StaffReport-continued_ADB-07-60.pdf
PLANNING DIVISION
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
th
Project:
TNT – New duplex & triplex at 8629 238 Street SW (RM-1.5)
File Number:
ADB-2007-60
Date of Report:
February 27, 2008
Planner:
____________________________
Gina Coccia
Public Hearing:
March 5, 2008 at 7:00 P.M.
Edmonds Public Safety Complex: Council Chambers
th
250 5 Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
I.SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
Design review of a proposed new five unit multi-family project (consisting of one duplex and one
th
triplex) at 8629 238 Street SW in the Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) zone. This application was
presented to the Architectural Design Board (ADB) on October 17, 2007 and several items were
discussed (the meeting minutes are included as Exhibit 6). The public hearing was continued to
allow the applicant to revise the project to meet the code requirements and design objectives. The
applicant has summarized all of the changes that were made and how the ADB’s original
concerns were addressed. The ADB summarized its recommendation as follows:
The proposed parking plan must be reconsidered to ensure the proposed project can meet the
City’s current parking requirements.
The design of the side elevations, particularly the right side, should be reworked to break up
the monotonous walls as discussed earlier by the Board. The purpose of this would be to
th
Street SW.
make the right façade of the triplex as appealing as possible from 238
More detailed information should be provided by the applicant so the Board has a clear
understanding of what is being proposed. This information should include color renderings
of the proposed design.
The design of the front façade should be altered to emphasize the entryways more.
The applicant should reconsider the landscape plan and consider opportunities to save as
many of the existing significant trees as possible.
The following is staff’s analysis of the project.
II.GENERAL INFORMATION:
Exhibit 1
Staff Report
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
1.Owner:
Troy Renneke of TNT, LLC (Exhibit 3).
2.Applicant:
Terry Ostergaard of A.S.P.I. (Exhibit 3).
3.Tax Parcel Number:
00463300700302.
th
4.Location:
8629 238 Street SW, Edmonds WA 98026.
5.Size:
10,836 square feet (Exhibit 7).
6.Zoning:
Multiple Residential (RM-1.5), subject to the requirements of ECDC 16.30.
7.Proposed Use:
Five new multi-family dwelling units consisting of a duplex and a triplex.
8.Existing Use:
One single family residence built in 1942 (Snohomish County Assessor).
9.Process:
For this project, the ADB reviews the design of the proposal and makes the final
decision on whether the proposal is consistent with the zoning ordinance and the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
III.SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION:
Review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was required because the project will
contain five dwelling units. The City issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on
September 11, 2007. No comments or appeals were received. Both the City and the applicant
have complied with SEPA requirements.
IV.PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE:
The public hearing was opened on October 17, 2007 and continued to December 5, 2007. It was
then opened and continued to January 2, 2008 to allow the applicant sufficient time to re-design
th
the proposal. The hearing was again continued to February 6, 2008 to allow for more time, and
th
finally to March 5. A “Notice of Application” and a “Notice of Hearing” were published in the
Herald Newspaper, posted at the subject site, as well as the Public Safety Complex, Community
Development Department, and the Library. All notices were also mailed to residents within 300
feet of the site. The City has complied with the noticing provisions of ECDC 20.91 (Public
Hearings and Notice).
V.TECHNICAL COMMITTEE:
This application was reviewed and evaluated by the City’s Fire Department, Engineering
Division, Parks and Recreation Department, and the Public Works Department. There are no
outstanding issues with these departments.
VI.NATURAL ENVIRONMENT:
:
1.Topography Rolling.
:
2.Soils According to the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, this site
consists of “Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes” (Map Unit Symbol 5).
:
3.Critical Areas It was determined that there are no critical areas on or adjacent to this
property (file CRA-1999-0240). The Applicant and the City have complied with the
Page 2 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
requirements of ECDC 23.40. The City’s LiDAR map indicates a general slope of under
20% across the entire property.
4.Wildlife:
Typical of a single family site in a transitional neighborhood.
5.Vegetation:
There are many mature trees onsite, especially around the perimeter (Exhibit 8).
VII.NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
This property is located in the Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) zone in between Edmonds Way and
Highway 99. The neighborhood surrounding the site consists of a mix of multi-family buildings,
a few older single-family homes, and a church.
VIII.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site
is“Edmonds Way Corridor.” An excerpt of a
policy to achieve goals of the City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan related to this project are
shown below:
F.3. Use design review to encourage the
shared or joint use of driveways and
access points by development onto
SR-104 in order to support the
movement of traffic in a safe and
efficient manner. Site access should
not be provided from residential
streets unless there is no feasible
alternative.
F.4. Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent
residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family
neighborhoods, use design techniques such as modulation of facades, pitched roofs,
stepped-down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide
designs compatible with single family development. Make use of natural topography
to buffer incompatible development wherever possible.
(2006 Comprehensive Plan, page 59)
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.” (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.
a.
Vehicular Access. Vehicular access is taken from the west along an adjacent vehicular
access easement.
Page 3 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
b.
Location and Layout of Parking. The parking proposed is in front of each individual
garage unit (Exhibit 7). This was the main item that was resolved based on the ADB’s
original comments.
th
c.
Pedestrian Connections Offsite. There is an existing sidewalk along 238 Street SW.
th
d.
Garage Entry/Door Location. The garages are no longer prominent as viewed from 238
Street SW.
e.
Building Entry Location. All units are accessed from the west, and they’ve been
redesigned to become a focal point for the project (Exhibits 11 and 9).
f.
Setbacks. It appears the proposal meets the required setbacks for the underlying zone.
g.
Open Space. None proposed.
h.
Building/Site Identity. There are only two buildings proposed, but they are consistent
with each other.
i.
Weather Protection. Unit entrances are covered and have been re-designed to appear
more prominent (Exhibit 11).
j.
Lighting. Lighting is proposed as part of this project, and it appears consistent with the
design of the buildings (Exhibit 5) – it is an outdoor wall lantern with an antique bronze
finish. A total of 10 fixtures are proposed.
k.
Signage. None proposed.
l.
Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical. Each unit will have individual trash
service, so no community trash/recycling facility is needed.
m.
Significant Features. There are no significant features on the site.
n.
Landscape Buffers. Some landscaping is proposed around the perimeter of the site;
however, it does not appear to sufficiently act as a buffer between developments (Exhibit
10).
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.”
(page 78)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.. Upon staff’s site visit, it did not appear that any views would be obstructed.
Height
However, a public comment was raised by a neighbor concerning her existing view. The
project is consistent with a small-scale multi-family development.
b.. The columns were redesigned to cover the full length of the building.
Massing
c.. The roofs show sufficient modulation.
Roof Modulation
d.. The columns add depth to the building, whereas the previous submittal
Wall Modulation
indicated a flat wall. The south elevation has been redesigned with a second-story bump-
out to add depth from the street. The north elevation looks similar, but with no second
Page 4 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
story bump-out.
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.” (page 78)
Four objectives for building form are discussed in the Comprehensive Plan:
a.
Façade Requirements. The two buildings are appealing and would arguably improve the
current condition of the site.
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 cedar shingles, stonework, and
columns (Exhibits 9 and 11).
d.
Accents/Colors/Trim. The colors chosen are from a neutral palate (Exhibit 11).
IX.PUBLIC CONCERNS:
To date, no written public comments have been received. However, when the hearing opened on
October 17, 2007, two people expressed their concerns as summarized below (Exhibit 6):
1.
Diane Cross – She just bought a condo next door with a view and hopes to retain it. She
would prefer that the applicant try to retain as many of the large trees as possible. She was
surprised that five dwelling units is a permitted density due to the size of the site.
2.
Al Rutledge – He expressed his concerns about public safety, including neighborhood crime.
X.APPLICABLE CODES:
1.ECDC 16.30 (Multiple Residential)
A.
The site is located in the Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) zone and subject to the
requirements of ECDC 16.30.
B.
The minimum lot area per dwelling unit is 1,500 square feet; The lot is 10,836 square
feet, which yields a maximum density of 7 dwelling units (7.22). Five dwelling units are
proposed.
C.
Specific height calculations were not provided with the ADB submittal.
: The Site Plan will need to be revised to include 2’ contours, as well as the height
Note
calculations for the two buildings. Height calculations shall be provided on the site plan
and Elevations that clearly show how this project remains under the height limit provided
in ECDC 16.30.030.A.
D.
The project proposes to remain under the 45% maximum lot coverage threshold with
4,446 square feet (41%).
E.
The applicant will prove that all development standards are met through the building
permit process.
2.ECDC 17.50 (Off Street Parking Requirements)
Page 5 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
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:
B.
Preliminary floor plans indicate that
Type of multiple Required parking spaces
dwelling unit per dwelling unit
there will be five 2-bedroom units,
which yields nine parking spaces
Studio1.2
required.
1 bedroom 1.5
C.
A total of fourteen parking spaces have
2 bedrooms 1.8
been provided on site: five in the
3 or more bedrooms 2.0
garage and nine stacked behind these
spaces (Exhibit 7).
D.
Pursuant to ECDC 16.30.030.C, “No parking spaces may be located within the street
setback.” It appears that the southern most parking space now meets this requirement.
3.ECDC 20.11 (General Design Review)
A.
ECDC 20.11.010 requires the ADB to review general design review applications that
trigger SEPA. This project required review under the State Environmental Policy Act.
B.
ECDC 20.11.030 lists the criteria for Building Design and Site Treatment that must be
met.
C.
Staff feels that the Building Design criteria listed in ECDC 20.11.030.A have been
achieved.
D.
ECDC 20.11.030.B (Site Treatment) states (underlined for emphasis):
The existing character of the site and the nearby area should be the starting point for the
design of the building and site treatment. The following are elements of site treatment:
1.Grading, vegetation removal and other changes to the site shall be minimized where
natural beauty exists. Large cut and fill and impervious surfaces should be avoided.
2.Landscape treatment shall be provided to enhance the building design and other site
improvements.
3.Landscape treatment shall be provided to buffer the development from surrounding
property where conflict may result, such as parking facilities near yard spaces,
streets or residential units, and different building heights, design or color.
4.Landscaping that could be damaged by pedestrians or vehicles should be protected
by curbing or similar devices.
5.Service yards, and other areas where trash or litter may accumulate, shall be
screened with planting or fences or walls which are compatible with natural
materials.
6.All screening should be effective in the winter as well as the summer.
7.Materials such as wood, brick, stone and gravel (as opposed to asphalt or concrete)
may be substituted for planting in areas unsuitable for plant growth.
E.
Staff feels that the landscape plan generally complies with the above standards, except
that additional landscaping could be provided along the eastern and northern property
lines to act as a better buffer between these developments.
4.ECDC 20.13 (Landscaping Requirements)
Page 6 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
A.
The Landscape Plan has been revised to take into consideration the ADB’s requests and
the site constraints.
B.
The mature evergreens are not slated to remain around the perimeter; all new landscaping
is proposed (Exhibit 10).
C.
The applicant has stated that a utility easement on the east side of the property is what is
preventing the retention of the existing mature evergreen trees.
D.
If it is absolutely not possible to retain any of the existing mature evergreens, then staff
feels that the Landscape Plan should be “beefed up” to include many more trees and large
shrubs around the perimeter, which would not only act as a buffer between developments,
but would also be consistent with the natural green character of the site.
th
E.
No street trees are required along 238 Street SW.
F.
The revised landscape plan (Exhibit 10) shows landscaping around the wall of each
garage unit and near the parking area.
G.
The revised landscape plan shows 7’ Emerald Isle Leyland Cypress trees along the
northern property line, which should help act as a buffer between this multi-family
development and the multi-family development to the north.
H.
One Katsura tree is shown at the SW property corner. Three 8’ Black Pines are shown
along the southern property line, along with two Japanese Maples and a variety of shrubs.
I.
A small amount of landscaping (mostly shrubs) is provided along the eastern property
line, however it does not appear that it will act as an adequate buffer between this site and
the property to the east.
XI.RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVAL
Based on the analysis and attachments to this report, staff recommends of the
design of the project with the following conditions:
1.
The Landscaping Plan shall be revised to show additional trees and shrubs along the north
and east property lines in order to provide an adequate buffer between this site and the
property to the East.
2.
The Site Plan shall be revised to include 2’ contours, as well as the height calculations for the
two buildings; height calculations shall be provided that clearly show how this project
remains under the height limit provided in ECDC 16.30.030.A.
3.
The applicant must apply for and obtain necessary building permits.
4.
This application is subject to the applicable requirements in the Edmonds Community
Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the
various provisions contained in these ordinances.
XII.PARTIES OF RECORD:
Terry L. Ostergaard, Project Manager Troy Renneke, Owner
A.S.P.I.TNT, LLC
4727-A Evergreen Way 1136 Vista Place
Everett WA 98203 Edmonds WA 98020
Page 7 of 8
TNT, LLC: Duplex & Triplex
File Number: ADB-2007-60
Diane Cross Al Rutledge
th
8615 238 Street SW – B301 7101 Lake Ballinger Way
Edmonds WA 98026 Edmonds WA 98026
PlanningDivision
XIII.EXHIBITS:
1.
Staff Report
2.
Zoning/Vicinity Map
3.
Land Use Application
4.
Re-submittal Letter (2/14/2008)
5.
Lighting Proposal
6.
ADB Meeting Minutes (10/17/2007)
7.
Revised Site Plan (2/14/2008)
8.
Existing Conditions
9.
Revised Elevations
10.
Revised Landscape Plan (2/14/2008)
11.
Color Rendering
12.
SEPA DNS
Page 8 of 8