Loading...
2024-04-25 Architectural Design Board MinutesCITY 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 Stine 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 Stine 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 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 Stine 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 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 Stine 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 Stine 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 Stine 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 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 Stine 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 Stine 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 Stine 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 None BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS None ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Schmitz commented on Edmonds' charm. Chair Bayer again welcomed Board Member Stine. 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