Loading...
2024-06-27 Architectural Design Board PacketOF EDA' v ti Agenda Edmonds Architectural Design Board REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL- 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 JUNE 27, 2024, 6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING INFORMATION This is a Hybrid meeting. Attendees may appear in person or on-line via the zoom link provided. Physical Meeting Location: Brackett Room, 3rd Floor Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N. Zoom Link: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/j/88959586932?pwd=RzdPWUIwM09PZ1k1MHN2eWM1YXphZz09 Passcode:591531 1. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Statement: This is an opportunity to comment regarding any matter not listed on the agenda as public hearing. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Please clearly state your name and city of residence. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. 8660 : Approval of previous meeting minutes S. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. 8711 : Review of the draft Community Design Element of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan 7. ADB MEMBER COMMENTS 8. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Architectural Design Board Agenda June 27, 2024 Page 1 Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/27/2024 Approval of previous meeting minutes Staff Lead: Jeff Levy; Michael Clugston Department: Architectural Design Board Prepared By: Michelle Martin Background/History May 23rd meeting cancelled Staff Recommendation Approve minutes from April 25th meeting. Narrative April 25th meeting minutes attached for review. Attachments: ADB 04252024_draft Packet Pg. 2 CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Chair Bayer called the hybrid meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at Edmonds City Hall, 121— 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. She welcomed Todd Stein to the Board, and introductions were made. Board Members Present Staff Present Kim Bayer, Chair Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Alex Hutchinson Jeff Levy, Senior Planner Corbitt Loch Steve Schmitz Consultants: Todd Stein Shreya Malu, VIA Perkins Eastman Dan Kennedy, VIA Perkins Eastman Board Members Absent Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair (excused) Maurine Jeude (excused) APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 28, 2024 ADB Regular Meeting Minutes MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER SCHMITZ, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LOCH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Review of the 2020 Comp Plan Urban Design Element Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Pagel of 5 Packet Pg. 3 Senior Planner Levy introduced this item and welcomed the consultants Daniel Kennedy and Shreya Malu from VIA Perkins Eastman who made the presentation regarding the Urban Design Element. Mr. Kennedy discussed the Vision for Edmonds, opportunities with neighborhood centers and neighborhood hubs, and Urban Design Elements. He solicited feedback from the group about Urban Design Elements which include Building Form, Public Realm, Open Spaces, Streets and Connectivity, Art and Culture, and Climate Responsiveness. The team is looking at designating the Dayton Street — Arts Corridor as a Live -Work space and solicited feedback. Questions followed about the selection of hubs and centers and the origin of the live -work land use idea. Chair Bayer referred to the extensive feedback they received from the public about heights on Dayton Street and wondered how the community would support the taller buildings there. Mr. Levy explained this resulted from community meetings that were held back in December around what Dayton Street could turn into. People seem supportive of increasing heights by 5 feet in order to make a stronger frontage edge that could support the pedestrian experience a little better. There was some discussion about redevelopment potential and pedestrian access of Five Corners, Westgate, and Perrinville. There was a comment about the importance in general of focusing on transitions between transit and the built environment and some discussion about public open spaces. Chair Bayer asked if the comments submitted by board members had been reviewed. Mr. Levy indicated those would be analyzed and incorporated moving forward. Board Member Stein commented that the urban design elements would likely be context dependent and different between the hubs. He also asked for clarification about the city vision. Mr. Kennedy explained the city vision has been established. For the centers and hubs there is a functional vision for what these places enable and also a desire for them to reflect the spirit of Edmonds. Board Member Schmitz commented that they can expect to see more middle housing and potentially neighborhood commercial in the next few years. Regarding public space, he recommended that they should encourage new development to push their frontage closer to the street to create that urban fabric. He appreciates the live -work typology on Dayton Street because it is a softer type of urbanism. He recommended allowing flexibility in designs moving forward. With regard to urban form and connectivity, new businesses should be required to face the street and have some uniqueness. He noted that successful urban spaces don't just connect to the sidewalk but they connect to each other and allow for passages through their built environment. He stressed the need to encourage creativity by giving people more options. Board Member Hutchinson agreed with flexibility and not making the zoning too prescriptive. He stressed keeping it beautiful and walkable but not necessarily forcing people to do retail. An example of what they don't want is the apartments and retail by Edmonds College. Board Member Schmitz also brought up access design as they design for the future. People will be aging out of larger homes with stairs and moving into more accessible living situations. He also wondered if they will be looking at widening sidewalks to allow for not only pedestrians, but also some uses like cafe seating and the use of scooters. He enjoys when the streets change with the seasons. Mr. Levy was not sure if Dayton would be a good place for pulling sidewalks back to have the cafe zones, but he did think with the live -work zoning there could provide an opportunity to open up to the community. This could be something like having an open house for artists or rolling up the door and putting out a person's piano for recitals. Board Member Schmitz liked this idea as a way to encourage more connection to the outside from a commercial space. He referred to the new Molly Moon's development and the Walnut Street Cafe as aspirational examples of this. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 4 Chair Bayer referred to a live -work project where the old Baskin Robbins was and noted that some of the concerns about that were around what happens when whoever has the space doesn't want it to be work -space anymore. Codes will need to be in place to ensure the space is used as intended and that there is appropriate oversight. Board Member Schmitz commented that they can't control what goes in the business spaces they already have in Edmonds, but it also could turn out to be even better than they hoped. Mr. Levy noted that staff is trying to figure out how to keep track of these things. For example, HB 1110 says that if you include one affordable unit you can have four units on a site. There are concerns about how this would be tracked and monitored over the years. Board Member Hutchinson asked about other design options that were considered for the Dayton Street corridor. He thought that the live -work idea might be a little dated. Board Member Stein suggested it might depend on the definition of "work". He referred to streets and connectivity and spoke to the importance of sidewalks, having active use, and eyes on the street. He commented that that there is only so much retail the community can support. He wondered what kind of active uses are being evaluated to be distributed across the city to make that connectivity. Mr. Kennedy referred to recent efforts to redesignate Dayton Street as retail. Staff is concerned also about how much retail can be successful downtown. Live -work seems to have a higher preference than a ground -oriented residential. For this corridor, there is a great opportunity to build off the existing arts corridor and provide a counterweight to that across the downtown. Board Member Stein asked if they have done any kind of analysis with the centers and hubs about what kind of ground floor uses make sense. Board Member Hutchinson commented that restaurants and cafes continue to be successful. He wondered how they can encourage this even more. Chair Bayer raised concerns about parking. She thinks there needs to be some consideration for parking. Board Member Schmitz agreed and noted that parking is another entrance into a building. It should be treated as a way to drive the design of buildings to be better and not the most prominent thing attaching buildings to the streets. Mr. Levy explained they are not talking about getting rid of parking altogether, but there are some more creative ways to handle it such as park -and -share or off -site garages. Mr. Kennedy added that there will be parking in the centers and hubs for the foreseeable future with any redevelopment. Staff is looking for input on how that parking should expressed. Board Member Loch commented that state law requires that design guidelines be clear and objective. He thought it would be good to have two versions of this depending on whether there is street retail or not. He likes the live -work idea for Dayton Street. Regarding cars and parking, he thinks there are already good rules about allowing parking but de-emphasizing it in an urban setting. Those should continue or be updated. He noted that futurists say in the future we won't own cars. When you need a car, you will call and an autonomous vehicle will come to get you and take you where you need to go, so there will be much less need for parking. Board Member Hutchinson suggested having a variety of different massing plans as options for Five Corners for people to react to. Board Member Stein referred to the Urban Design Elements and commented that Art and Culture and Climate Responsiveness ought to inform all the other elements rather than standing alone. He noted that arts and culture are key parts of Edmonds' identity, and we all need to be more climate responsive. Mr. Levy acknowledged this and discussed how they relate. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 5 Board Member Schmitz wondered if there is any incentive to creating public art such as murals as part of a development. Mr. Kennedy explained that the things a developer can offer such as affordable housing, public art, or open space have to be weighed when there is an incentive structure in place. If it is incentivized, there is a question of how it should be expressed. Chair Bayer requested staff guidance on how to approach Building Form since it is such a large topic. Mr. Levy commented that there hasn't been much public feedback on this. He asked the ADB to think about recurring topics of concern that come up with developments. Chair Bayer referenced concerns from previous projects about shadows, mass and scale, transition zones, and lack of design elements. Mr. Levy explained these would be addressed further down the road but they were great ideas to start to talk about. Board Member Stein asked for clarification about base, middle, and top. Chair Bayer thought this referred to having some modulation. Mr. Clugston further elaborated on this. There was some discussion about how much detail it was appropriate to get into with the Comp Plan which should just provide policies and give general guidance. Suggestions were presented for how to better describe this such as how the building meets the sky versus how it meets the ground, human scale versus human -centric, and/or modulation. Chair Bayer emphasized her desire that the projects the ADB reviews actually have some design and are not just a big mass building with no modulation. Mr. Clugston agreed that the standards need to be updated but argued that the general design objectives on pages 8-10 in the packet are still a pretty good place to start for site design, building form, and building fagade. Board Member Stein agreed that they look pretty good and asked if anything is broken or if they just need tweaking. Board Member Loch pointed out that there are no photos; this can contribute to unintended consequences. Board Member Schmitz referred to Climate Responsiveness, and stated they need to accept that there will be new technologies coming in. The policies should have something to say about new and experimental things coming along. He stressed the need for designs to be flexible in order to be sustainable. Board Member Loch referred to Art and Culture and said he finds culture hard to put into policy because it is so intangible. Board Member Stein referred to Open Space and commented on the balance of open space versus private property that looks like open space. Mr. Levy mentioned they have had some discussions about having possible incentives to have open spaces dedicated on private property, but this has resulted in many questions about how it would be handled. Chair Bayer asked how the Tree Code would fit into this. Mr. Levy explained that the City has engaged in a tree canopy study to determine what goals can be realistically set for a tree canopy. After this they will be able to develop a code to encourage canopy growth but do it in a way that doesn't preclude any further development. Mr. Levy reviewed next steps. Chair Bayer expressed appreciation to staff for bringing the Comp Plan to the ADB for review. BOARD REVIEW ITEMS Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 6 None BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS None ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Schmitz commented on Edmonds' charm. Chair Bayer again welcomed Board Member Stein. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting April 25, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 7 Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/27/2024 Review of the draft Community Design Element of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History Edmonds is in the process of doing a periodic update of its comprehensive plan consistent with the Growth Management Act (GMA) in RCW 36.70A.130. As part of that work, and consistent with the ADB's powers and duties in ECC 10.05.040, the Board is reviewing the Urban Design Element. This is not a required element of the comprehensive plan, but rather optional as noted in RCW 36.70A.080. The Board reviewed the existing the Urban Design portion of the Community Culture and Urban Design Element of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan at their February 22 and March 28 meetings (minutes attached). Based on discussions at those meetings and at the Board's April 25 meeting (draft minutes are in the packet and the media is linked), the City's comprehensive plan consultant, VIA Perkins - Eastman, created the attached draft Community Design Element. Staff Recommendation Review the attached draft and provide feedback on the draft element (Attachment 3). Any additional comment and feedback is needed by July 12 so the element can be finalized prior to inclusion in the complete draft comp plan being compiled in late July. Narrative The draft Community Design element is a departure from the existing Urban Design element in that it describes a specific goal and policies for integrated place -making while removing design guidance and standards for inclusion in a separate document. Integrated place -making is an approach to urban planning and development that focuses on creating cohesive, vibrant, and inclusive spaces by considering the interconnectedness of social, economic, environmental, and cultural elements. This method emphasizes the active involvement of community members in designing and maintaining spaces that reflect their identity and meet their diverse needs. Draft Goal CD-1 states: Goal CD-1. Create strategic action plans at the neighborhood level that identify urban design opportunities and prioritize public realm investments. The Goal is supported by six policies which are aimed at improving communication between stakeholders, obtaining actionable urban data, and using that data in decision -making about public investments. Attachments: Attachment 1 - 2/22/24 Board minutes Attachment 2 - 3/28/24 Board minutes Packet Pg. 8 Attachment 3 - Draft Community Design Element Media from 4/25/24 Board meeting Packet Pg. 9 CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting February 22, 2024 Chair Bayer called the hybrid meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at Edmonds City Hall, 121— 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Kim Bayer, Chair Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair Alex Hutchinson Maurine Jeude Corbitt Loch Steve Schmitz Board Members Absent None APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 25, 2024 ADB Meeting Minutes Staff Present Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Jeff Levy, Senior Planner MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LOCH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS Chair Bayer highlighted the Edmonds Code of Ethics and the ADB handbook and thanked everyone for their service. A. 2024 ADB Work Plan Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting February 22,2024 Paget of 2 Packet Pg. 10 Senior Planner Levy and Planning Manager Clugston reviewed the tentative work plan. Board members asked questions regarding clarification about the ADB's design review process from now until things are finalized at the state level. There was also a recommendation to include design review process and regulations on the work plan in addition to design guidelines. Planning Manager Clugston noted that was the intention. Board members asked about the potential for subcommittee work and joint meetings with the Planning Board. Staff indicated that could happen further down the road. B. Review of the Urban Design Element from the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Senior Planner Levy presented on the Urban Design Element. Staff is requesting that the Planning Board go through a Word copy of the document and make suggested changes using any method they choose. He also pointed to reference documents in the packet related to BB 1110 (Middle Housing), BB 1337 (ADU), and HB 1293 (Clear and Objective Standards) as important for the Board to review. Board member comments are expected to be compiled and brought back at an upcoming meeting. There was a question about if such a high level of specificity in the Comprehensive Plan is the best method versus having some overarching policies in the Comprehensive Plan and deferring details to the Design Guidelines where they can be addressed in totality. Planning Manager Clugston reviewed some of the background on how this has been done to date but expressed openness to doing it a new way. There was some discussion about the need to come up with a clear and objective definition of "charm" and a desire to prioritize people first, buildings next, and vehicles last. PUBLIC HEARINGS None BOARD REVIEW ITEMS None BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS There was a question about dates for upcoming meetings that are not yet on the calendar. Planning Manager Clugston explained that they had looked into switching days for the ADB meetings but determined that isn't going to work this year. The intent for now is to have meetings on the 0 Thursdays of the month all year. Special meetings may be scheduled around holidays as needed. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:42 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting February 22,2024 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 11 C CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting March 28, 2024 Chair Bayer called the hybrid meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at Edmonds City Hall, 121— 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Kim Bayer, Chair Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair Maurine Jeude Corbitt Loch Board Members Absent Alex Hutchinson (excused) Steve Schmitz APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 22, 2024 ADB Meeting Minutes Staff Present Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Jeff Levy, Senior Planner Amber Brokenshire, Associate Planner MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER LOCH, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS A. PLN2023-0015 Port of Edmonds North Portwalk and Seawall Reconstruction Associate Planner Amber Brokenshire made the presentation. She discussed the review process, site context, and proposal. She reviewed how the proposal will meet site development standards including setbacks, height, parking, landscaping, and two proposed conditions highlighted in the staff report regarding landscaping and screening of mechanical equipment. Staff is recommending that the ADB forward a recommendation of approval to the Hearing Examiner with staff two proposed conditions. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 28, 2024 Pagel of 3 Packet Pg. 12 C Clarification questions were asked about the screening, parking, accessibility of the restrooms, access to the portwalk, opportunities for art, and landscaping. A concern was raised about the potential slipping hazard of the proposed glass blocks. Ms. Brokenshire responded that a condition could be that materials are used that prevent slippage. The applicant explained the Port would have to put "melt" down; the blocks also come with non -slip coating. A concern was also raised about the heat of glass blocks for dogs' feet. The applicant did not think this would be an issue due to open air circulation underneath. Commissioners were pleased with the extensive landscaping plan. Additional clarification questions were asked about seating and the potential for historical plaques or recognition of the native tribes who historically used the waterfront area. The applicant stated they have not settled on artwork yet. There was a question about whether the project actually complies with the design criteria especially regarding being a unique, creative, beautiful place unlike any other. Specifically, the Comprehensive Plan talks about everything in the downtown area being an identity element; encouraging a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment, and associated business; providing for a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, and natural features; providing space for local businesses and cottage industries; and providing open space for interaction, play, seating, and other activities. There were comments that this is a nice place to just sit and enjoy the nature. It doesn't necessarily need a lot of retail, but opportunities for food trucks or other ways to make it a little more exciting would be nice. There was discussion about the bathroom being a very utilitarian structure that could be more creative in its design. The applicant explained the bathroom was designed to match the other one. There was brief discussion about whether a bathroom is even necessary in this location. Several board members felt it was important. The Board discussed possible conditions of approval such as emphasizing the tribal connection in an educational/historical way and including various additional art installations such as public sculptures. There was also some question about what could be done with the restroom. The applicant discussed cost constraints for the Port and noted that reasons for selecting the restroom were because of the cost, to match the other restroom, and for the longevity of the building. In general, board members suggested that the restroom needs additional architectural detailing to comply fully with the design guideline. There were suggestions about putting something on the building to add more interest such as a mural or other artwork. Another idea was adding planters/landscaping to add more interest. It was also noted that the illustration of the restroom looking west isn't consistent with the drawings in the packet. The plans don't have the different treatment of the waterline. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR BROOKS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, TO FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE HEARING EXAMINER WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS: 1) INCORPORATE MURAL ARTWORK/PAINT ON THE SIDE OF THE RESTROOM BUILDING, AND 2) INCORPORATE CREATIVE ARTWORK, TRIBAL REFERENCE WITH HISTORICAL/CULTURAL/EDUCATIONAL ASPECT WITHIN THE SITE. MOTION PASSED (3-1). AYES: BAYER, BROOKS, JEUDE NOES: LOCH Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 28, 2024 Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 13 C BOARD REVIEW ITEMS None BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Review of Individual Member Comments on the 2020 Urban Design Element Senior Planner Jeff Levy said he would compile all the comments/edits for discussion at the next meeting, highlighting any areas where there might be conflicting ideas. This would be followed up by a first draft for review at the following meeting. There was a suggestion that it would be easier to start from scratch than to try to edit an outdated document. Staff explained that was an option. There was discussion about the process and the anticipated timeline in order to complete the first complete draft of the Comprehensive Plan component by June. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Loch expressed frustration about the large size of this meeting's packet for the ADB to review and requested that only the material necessary for the ADB to consider be included in the future. Mr. Clugston concurred. Chair Bayer requested getting the consolidated document with enough time prior to the next meeting to be able to review it. Mr. Clugston agreed and stated their intent is to get the packets out a week before the meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 28, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 14 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update DRAFT Community Design Element June 14, 2024 Guiding Principle: Edmonds prioritizes the needs and experiences of its people by making design for people the core of our planning process Integrated Place -Making Integrated place -making is an approach to urban planning and development that focuses on creating cohesive, vibrant, and inclusive spaces by considering the interconnectedness of social, economic, environmental, and cultural elements. This method emphasizes the active involvement of community members in designing and maintaining spaces that reflect their identity and meet their diverse needs. "Placemaking inspires people to collectively reimagine and reinvent public spaces as the heart of every community.... More than just promoting better urban design, placemaking facilitates creative patterns of use, paying particular attention to the physical, cultural, and social identities that define a place and support its ongoing evolution" The Project for Public Spaces A place -centered approach works best when informed by data - providing planners and the public with information about how people use public spaces, and what factors are most important when designing or improving them. Over the past decade, Edmonds has strategically planned for future development in its Activity Centers. During the last Comprehensive Plan Process in 2015, Activity Centers were identified as the Downtown/Waterfront Area and Highway 99 Corridor. Complementary to Activity Centers, a Neighborhood Centers and Hubs strategy identifies new locations to situate compatible forms of growth. A place -driven approach to urban design within these growing areas and throughout Edmonds advances parallel city objectives like economic development, sustainability, and youth engagement, while encouraging stewardship of these environments. Over time, Edmonds' interconnected set of policy, design, and development standards — as well as city investments will create a virtuous cycle of collaboration among the community, policymakers, and private developers to ensure that urban spaces are not only functional, but also context specific, socially cohesive and contribute to the economic vitality of the City. Integrated placemaking builds off of real -world experiences within public spaces - gathered in the form of public life data. A data informed strategy is applied to ensure that public spaces are 6/17/2024 Draft Community Design Element 1 Packet Pg. 15 designed and developed in a way that benefits all community members. With careful observation over time, planners, designers, and decision makers can identify the needs and preferences of diverse groups, avoiding biases that can arise from assumptions or limited perspectives. Data informed strategies enable public realm investments to be made in areas that have the most amount of potential for success (based on land use principles) and can bring forward those that should be prioritized even when facing a legacy of under investment. Methods and benefits from this approach are listed following: 1. Evidence -based Decision Making: Allows policymakers and urban planners to make informed decisions rather than relying on assumptions or anecdotal evidence. 2. Identifying Patterns and Trends: This insight can inform decisions about where to allocate resources for maintenance, improvement, or new developments. 3. Optimizing Design and Layout: Data can be used to optimize the design and layout of parks, streets, plazas, and other areas to better serve the needs and preferences of the community. 4. Monitoring Impact of Interventions: Data can be used to monitor impact of changes such as installing new amenities or implementing traffic calming measures over time. This allows for adjustments to be made based on real -world outcomes. 5. Promoting Equity and Inclusivity: Data can help identify disparities in access to public spaces among different demographic groups. 6. Engaging Stakeholders: Transparent access to data fosters greater trust and collaboration among stakeholders As people work together towards common goals, they develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of each other's experiences and perspectives. In this way, integrated placemaking can help to bridge gaps across racial and socioeconomic lines, and bring about partnerships among various stakeholders, including residents, businesses, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations — each of whom are working together to achieve a shared benefit. Goal CD-1. Create strategic action plans at the neighborhood level that identify urban design opportunities and prioritize public realm investments. Policy CD-1.1 The city should invest in a set of "urban design frameworks" to be updated on an estimated 5-year cycle for each identified Activity Center, Neighborhood Center and/or Hub. Urban design frameworks should comprise a systematic urban planning and design document that translates community ideas into a shared vision, helping to guide actionable change. The urban design framework may incorporate a variety of planning 6/17/2024 Draft Community Design Element 2 Packet Pg. 16 tools applicable to the physical environment, including the use of context sensitive criteria such as the 12 "urban quality criteria" as developed by the Gehl Institute. These criteria focus on human behavior, and center around three themes — protection, comfort, and enjoyment. (Gehl, J. (1987). Life between Buildings. New York: Van Nostra nd-Reinhold.) ENJOYMENT COMFORT PROTECTION Protection Scale Opportunities to Opportunities to against traffic and • Buildings and spaces see walk accidents feeling designed to human d • Reasonable viewing •Room for walking safe scale distances Interesting facades Unhindered Views No obstacles Protection for Lighting (when dark) Accessibility for pedestrians everyone Eliminating fear of traffic Protection Opportunities Opportunities to Opportunities to ainst crime and to enjoy the talk/listen stand/stay lence- feeling positive aspects Low noise levels Edge effect/attractive OEyes of climate Street furniture that 'to zones for standing/ secure Lively public realm provides I kscapes' staying • Sun/shade Supports for standing on the street Shelter from wind/ Overlapping functions - breeze day and night Positive sensory Opportunities for Opportunities to Protection against experience play and exercise sit unpleasant Good design and detailing Physical activity, •Zones for sitting sensory Good materials exercise Utilizing advantages: experiences • Fine views Play and street view, Sun, people . Wind, Rain/snow Trees, plants, water entertainment Good places to sit Pollution Dust/noise Policy CD-1.2 The urban design framework should be conducted with direct participation from relevant City departments including Planning & Development, Public Works, Economic Development, Parks, and Cultural services. Policy CD-1.3 Each urban design framework should include a community outreach plan developed in accordance with the Equitable Engagement Framework. 6/17/2024 Draft Community Design Element 3 Packet Pg. 17 Policy CD-1.4 In support of urban design frameworks, the city should develop a process for a citywide "public life study." (Refer Appendix x for a sample of Public Life Study) The public life study should provide data informed insights into how land use, building design, activation, social behavior, and urban form influence activity in Edmonds' public space. This will generally involve gathering data on items such as: a. The scale and urban characteristics of the space b. How many people are there, and for how long c. Who is there, by gender, age, etc. d. What activities are people engaging in The study should be carefully designed to enable comparison between spaces in the city and to other locations. It is recommended to use the "Public Life Data Protocol" (developed by Gehl Institute). This data set should be used over time to track, share, and compare information about the relative success of the City's public spaces. Data should be collected though: • Observation • On -site Surveys • Focus Groups • Qualitative ranking on urban quality criteria Policy CD-1.5 Using data collected through public life studies, the city should create Public Life Action Plans as a core component of each urban design framework to identify both design and programming opportunities. Policy CD-1.6 Public Life Action Plans should be used as input to define capital investment recommendations within neighborhoods, and as input to identify priority public amenities for incentive programs, helping to tailor city investment to neighborhood specific objectives. 6/17/2024 Draft Community Design Element 4 Packet Pg. 18