StaffReport_PLN20110007.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
th
121 5Avenue North,EdmondsWA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICESDEPARTMENT•PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING DIVISION
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Project:
GRE Edmonds Way
File Number:
PLN20110007
Date of Report:
June 8, 2011
From:
____________________________
Gina Coccia, Associate Planner
Public Hearing:
June 15, 2011 at 7:00 pm
City Council Chambers: Public Safety Complex
th
2505Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
I.SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
The review at hand is for design reviewapproval ofthe site, landscaping, and proposed
building designsof theGRE Edmonds Way mixed use projectlocated at 23014 and
23020 Edmonds Way in the Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW) and Multiple
Residential Edmonds Way (RM-EW) zones. The application includes a design narrative,
survey, photos, site plan, floor plans, elevations, renderings, and landscape plan (etc.) as
shown in Attachment 1. Also included for review is a geotechnical report(Attachment 6)
and downstream analysis(Attachment 7).The following is staff’s analysis on the project.
II.GENERAL INFORMATION:
1.Owners:
GRE Edmonds Way, LLC(Attachment 2).
2.Applicant:
Studio Meng Strazzara(Attachment 2).
3.Tax Parcel Numbers:
27033600106000, 27033600105200, and 00555300101100.
4.Location:
23014 & 23020Edmonds Way(Attachment 3).
5.Zoning:
Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW) andMultiple Residential
Edmonds Way (RM-EW)(Attachment 3).
6.ExistingUse:
Vacant.
7.ProposedUse:
A mix of uses: both commercial and residential.
EXHIBIT -1
2
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
8.Review Process:
Because the project prompts review under the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA), review by theArchitectural Design Board (ADB) is required as a
“Type III-B” development application.The ADB will reviewthe design of the
proposal and will makethe final decision on whether the proposal is consistent with
the design review criteria found in ECDC 20.11(general design review), ECDC 16.30
and ECDC 16.50 (the zoning ordinance),ECDC 20.13 (landscaping), and the
Comprehensive Plan.
III.SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION:
Review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was required because the
project willcontain 89 dwelling units as well as 6009 square feet of commercial office
space, parking for 144 vehicles, and grading of 10,000 cubic yards.The City issued a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on May 27, 2011 (Attachment 8). No
comments or appeals were received; both the City and the applicant have complied with
SEPA requirements.
IV.PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE:
A notice of application and notice of hearing were published in the Everett Herald
newspaper, posted at the subject site, as well as the other required locations (the public
safety complex, city hall, and the library). All notices were also mailed to residents
within 300 feet of the site. The City has complied with the noticing provisions in ECDC
20.03 (Attachment 5).
V.TECHNICAL COMMITTEE:
This application was reviewed and evaluated by the City’s Fire District, Engineering
Division, Building Division, Parks and Recreation Department, and the Public Works
Department.
The Fire Marshal warnedthat the fire lane striping will need to be identified on the site
plan (or civil plans). Also, he noted that guest parking is typically an issue for residents.
The Engineering Division reviewed the LID techniques proposed and they have been
found to be satisfactory. The applicant was encouraged to provide pervious pavement
and rain gardens where feasible. The downstream analysis has been reviewed, along with
the traffic impact analysis and they have been found to be acceptable (Attachment 7).
The Parks Department will have the final say on the street tree species. For the proposal
nd
across 232Street to the south, the Parks Department required the street tree species to
be “Acer Rubrum Bowhall Maple”.
As always, athorough review by all affected departments will be conducted with a
complete building permit application.
EXHIBIT -1
3
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
VI.NATURAL ENVIRONMENT:
1.Topography:
The entire site is flat, but towards the west 20 feet of the site there is a
slope. This site sits at the bottom of a 24-foot slope, so a geotechnical evaluation was
conducted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (Attachment 6). Agood illustration of the
topography is shown on page A5of Attachment 1:“Architectural Site Plan.”
2.Soils:
According to the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, this site
consistsof “Alderwood-Urban land complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes”(map unit
symbol 6).
3.Critical Areas:
There is a slope along the western portion of the property
(CRA20040025-31).A geotechnical report was submitted with the application and
although it will be reviewed again during the building permit phase of this process, it
appears to comply with the critical areas ordinance.The applicant and the City have
complied with the requirements of ECDC 23.40.
VII.NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
This site is located intransitional neighborhood that is a mix of residential and
commercial (Attachment 3). Across Edmonds Way to the east lies a portion of
unincorporated Snohomish County known as “Esperance.” Across the street to the south
is a veterinary clinic followed by a multi-family development. To the North lies another
multi-family development, and to the west lies a single family neighborhood. The site is
on the corner of Edmonds Way (SR-104),which is considered a principal arterial, and
nd
232Street SW, which is considered a local street.
VIII.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is “Edmonds Way Corridor.”An
excerpt from the plan is shown below, and specific criteria can be found in Attachment 10
(Urban Design Guidelines –General Objectives).
1.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.”(Attachment 10–
Comprehensive Plan, page 91)
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.
nd
a.Vehicular Access:
Vehicular access is taken from232Street SW on the south
side of the property, as well as from Edmonds Way.
EXHIBIT -1
4
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
b.Location and Layout of Parking:
The parking proposedis behind the buildings
shielded from view from Edmonds Way as well as the properties to the west due
to a change in topography.
c.Pedestrian Connections Offsite:
There is an existing sidewalk along Edmonds
Waywhich connects pedestrians via pathways.
d.Building Entry Location:
The buildings can be accessed from Edmonds Way.
e.Setbacks:
It appears the proposal meets the required setbacks for the underlying
zone.
f.Building/Site Identity:
The buildings and site are cohesive in design. No signage
is shown.
g.Weather Protection:
Building eaves appear to project slightly,butnot providing
much weather protection along the perimeter of the building. Thisis probably due
to the proposal being located at or near the required setbacks.
h.Lighting:
None shown.
i.Signage:
No signage is shown at this time.
j.Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical:
The trash enclosure will be
provided towards the middleof the sitealong thewest side.
k.Landscape Buffers:
All new landscaping is proposed as shown on the
preliminary landscape plan (Attachment 1, pages A16-A19). Several treeswill be
retained. Street trees are proposed along Edmonds Way.There is perimeter
landscaping shown on site with a good mix of trees and shrubs.
2.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.” (Comprehensive Plan, page 94)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.Height:
There are no known views. The buildings areshown at the height limit
(which will be verified through detailed calculations during the building permit
review).The perspectives in Attachment 1 are helpful in understanding the
relationship between thepedestrian and the buildings.
b.Massing
:The required “step-backs” help keep the project to scale. See sheet A1
of Attachment 1 for a discussion onmodulation.
c.Roof Modulation:
The roofline is modulated, which is well reflected in the color
building perspectives found in Attachment 1,sheet A12.
d.Wall Modulation:
The walls are modulated, which is well reflected in the color
building perspectives foundin Attachment 1,sheet A13.
EXHIBIT -1
5
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
3.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.”(Comprehensive
Plan, page 95)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.Façade Requirements:
There is an individual identity ofthebuilding proposed –
it is unique in its shape and articulation.
b.Window Variety and Articulation:
As shown on sheet A12of Attachment 1,
there are many windows, all of which are arranged in a rhythmic pattern, which
should lighten up the building façades.
c.Building Façade Materials:
Proposed materials includecement fiber panels
(with rain screens) and CMU blocks at the lower commercial level.Juliet
balconies are shown along some of the residences of the south building, and a
parapet cornice borders the roof.
d.Accents/Colors/Trim:
Refer to Attachment 1, sheet A1–the orange color ties
together both buildings, while the use of blue and peach add contrast.
The proposalappears to be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan.
IX.PUBLICCONCERNS:
To date, one public commentletter has been received (Attachment 9), although several
people have asked about it.Claudia Olney is concerned that the height bonuses provided
in the zoning code are going to be used, which may mean a reduction inprivacy for her
backyard.
The zoning code dictates the height limit, sothe City is required to allow projects to
proceed so long as the standards are being met. Height calculations will be thoroughly
reviewed during the building permit process to ensure code compliance. One way folks
add privacy to their own private property is by planting a vegetative hedge (which does
not require a permit and is not subject to the City’s height limits). Arborvitaeis a popular
plant chosen for this purpose–you may want to consider looking into this should you feel
that your privacy is going to be reduced.
X.APPLICABLE CODES:
1.ECDC16.30 (RM –Multiple Residential)
The 29-unit northern apartment building is located in theRM-EW zone. The
minimum street setback is 15’(east), 10’from the sides (north/south), and 15’from
the rear (west). The site plan indicates that the setbacks will be achieved with the
proposed design. Multi-family dwelling units are a permitted use in theMultiple-
Residential zone at a rate of one dwelling unit per 1,500 square feet of lotarea. Based
on the lot size of 44,781 square feet, 29 units could be allowed (29 units are
EXHIBIT -1
6
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
proposed). The height limit is 25’(plus 5 plus another 5 if conditions in ECDC
16.30.030.A are met).It appears as though the zoning requirements of ECDC 16.30
can be achieved.
2.ECDC 16.50 (BC –Community Business)
The southern mixed-usebuildingis located on a corner lot in theBC-EW zone.The
minimum street setback is 0’(east/south)andside setbacks are 0’(north/south)
except that aside setback of 15’is requiredwhen adjacent to residentially zoned
properties (west).The site plan indicates that setbacks will be achieved with the
proposed design.The height limit is 35feet (plus 5 plus another 5 if conditions in
ECDC 16.50.020.A are met).Both commercial and residential uses are permitted
uses in this zone (with no density limit).Itappears as though the zoning requirements
of ECDC 16.50can be achieved.
3.ECDC 17.50(Parking)
Commercial parking is based upon the square footage of the tenant space, while
residential parking is calculated based on the number of bedrooms per unit.With
6009 square feet of commercial proposed, several calculations can be made
depending on the future tenant’s use. For the residential units, 42 studios are shown,
15 1-bedrooms,and 32 2-bedrooms yielding a total of 131 parking spaces required
(130.5 rounds up to 131). The plansshows144 stalls provided across both parcels,
leaving 13 for the commercial use. If the commercial use were solely retail, 20.03
spaces would be required. Office space requires 15.02 stalls, while a service use
would require 10.02 stalls. The applicant has indicatedthat the future tenantswill be
offices with no customer service which would only require 8 stalls.The problem
we’llrun into down the line is thatwe’re not sure who the tenantspaces will be leased
to.We don’twant to deny a businesslicense to a company that would like customers
to visit because the new building is underparked. So, this will need to be figured out
prior to submitting for a building permit, which is usually accomplishedthrough a
mix of uses thatrequire different ratios.
4.ECDC 20.11 (General Design Review)
The project site is not located in a specific “district.”Therefore, “General Design
Review” is required under ECDC 20.11.Design review by the Architectural Design
Board (ADB)is requiredfor this projectbecause the SEPA threshold is triggered.
The ADB must find that theproposed development is consistent with both the
Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, certain criteria for
building design and site treatment are shown in ECDC 20.11.030.
The applicant has provided anarrative on the design of the project (Attachment 1,
sheets A1-A2) and staffagrees withthe content of the narrative.Please review these
pages to see how compliance with ECDC 20.11 has been achieved.Staff feels that
theproject, as conditioned, meets the General Design Review criteria.
EXHIBIT -1
7
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
5.ECDC 20.13(Landscaping)
There are a great deal of landscaping requirements in ECDC 20.13 that are intended
to go hand-in-hand with the Comprehensive Plan’s Urban Design Guidelines.Please
review Attachment 1, sheets A2 and A16-A19).ECDC 20.13.000 specifically states,
“The ADB and hearing examiner shall be allowed to interpret and modify the
requirements contained herein…”Staff feels that the applicant has tried to comply
with the landscaping chapter and supports the proposed landscape plan.
The proposal appears to be consistent with theZoning Ordinance.
XI.RECOMMENDATIONS:
The owner/applicant must apply for and obtain all necessary permits, subject to the
requirements of the code. Because this site fronts on SR-104, it is the applicant’s
responsibility to verify if approval by WSDOT is also required. Based on the analysis
and attachments to this report, staff finds that the project meets both the Zoning
APPROVAL
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan –and therefore recommends ofthe
PLN20110007
new GRE Edmonds Way mixed use projectas shown in file with the
following conditions:
1.Update the street tree species to “Acer Rubrum Bowhall Maple.” The street tree
species shall be re-reviewed by the City of Edmonds Parks & Recreation
Department prior to building permit issuance.
2.The parking will need to be recalculated at the numbers provided in the code.
Please either:
a.Reduce the number of residential units;and/or:
b.Reducethe amount of commercial space;and/or:
c.Re-assign a portionof the commercial space to a lower parking ratio
providing for a mix of commercial uses throughout the site.
XII.PARTIES OF RECORD:
1.GRE Edmonds Way
–2801 Alaskan Way –Suite 310, Seattle WA 98121.
2.Studio Meng Stazzara
–2001 Western Avenue –Suite 200, Seattle WA 98121.
st
3.Claudia Olney
–9229231Street SW, Edmonds WA 98026.
th
4.City of Edmonds
–121 5Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020.
EXHIBIT -1
8
PLN20110007 “GRE Edmonds Way”Page|
XIII.ATTACHMENTS:
1.
Design Review Application.
2.
Land Use Application.
3.
Vicinity Map.
4.
Engineering Memo.
5.
Public Notices & Affidavits.
6.
Geotechnical Report.
7.
Downstream Analysis.
8.
SEPA DNS & Checklist.
9.
Public Comments.
10.
ComprehensivePlan Excerpts.
EXHIBIT -1