated into a number of the south facing units at the east wing.
Page 21 of 25
E.3 Design Objectives for Variation in Facade Materials (page 98)
The materials that make the exterior facades of a building also help define the scale
and style of the structure and provide variation in the facade to help reduce the
bulk of the larger buildings. From the foundation to the roof eaves, a variety of
building materials can reduce the scale and help define a building's style and
allows the design of a building to respond to its context and client's needs.
As noted in Finding 21, the design of Building 10 provides variation in
building materials and colors from the foundation to the roof that is sufficient
to satisfy this criterion. This is confirmed in the preceding responses to
numerous other design criteria and related findings and conclusions.
E.4 Design Objectives for Accent Materials/Colors/Trim
Applied ornament, various materials and colors applied to a facade as well as
various decorative trim/surrounds provide variation in the scale, style and
appearance of every building facade. The objective is to encourage new
development that provides:
® Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood
® Visual interest and variety in building forms.
® Reduces the visual impacts of larger building masses.
® Allows identity and individuality of a project within a neighborhood
The approach for this re -design is for it to blend effectively with the Point
Edwards area as a whole, using building materials, colors, and landscape palettes
which are analogous to the surrounding environment, while appearing unique
enough that it has its own identity. As stated in the preceding discussion of
design criteria, these objectives have been met and are satisfied with the proposed
design. Design cues have been taken from surrounding residential buildings,
while also borrowing the clean, modern lines and fenestration found at the Point
Edwards amenity buildings. It is noted that the guidance offered to the applicant
at the conclusion of the December 19, 2012 public hearing for direction in making
design changes to the proposed building supported the above -stated design
objectives and was intended to offer helpful direction to the applicant. During
deliberations at the May 15, 2013 public hearing, the applicant's success in
responding to the guidance and the resulting consistency of the revised design
with the guidance and with the City's design criteria and standards was
acknowledged. The resulting facade design and materials, colors, trim, accents,
Page 22 of 25
and other ornamentation and architectural elements, produce a building that is
compatible with its surrounding neighborhood, offers visual interest and variety in
building forms, accomplishes the reduction of the visual impacts of larger
building masses, and retains identity and individuality of the project within the
Point Edwards neighborhood.
Conclusions regarding the proposal's compliance with the zoning ordinance:
5. The ADB concludes that the proposal meets the bulk and use requirements of the zoning
ordinance as more particularly described below and as determined and found by staff in
the exercise of its authority under ECDC 20.11.020.B.
6. Pursuant to the contract rezone for the site, any future use, development modification or
improvement of the Property shall be subject to the restrictions of the MP 1 and MP 2
zones on the respectively zoned portions of the Property and subject to and consistent
with the provisions of the site master plan for Point Edwards. The ADB concludes that
the proposal is consistent with the Point Edwards Master Plan.
7. ECDC 16.75.010 Uses: The site is located in the Master Plan Hillside Mixed -Use Zone
(MP1) and is subject to the requirements of ECDC 16.75. The current proposal for
Building 10 is for an 85-unit multifamily residential building. Multifamily development
is a permitted primary use in the MP1 zone pursuant to ECDC 16.75.010.A.1.
8. ECDC 16.75.020.B
a. Setbacks: The proposed Building 10 complies with the setback requirements
established in ECDC 16.75.020.B
b. Height: The allowable height in the MP zone is 35 feet with an additional 5 five
feet_ allowed as part of an approved modulated design in accordance with Chapter
20.10 ECDC to a maximum of 40 feet. The proposed building includes an
approved modulated roof design (Conclusions of Law 4.a.D.3.a) and is allowed
the additional five feet. The proposed building is compliant with the maximum
height established in ECDC 16.75.020.B
c. Coverage: According to footnote 6 under the development standards table for the
MP1 zone referenced above, lot coverage for any of the individual building lots
cannot exceed 75 percent, and total lot coverage for the entire site covered by the
Point Edwards Master plan cannot exceed 45 percent. Page 4 of Attachment 3
provides calculations demonstrating compliance with the coverage requirements
of ECDC 16.75.020.B. Building 10 will occupy 42.9 percent of its building site
while coverage for the entire Point Edwards development would be 28.5 percent.
d. Density (Lot area per dwelling unit): While Building 10 is located on its own
separate parcel, overall density for the Point Edwards development was
determined during the Master Plan review process. The Point Edwards Master
Plan (Attachment 5) indicated a maximum of 419 units in the upper yard, or MP 1
Page 23 of 25
zone. The Point Edwards development has been approved for 350 units. To date,
261 units have been developed which leaves 89 units left from the approved 350
units. The proposed Building 10 is for an 85-unit multifamily building which is
consistent with the density allowed under the Master Plan and approved Point
Edwards development.
9. ECDC 17.50 Off street Parking Regulations: One -hundred thirty-six (136) off street
parking spaces are required pursuant to ECDC 17.50.020.A.1. With 144 stalls provided,
the applicant is compliant with the parking requirements of ECDC 17.50
10. The ADB finds the proposed development is consistent with the bulk standards, use
requirements, parking and other applicable regulations of the zoning ordinance.
11. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements
a. ECDC 20.13 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.
b. The ADB finds the proposed landscaping is consistent with the requirements of
ECDC 20.13 and the rest of the Point Edwards development, subject to the
provisions of Condition 2 below relating to the screening of the surface parking
lot located on the south side of Building 10.
c. Along the south side of the surface parking area which borders the Town of
Woodway is a rockery which can be seen on page 40 of Attachment 3. The
surface parking is proposed to be placed up to the base of this rockery. The
existing vegetation along the top of the rockery is essentially a briar patch. The
ADB finds that landscaping along the rockery should be improved to provide
greater screening of the parking area from the single family residence located just
south of the development in Woodway, as specified in Condition 2 to its decision,
set out below.
d. Type V landscaping is required for parking areas and is described in ECDC
20.13.030.E. For parking areas that contain more than 50 but less than 100
parking spaces, the amount of Type V landscaping required is determined by
interpolating between 17.5 and 35 square feet for each parking stall proposed.
With 74 parking stalls on the proposed surface lot, 25.9 square feet of Type V
landscaping is required per parking space for a total of 1,916.6 square feet of
Type V landscaping. Page 32 of Attachment 3 indicates there is 2,353 square
feet of Type V landscaping, which is consistent with ECDC 20.13.030.E.
12. Conclusions regarding conformance to Site Master Plan for Point Edwards:
The proposal conforms to the provisions of the Site Master Plan for Point
Edwards.
Page 24 of 25
f7�C�fy717►
The design review for the proposed Building 10 located at 50 Pine Street (PLN20130022) is
approved with the following conditions:
On -street parking is required to be added at the location of the existing northern
driveway approach which is no longer being used by Building 10.
2. A trellis no taller than 6 feet with associated planting should be installed adjacent to
the top of the rockery on the south side of the surface parking area, and the applicant
should work with the adjacent property owner to provide additional screening
landscaping.
3. The applicant must apply for and obtain all necessary permits. This application is
subject to the requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is up
to the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these
ordinances.
4. Height calculations are required with the building permit application in order to
demonstrate that the project complies with the height requirements of the MP 1 zone.
Page 25 of 25