Loading...
StaffReport_ADB-08-11.pdf ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD STAFF REPORT May 7, 2008 Meeting TO: The Architectural Design Board FROM: __________________________________ Mike Clugston, AICP Planner DATE: April 25, 2008 ADB-2008-11 Application by A.D. Shapiro Architects for a two-story commercial project (Andersen Office Building) consisting of 5,696 square feet of office space at 665 Edmonds Way. A. Property Owner: Applicant: Property Owner:Applicant: Jeanine Jansen Tony Shapiro 23632 Highway 99 A.D. Shapiro Architects Suite F 502 624 Edmonds Way Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds WA 98020 B. Site Location: The site is triangular in shape, slightly Site Location th north of the intersection of 15 Street SW and Edmonds Way (see inset and Attachment 2). C. Overview: Overview: 1.Zoning: This parcel is located in the Planned Business (BP) zone and is subject to the requirements of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 16.53. 2.Environmental Review: A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the project was issued on April 3, 2008 (Attachment 8). Snohomish PUD indicated that there is existing capacity to serve the proposed development City of Edmonds Zoning Map, December 14, 2007 (Attachment 9). Both the City and the applicant have complied with SEPA requirements. 3.Issues: For this project, the Architectural Design Board reviews the design of the proposal and makes the final decision on whether the proposal is consistent with the design review criteria found in ECDC 20.10 (Design Review), ECDC 20.11 (General Design Review) and ECDC 20.13 (Landscaping), and with the Urban Design (General Objectives) found in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Staff Report for ADB-2008-11 Andersen Office Building D. Edmonds Community Development Code Compliance: Edmonds Community Development Code Compliance The following is staff’s analysis on the project’s compliance with the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). As always, all development standards will be verified through building permit review. 1.ECDC 16.53 – Planned Business (BP) Zone a.Height: The maximum height in the BP zone is 25 feet. There is an opportunity for 5 additional feet of height if the following criterion (found in the footnote 2 of ECDC 16.53.020.A) is satisfied: 2 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. In this case, the applicant appears to have chosen not to take advantage of the additional height. The roof is proposed to be flat and is indicated to be slightly below 25’ on the elevation drawings (Attachment 5). b.Setbacks: The following table shows the required setbacks for all structures in the BP zone: Rear Rear Edmonds Way Side (SE, Adjacent (NE, Adjacent (SW) (NW) to BP zone) to RS zone) Required 15 feet None None 15 feet Setbacks Proposed 15 feet ~ 40 feet ~ 0 feet 15 feet Setbacks ECDC 16.53.020.C states: The required setback from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground cover and continuously maintained by the owner of the BP lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or dense, continuous hedge shall be maintained in the setback. There is an existing 5’ fence along the extent of the eastern and northwestern property lines. While this fence does not meet the above height requirement, it is appropriate since the new landscaping in the 15’ setback area along the RS-zoned parcel must be of Type I variety (see Landscaping requirements below) which allows the use of a 5’ fence. 2.ECDC 17.50 (Parking): Business and commercial projects are subject to the parking requirements found in ECDC 17.50.020.B. Business and professional offices with on-site customer service require one space per 400 square feet of building area. With a total of 5,696 square feet of building area proposed, 14 spaces are required. The applicant has proposed to provide 15 parking stalls. 3.ECDC 20.12 (Landscaping): Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020.E, “automatic irrigation is required for all ADB- approved landscaped areas for projects which have more than four dwelling units, Page 2 of 5 Staff Report for ADB-2008-11 Andersen Office Building 4,000 square feet of building area or more than 20 parking spaces.” Because this project proposes nearly 5,700 square feet of commercial space, automatic irrigation is required. ECDC 20.12.030 defines specific types of landscaping which are required to be used with certain types of development depending on its location. For example, Type 1 landscaping is intended to provide a very dense sight barrier to significantly separate uses and land use districts. In the case of the proposed development, Type 1 landscaping would be required in the 15’ eastern setback adjacent to the residentially- zoned parcel (Attachment 6). Several Type 1 landscaping options are presented in ECDC 20.12.030.A. The ADB may interpret and modify the requirements provided such modification is consistent with the intent of the ordinance and achieves the desired screening: 1. Two rows of evergreen trees, a minimum of 10 feet in height and planted at intervals of no greater than 20 feet on center. The trees must be backed by a sight-obscuring fence a minimum of five feet high or the required width of the planting area must be increased by 10 feet; and 2. Shrubs a minimum of three and one-half feet in height planted in an area at least five feet in width, and other plant materials, planted so that the ground will be covered within three years; 3. Alternatively, the trees and shrubs may be planted on an earthen berm at least 15 feet in width and an average of five feet high along its midline. It is also noted that the Landscape Plan is overlaid on a site plan that is different from that submitted with this application (Attachment 3) and that no structures are allowed in the setback area per ECDC 16.53.020.C. E. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: . Comprehensive Plan Compliance: The following is staff’s analysis on the project’s compliance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 1.Location: The existing Comprehensive Plan designation is “Westgate Corridor.” This commercial area is discussed in the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Element (page 58) and also in the Urban Design (General Objectives) section (pages 73-81), which is located in the Community Culture and Urban Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The BP district is a compatible zone in the Westgate Corridor plan designation. 2.Design Objectives for Site Design: “The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscaping features is an integral part of how a building acts 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 physical environment.” The size and shape of the parcel creates challenges to redevelopment (Attachment 3). However, the applicant has done a good job of designing the project to fit the site. For example, there are two existing curb cuts onto Edmonds Way. The northern cut Page 3 of 5 Staff Report for ADB-2008-11 Andersen Office Building will be moved slightly to the south and redesigned to support the redeveloped site and the southern cut will be eliminated. Parking on-site will be on the northern portion of the parcel, closer to the adjoining BP-zoned parcel to the northwest rather than the RS-zoned parcel to the northeast. The applicant is also proposing a storage area for bicycles on-site. This feature, along with the existing sidewalks and bus routes along Edmonds Way, should encourage greater use of alternative transportation to and from the site. The trash/recycling enclosure is placed toward the rear of the site. 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 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.” The building’s height is proposed to be 25 feet (Attachment 5). As a result, the development will be similar in scale to the single-family parcel to the northeast. The building’s main entrance is proposed for the south façade and faces directly onto Edmonds Way which ties the building nicely to the streetscape. The proposed building seems to be somewhat boxy overall but the mass is broken up through use of varied colors and materials. 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.” This project includes numerous windows. Several materials are proposed to cover the building including metal siding (and awnings), hardi-plank, and brick veneer (Attachment 5). Several lighting systems are proposed (Attachment 7). The proposed lighting should add interest to the building façade while providing for safety. 5.Streetscape: The Edmonds Streetscape Study identifies SR-104 as a key route through the City, and recommends the following larger boulevard-type street trees for the corridor (page 123): Liriodendron tulipifera / Tulip Tree · Cercidiphyllum japonicum / Katsura Tree · Quercus ruba / Red Oak · It appears that the applicant has selected 5 Liriodendron tulipifera / Tulip Tree as street trees for the site (Attachment 6) which is in accordance with the Street Tree Plan. F.TechnicalReview: TechnicalReview: The Engineering Division and the Fire, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation Departments have reviewed this application. Engineering Program Manager Jeanie McConnell noted that additional information was needed for the traffic impact analysis and the storm drainage plan (Attachment 10). The applicant has supplied the requested Page 4 of 5 Staff Report for ADB-2008-11 Andersen Office Building information to staff’s satisfaction. G.Public Comment: Public Comment: To date, no public comments have been received. H.Recommendation: Recommendation: APPROVE Staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board the design of file ADB-2008-11 number with the following conditions: 1. Individual elements of this project are required to meet all applicable city codes. It is the responsibility of the applicant to apply for and obtain all necessary permits. 2. The Landscape Plan shall be revised so that appropriate Type 1 landscaping is provided within the 15’ setback area adjacent to the residentially-zoned parcel to the east. No structures may be placed in the landscaped setback. The Board finds that with these conditions, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, it satisfies the purposes and criteria of ECDC Chapters 20.10, 20.11 and 20.13, and staff has found the proposal meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. I.Attachments: Attachments: 1. Land Use Application 2. Vicinity / Zoning Map 3. Site Plan (A1) 4. Floor Plan (A2) 5. Elevations (A3.1 through A3.4) 6. Landscape Plan (L1.1) 7. Proposed Lighting Systems 8. Determination of Nonsignificance, issued April 2, 2008 9. SEPA comment letter from Snohomish County PUD, dated April 15, 2008 10. Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan Page 5 of 5