Staff Report ADB-08-01.pdf
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
STAFF REPORT
March 5, 2008 Meeting
PLANNING DIVISION
ADVISORY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO: The Architectural Design Board
FROM: __________________________________
Michael D. Clugston, AICP
Planner
DATE: February 26, 2008
Application by Murphy Building Company, Inc., for Willowdale
ADB-2008-01
th
Townhomes, a 17-unit multifamily residential complex located at 20728 76
Avenue West (Attachment 1).
A. Property Owner and Applicant Agent
Property Owner and ApplicantAgent
Murphy Building Company, Inc. Laurey Tobiason
nd
6203 202 Street SW Tobiason & Company, Inc.
th
Lynnwood, WA 98036 20434 10 Place SW
Seattle, WA 98166
B. Site Location
Site Location
th
20728 76 Avenue West (ID:
00614300001000). The site is at the
th
western intersection of 76 Avenue
th
West and 208 Street SW (see inset).
C. Introduction
Introduction
The Willowdale Townhomes is a 17-
unit mulitfamily development
consisting of four buildings. Access to
th
the development is gained from 76
th
Avenue West at the intersection of 208
Street SW. There is an existing traffic
light at this intersection which the
development will use. Resident and
guest parking will be provided on-site.
City of Edmonds Zoning Map, December 14, 2007
Existing and proposed landscaping will
buffer the use from surrounding
th
residential uses and from 76 Avenue West (Attachment 2).
Because the project seeks to create more than four residential units, SEPA is triggered and the
project is reviewed by the Architectural Design Board. The ADB reviews the design of the
project and at the conclusion of the public hearing, makes the final decision. If approved by the
ADB, the applicant may submit a building permit application for the project at which time all
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
applicable development standards are reviewed by staff.
D. Overview
Overview
1.Zoning: The parcel is located in the Multifamily Residential (RM-2.4) zone and is therefore
subject to the requirements of ECDC 16.30 (Multiple Residential). The parcels immediately
to the north and south are also zoned RM-2.4 and developed accordingly. To the west is an
th
area of single family detached development (RS-8). To the east, across 76 Avenue West
thth
and north of 208 Street, is College Place Middle School. South of 208 Street is an area of
RM-1.5 zoned properties which are developed with multifamily structures.
2.view: Review of the project under the State Environmental Policy Act
Environmental Re
(SEPA) was required. The applicant submitted an Environmental Checklist which staff
reviewed. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on January 24, 2008 (Attachment
3). The Snohomish County PUD responded that the utility has sufficient existing capacity to
serve the proposed development (Attachment 10). No other responses were received.
3.Issues: For this project, the Architectural Design Board reviews the design of the proposal
and makes the final decision as to whether the proposal is consistent with the zoning
ordinance and that the proposal meets the relevant design objectives contained in the
Comprehensive Plan.
E. Edmonds Community Development Code Compliance
Edmonds Community Development Code Compliance
The following is staffs analysis on the projects compliance with the Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC). Development standards are again reviewed and confirmed with the
building permit application.
1.ECDC 16.30 (Multiple Residential) Zone
a.The improvements are proposed on property with a multiple residential zoning
designation (RM-2.4). The lot area is shown as 41,485 square feet, which could support
a maximum of 17 dwelling units. The applicant is proposing to construct 17 dwelling
units.
b.The maximum lot coverage in multiple residential zones is 45% of the total lot area.
Pursuant to ECDC 21.15.110, coverage means the total ground coverage of all
buildings or structures on a site measured from the outside of external walls or
supporting members or from a point two and one-half feet in from the outside edge of a
cantilevered roof, whichever covers the greatest area. The building footprints are
shown as being less than 18,668 square feet, which is 44.99%. As proposed, the project
appears to meet the lot coverage requirement; this will be verified at building permit.
c.The maximum height in multiple residential zones is 25 feet, however, Roof only may
extend five feet above the stated height limit if all portions of the roof above the stated
height limit have a slope of four inches in 12 inches or greater. No portion of the roof
over the 25 limit shall be flat, unless a variance is first approved. No height calculations
have been submitted for the design review portion of this project. The site is relatively
level, so the height rectangles for each building should have fairly consistent elevations
for average original grade. The elevations show the center peaks of the buildings at
approximately 30 feet, so it appears that the applicant intends to design to project to meet
the height requirement. As always, height will be verified through building permit
review, especially as it relates to the pitch of the roof between 25-30 feet.
Page 2 of 7
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
d.The table below shows the required setbacks for structures in the RM-2.4 zone.
th
76 Avenue W Rear Side Side
(East) (West) (North) (South)
Required
15 feet 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet
Setbacks
Proposed
15 feet 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet
Setbacks
It appears that the project meets the minimum setback requirements for the zone, but this
will be verified through building permit review.
Note: Patios are identified at the rear of each residence. ECDC 16.30.040.D provides
the language for uncovered at-grade patios in the setback area as shown below.
ECDC 16.30.040.D. Setback Encroachments.
Eaves and chimneys may project into a required setback not more than 30 inches. Uncovered and unenclosed
porches, steps, patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one-third of the required
setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches above the ground level
at any point.
As proposed, it appears that the patios on the western building extend into the setback
into the setback greater than four feet (between four and five feet). As referenced above,
patios may encroach one-third of the setback (five feet, in this case) or four feet,
whichever is less. The patio encroachments will be reviewed with the building permit.
Five uncovered parking spaces are proposed to encroach into the side setbacks along the
north and south property lines. ECDC 16.30.030.C states that no parking spaces may be
located within the street setback, but the code is silent regarding their placement in the
side setback. As a result, the spaces would be permitted to encroach into the side
setbacks.
2.ECDC 17.50 (Parking)
a.Multifamily parking requirements are based upon the number of dwelling units and the
number of bedrooms per dwelling unit, pursuant to ECDC 17.50.020.A.1.b and the table
below:
Type of multiple Required parking spaces
dwelling unit per dwelling unit
Studio 1.2
1 bedroom 1.5
2 bedrooms 1.8
3 or more bedrooms 2.0
b.The plans indicate that there will 17 three-bedroom dwelling units, which yields 34
required parking spaces. The applicant proposes two parking spaces per dwelling unit
Page 3 of 7
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
(34 covered spaces) and 5 additional uncovered spaces. Four spaces proposed for the
development are tandem spaces.
c.Tandem spaces. According to ECDC 18.95.030, any required off-street parking space is
to be individually accessible. Tandem or stacked parking may not be used to provide any
required parking space. However, 18.95.030.A states: Where an applicant proposes to
provide additional parking spaces for the benefit of visitors and residents in addition to
those required by the code, the staff may approve the use of tandem or stacked parking
where such tandem parking will not block or impede access to any required space, or
present a safety hazard. In no event shall tandem or stacked parking be permitted where
its use would increase the permitted density of development. ECDC 17.50.040.A states
that for permitted uses in residential zones off-street parking shall be located on the
same lot and within 100 feet walking distance of the use for which it is required. All
proposed off-street spaces are located on-site within 100 walking feet of the residential
structures.
d.It appears that the applicant will meet the minimum parking requirements. Parking
spaces in excess of the 34 required are provided; the five uncovered spaces allow for the
inclusion of tandem spaces in four of the proposed residences. All parking requirements
will be confirmed through the building permit process as it is up to the Engineering
Division to make sure that the parking spaces shown meet the minimum parking
standards.
3.ECDC 20.11 (General Design Review)
The ADB must make findings regarding the current proposal in relation to the Criteria
described in ECDC 20.11.030 as well as the General Urban Design Objectives in the
Comprehensive Plan. Building design and site treatment criteria are analyzed along with the
Design Objectives below (Section F).
4.ECDC 20.13 (Landscaping Requirements)
a.Pursuant to ECDC 20.13.020.E, automatic irrigation is required for all ADB-approved
landscaped areas for projects which have more than four dwelling units, 4,000 square feet
of building area or more than 20 parking spaces. Because this project proposes 17
dwelling units, automatic irrigation is required. This will be reviewed with the building
permit.
th
b.The Edmonds Street Tree Plan does not require a specific tree along 76 Avenue West
but rather recommends a number of appropriate species depending on the site. The
applicant has suggested using the Pyrus calleryana Capital/Capital Pear which is one of
the small-to-medium/narrow trees recommended in the Plan (Attachment 4).
F.Comprehensive Plan Compliance
F.Comprehensive Plan Compliance
The following is staffs analysis of the projects
compliance with the Citys Comprehensive
Plan.
1.Location: The subject parcel is designated
Multi-Family Medium Density. General
Design Objectives applicable to this
designation are found on pages 73-79 of the
Comprehensive Plan. It is the Architectural
Design Boards responsibility for ensuring
compliance of the project with the
City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Map, December 2006
Page 4 of 7
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
objectives identified in the Plan. Staff has reviewed the pertinent sections of the
Comprehensive Plan and documented findings below. Attachments 5 - 8 depict the proposed
details of the development and are referenced in the discussion that follows.
2.Design Objectives for Site Design: The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways
and landscaping features is an integral part of how a building interacts with its site and its
surrounding environment. Good design and site planning improves access by pedestrians,
bicycles and automobiles, minimizes potential negative impacts to adjacent development,
reinforces the character and activities within a district and builds a more cohesive and
coherent physical environment. (page 74)
Fourteen different objectives for site design are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan. Not
every objective necessarily applies to every project; and, some objectives may be more
important than others for a particular project. For example, no signage is proposed as part of
this application. However, if signage is proposed in the future, it will be reviewed against the
applicable design criteria with the building permit application.
a.Vehicular Access
. The site will be accessed using an existing curb cut at the intersection
thth
of 76 Avenue and 208 Street where there is an existing four-way traffic signal. A
separate curb cut that is currently on the northern portion of the site will be eliminated.
b.Location and Layout of Parking. The bulk of parking onsite is located within the
proposed structures. Five unenclosed spaces are located throughout the site but only two
th
are potentially visible from 76 Street. A pedestrian pathway is proposed on the site
th
linking the development to the existing sidewalks on 76.
th
c.Pedestrian Connections Offsite. There are existing sidewalks and crosswalks on 76
along with several bus stops. These would be easily available to residents living at the
proposed development.
th
d.Garage Entry/Door Location. No garage entries will be visible from 76 Street.
e.Building Entry Location. All units are accessed from the interior of the development.
f.Setbacks. Required setbacks for the zone appear to be met (see E.1.d above) and will be
verified at building permit. The proposed development is bounded on the north and south
by similar multifamily residential buildings developed with similar setbacks.
g.Open Space. None was proposed as part of the application.
h.Building/Site Identity. The proposed structures are attractively designed and feature
modulated facades and roofs.
i.Weather Protection. Unit entrances are accessed either through individual garages or
covered porches.
j.Lighting. With the exception of individual house lights, no lighting was proposed as part
of the application for the interior of the site. The ADB may want to add a condition
regarding additional exterior lighting onsite.
k.Signage. None was proposed as part of the application. As mentioned previously any
signage proposed in the future must meet the requirements of ECDC 20.60 when
reviewed with the building permit.
l.Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical. Two trash enclosures are proposed for the
site. These must meet the requirements of the Public Works Department and will be
reviewed at building permit.
m.Significant Features. There are no significant features on the site.
Page 5 of 7
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
n.Landscape Buffers. While no buffers are specifically proposed, Type II landscaping will
act as a buffer between the development and the single-family residences to the west.
The trees and shrubs proposed along the eastern property line between the development
th
and 76 Avenue West will serve as a buffer to those units and to the development as a
whole.
3.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 citys Comprehensive
Plan. Protecting views from public parks and building entries as well as street views to the
mountains and Puget Sound are an important part of Edmonds character and urban form.
(page 78)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.Height. The height of the buildings in the proposed project is in keeping with that in the
vicinity. No water or Sound views will be impacted.
b.Massing. The building masses are divided vertically and horizontally with a variety of
different treatments.
c.Roof Modulation. Roofs are modulated with assorted gables and projections. The
slender interior units in each building that use tandem parking exhibit the highest roof
peaks.
d.Wall Modulation. The front and rear facades of all four buildings appear to be well
modulated. Numerous windows and other treatments serve to break up the mass. The
sides tend to be less interesting but these will largely not be visible and should not appear
to be that imposing, particularly when the landscaping fills in.
4.Design Objectives for Building Façade: Building Façade objectives ensure that the
exterior of a building the portion of a building that defines the character and visual
appearance of a place is of high quality and demonstrates the strong sense of place and
integrity valued by the residents of the City of Edmonds. (page 78)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.Façade Requirements. The buildings appear to be attractive and well-designed and
th
would likely enhance the character of the area along 76 Avenue West.
b.Window Variety and Articulation. A variety of windows, doors and porches will provide
light to the units.
c.Building Façade Materials. Proposed materials include areas of stone veneer on the
lower level along with 6 horizontal siding (light yellow and grey) and portions of cedar
shingles above. The materials create a unified, interesting visual design.
d.Accents/Colors/Trim. The accents and trim proposed fit nicely with the overall plans.
The colors, as mentioned above, are attractive and will fit well with existing development
th
along 76 Avenue West.
G.TechnicalReview
G.TechnicalReview
The Engineering Division as well as the Fire, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation
Departments have reviewed this application. The Engineering Division commented that the
applicant will be responsible for obtaining separate permits from the City of Lynnwood, as
required, at building permit stage since the submitted plans indicate that the storm, water and
sewer utilities fall within the Lynnwood right-of-way (Attachment 9).
Page 6 of 7
Staff Report for ADB-2008-01
Willowdale Townhomes
H.Public Comments
H.Public Comments
No public comments were received for the development application.
I.Recommendation
I.Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board APPROVE the design of file number
ADB-2008-01 with the following conditions:
1.Individual elements of this project are required to meet all applicable city codes, and it is the
responsibility of the applicant to apply for and obtain all necessary permits.
2.The trash enclosures shall be constructed to meet the minimum dimensions required by the
code (see City of Edmonds handout #E37 for details).
3.The rear patios must meet the setback requirements established in ECDC 16.30.030.
The board finds that with these conditions, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan and other adopted city policies, and the proposal satisfies the criteria and purposes of ECDC
Chapter 20.10 Design Review, ECDC 20.11 General Design Review, and ECDC Chapter
20.13 Landscaping, and staff has found the proposal meets the requirements of the zoning
ordinance.
J.Attachments
J.Attachments
1.Land Use Application
2.Site Plan
3.Determination of Nonsignificance, issued January 24, 2008
4.Landscape Plan
5.North-South Building Elevations and Floor Plans
6.North-South Building Color Study
7.East-West Building Elevations and Floor Plans
8.East-West Building Color Study
9.Engineering Division Comments, dated January 30, 2008
10.SEPA response from Snohomish County PUD, dated February 4, 2008
Page 7 of 7