StaffReport_ADB-07-72.pdf
CE
ITY OF DMONDS
th
121 5 Avenue North • Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
DSD: PD
EVELOPMENT ERVICES EPARTMENTLANNINGIVISION
ADR
DMINISTRATIVE ESIGNEVIEW
-
SD-
TAFFECISION
ADB-2007-72:
ADB-2007-72:
Application by Mike Adams of Taylor Gregory Butterfield Architects, representing Terrence Conway of
CRE Properties, for design review of a new office/warehouse building on a currently undeveloped parcel,
th
located at 21020 70 Avenue West in the General Commercial (CG2) zone.
PropertyOwner:Applicant:
PropertyOwner:Applicant:
Terrence Conway Mike Adams
CRE Properties Taylor Gregory Butterfield Architects
thth
21020 70 Avenue West 21911 76 Avenue West – Suite 210
Edmonds WA 98026 Edmonds WA 98026
SiteLocation:
SiteLocation:
th
Avenue West in the General Commercial (CG2) zone (see map below).
21020 70
ProjectProposal:
ProjectProposal:
ite
S
The proposal is for a new 9,000 square foot wood-
framed single story building with a two-story wing
on a currently undeveloped parcel. 7,500 square
feet will be used for manufacturing (a screen print
shop) and 1,500 square feet will be used for office
space. A SEPA Determination (DNS) was issued
on November 8, 2007 and no comments or appeals
were received.
DesignReviewProcess:
DesignReviewProcess:
The subject site is in the General Commercial (CG2) zone, and this project requires District-Based Design
Review by staff. Projects that remain under the height limit are reviewed by staff with the building
permit process, and the design review is considered an administrative Staff Decision subject to the
requirements of ECDC 20.12 (District-Based Design Review), 20.95 (Staff Decision), 16.60 (General
Commercial), and the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 1 of 6
Staff Report for ADB-2007-72
CRE Properties: Office/Warehouse
Analysis:
Analysis:
Facts:
A.
The improvements are proposed on property with a General Commercial zoning designation
1.
(CG2).
ECDC 16.60.030 states that design review by the Architectural Design Board is required for any
2.
project that includes buildings exceeding 75 feet in height in the CG2 zone. Projects not
exceeding these heights may be reviewed by staff as a staff decision. Regardless of what review
process is required, all projects proposed in the CG2 zone must meet the design standards
contained in ECDC 16.60.
The building is well under the 75-foot height limit; it is approximately 26 feet tall (Attachment 6).
3.
The commercial warehouse (a screen print shop) is the primary use of the site, accompanied with
4.
an office use.
The immediate proposal is to construct a new 9,000 square foot wood-framed single story
5.
.
building with a two-story wing on a currently undeveloped parcel
The applicant has recently obtained approval for a lot line adjustment (LLA) between this site and
6.
the parcel to the east (File LL-2007-78). This map has been recorded under file #200711155002.
A Critical Areas Determination was made for the property under file #CRA-2007-126. It was
7.
determined that there are no critical areas on or adjacent to the property; therefore, no critical
areas reports will be required.
A SEPA Determination (DNS) was issued on November 8, 2007. No comments or appeals were
8.
received (Attachment 2).
The table below shows the required (and proposed) setbacks for structures in the CG2 zone.
9.
CG2
SideSideSideSide
Zone
(North) (South) (East)(West)
Required
0000
Setbacks
Proposed
*
7’2’ 9 ¼ ” 9’ 5’ 9”
Setbacks
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is “Highway 99 Corridor,” and it is also located
10.
both within the “Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center” and the “Hi-Rise Node.”
For this project, the grading will require approximately 110 cubic yards of excavation and
11.
approximately 65 cubic yards of fill – the DNS has allowed up to 1,000 cubic yards of cut or fill
(Attachment 2).
*
ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.a states that “Type IV landscaping, minimum four feet wide, is required along all
street frontages.” The property has twelve feet of street frontage and contains parking, and the site plan
shows approximately 136 square feet of landscaping (approximately 8 feet wide by 17 feet deep).
Page 2 of 6
Staff Report for ADB-2007-72
CRE Properties: Office/Warehouse
The applicant has stated that there will be 10 employees on the largest warehouse shift, which
12.
requires 5 parking spaces pursuant to ECDC 17.50.020.B.15. There will be approximately 1500
square feet of new office space, which some of the warehouse employees will use. The parking
ratio for office space requires 3.75 parking spaces pursuant to ECDC17.50.020.B.5. Total on-site
parking required by code is nine (8.75) parking spaces. The site plan shows that 10 parking
spaces are provided (Attachment 3).
There are no adjacent residentially-zoned properties.
13.
There are several Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for commercial development (some are
14.
specific to the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center). These include:
“The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high economic
benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these types of uses to locate
within the Highway 99 Corridor.” (Page 48)
Design Objectives for Building Form: “Building height and modulation guidelines are
essential to create diversity in building forms, minimize shadows cast by taller buildings upon
the pedestrian areas and to ensure compliance with policies in the city’s Comprehensive
Plan. Protecting views from public parks and building entries as well as street views to the
mountains and Puget Sound are an important part of Edmonds character and urban form.”
(Page 77)
Highway 99 – General Appearance: “Creation of a new identity. Development of high
intensity nodes. Better identification of businesses by numbering. Encouragement of planned
business centers and design coordination among neighbors. Building forms compatible with
adjacent uses. Parking areas more clearly defined to eliminate confusion of driveways, street
and parking areas. Unsightly uses and storage screened by landscaping and fencing.” (Page
79)
The office/warehouse is the proposed commercial land use, which is encouraged by the above
15.
Comprehensive Plan policy.
The parking area is clearly defined.
16.
There are no known local views in the vicinity.
17.
The height of the proposed new building is relatively small at approximately 26 feet.
18.
ECDC 20.13.030.C defines “Type III Landscaping” as follows:
19.
“Type III landscaping is intended to provide visual separation of uses from streets, and visual
separation of compatible uses so as to soften the appearance of streets, parking areas and
building elevations.”
Type III landscaping is not shown along the North, South, East, and West sides on the landscape
20.
plan (Attachment 4).
Pursuant to ECDC 20.13.030.C.1 and 2, the following two ways of providing Type III
21.
landscaping are applicable to this project:
“1. Evergreen and deciduous trees, with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, a minimum of
six feet in height, and planted at intervals no greater than 30 feet on center; and
2. If planted to buffer a building elevation, shrubs, a minimum of three and one-half feet in
height, and living ground cover planted so that the ground will be covered within three years.”
Page 3 of 6
Staff Report for ADB-2007-72
CRE Properties: Office/Warehouse
ECDC 16.30.030.A.1.k states, “when no setback is otherwise required, Type III landscaping
22.
three feet in width and continuous in length is required between uses in the same zone.” There is
no setback otherwise required for this property.
The site plan shows an “existing retaining wall” along the south property line.
23.
ECDC 17.30.000D states, “When a retaining wall three feet in height or greater is contiguous to
24.
and below a proposed fence, the proposed fence may be constructed for the purposes of safety not
greater than four feet above the top of the retaining wall or the finished grade, whichever is less,
without the necessity for a variance.”
The site plans shows that there is less than three feet between the south elevation and the south
25.
property line.
thth
The site fronts is tucked behind a property that fronts on 70 Avenue West. 70 Avenue West is
26.
considered a “Local Street.”
th
No street trees are required for properties fronting on 70 Avenue West.
27.
The project proposes a 30-year composition shingle roof in the color “weathered wood”
28.
(Attachment 7).
The project proposes hardiplank lap siding in a “pebblestone beige” color on the bottom half of
29.
the building. Alternatively, the upper portion of the building proposes board and battens applied
vertically and painted in the same color. The wood exterior door will be painted “copper mine.”
The window, belly band, and corner trim are shown painted “tudor brown.”
Conclusions:
B.
The colors chosen are of a neutral color palate and are an appropriate fit for the building and
1.
neighborhood.
The project appears to meet the design standards in the code (ECDC 16.60), however all
2.
development standards will be reviewed with the building permit.
The project appears to meet the parking requirements for off-street parking (Attachment 3).
3.
This project meets the design guidelines found in the Comprehensive Plan and the design review
4.
chapter of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.12.
A building permit for the proposed improvements will need to be approved prior to construction.
5.
The Landscape Plan will need to show additional landscaping in order to meet ECDC 20.13.
6.
Specifically, the plan will need to be revised to show “Type III” landscaping along the west
property line, along the north property line, along the northern portion of the east property line
(where it borders the building). Planning staff would consider approving a landscape plan that
“clustered” the landscaping more along the north and west elevations, as long as the overall
planting density is met.
If the existing retaining wall along the south property line is less than 3.5 feet in height (as
7.
measured from top of wall to original grade), one way to meet intent of “Type III” landscaping
along the south property line is to have a 3.5 foot opaque fence along this property line.
Page 4 of 6
Staff Report for ADB-2007-72
CRE Properties: Office/Warehouse
TechnicalReview:
TechnicalReview:
The Engineering Division, Building Division, Fire Department, Public Works Department, and the Parks
& Recreation Department have reviewed this design review application. The Engineering Division
requested a Traffic Impact Analysis from the applicant. Said analysis was submitted and reviewed by the
Engineering Division.
PublicComments:
PublicComments:
The City has not received any comment letters for this project.
Decision:
Decision
Based on the facts, conclusions, and attachments to this report, staff finds that the design review for this
APPROVED
project (file number ADB-2007-72) is with the following conditions:
1.
The applicant must obtain a building permit for the proposed work, and individual elements of this
project are required to meet all applicable city codes.
2.
The Landscape Plan shall be revised to show “Type III” landscaping around the north, south, east,
and west sides of the property per ECDC 20.13. Planning will consider an approach that would
cluster the landscaping along the north and west property lines. An opaque fence 3.5 feet in height
along the southern property line would satisfy the “Type III” requirement.
I have reviewed the application for compliance with the Edmonds Community Development Code.
______________________________________________________________________________
Gina Coccia, Planning Division Date
Attachments:
Attachments:
1.
Land Use Application
2.
SEPA Determination
3.
Site Plan (A1.00, SV1.00)
4.
Landscape Plan (L1.00)
5.
Floor Plans (A2.10)
6.
Elevations (A3.00, A4.00)
7.
Color Samples
Page 5 of 6
Staff Report for ADB-2007-72
CRE Properties: Office/Warehouse
AppealsandExpiration:
AppealsandExpiration:
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing appeals and extensions. Any
person wishing to file an appeal or extension should contact the Planning Division at 425.771.0220 for
further procedural information.
Appeals – Section 20.12.080 describes how appeals of administrative design review shall be made.
ECDC 20.12.080.C: Design review decisions by staff under the provisions of ECDC 20.12.030 are only appealable to
the extent that the applicable building permit or development approval is an appealable decision under the provisions of
the ECDC. Design review by staff is not in itself an appealable decision.
ECDC 20.12.080.D: Persons entitled to appeal are (1) the applicant; (2) anyone who has submitted a written document
to the city of Edmonds concerning the application prior to or at the hearing identified in ECDC 20.12.020(B); or (3)
anyone testifying on the application at the hearing identified in ECDC 20.12.020(B).
Expiration – Section 20.12.90 describes the time limits for design review approval.
ECDC 20.12.090.A: Unless the owner submits a fully completed building permit application necessary to bring about
the approved alterations, or, if no building permit application is required, substantially commences the use allowed
within 18 months from the date of approval, ADB or hearing examiner approval shall expire and be null and void,
unless the owner files a fully completed application for an extension of time prior to the expiration date.
Page 6 of 6