Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2023-08-24 Architectural Design Board Packet
o Agenda Edmonds Architectural Design Board REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 AUGUST 24, 2023, 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 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. 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. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. July 27 Draft Meeting Minutes 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. 611 on Main Mixed -Use Phase 1 Hearing (Continued from May 25, 2023) 8. BOARD REVIEW ITEMS Items requiring review and recommendation from the ADB. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS 10. ADB MEMBER COMMENTS 11. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Architectural Design Board Agenda August 24, 2023 Page 1 Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/24/2023 July 27 Draft Meeting Minutes Staff Lead: {enter Staff Lead or "N/A" here} Department: Planning Division Prepared By: David Levitan Staff Recommendation Review and approve the meeting minutes from the ADB's July 27, 2023 regular meeting. Narrative The draft meeting minutes from the ADB's July 27, 2023 regular meeting are attached. Attachments: July 27, 2023 Draft Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 2 1.a CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Vice Chair Brooks called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at City Hall, 121— 5r' Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair Joe Herr Maurine Jeude Corbitt Loch Lauri Strauss Board Members Absent Kim Bayer, Chair (excused) Steve Schmitz APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Staff Present Mike Clugston, Senior Planner May 25, 2023 and June 15, 2023 ADB Meeting Minutes MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER STRAUSS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS Site and Building Design Review of the Greenwalk Park Planned Residential Development Senior Planner Mike Clugston made the presentation on the Greenwalk Park Planned Residential Development (PRD). He explained what a PRD is and discussed the PRD review process. This is currently at the preliminary review where the ADB reviews and makes a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner on design at a public Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Pagel of 5 Packet Pg. 3 1.a meeting. He reviewed the location at 540 and 550 Edmonds Way, the preliminary site plan, and single-family design standards for PRDs. Site Design Standards Retain Significant Features: This site has rolling topography. The applicant intends to retain 36 significant trees and the existing pond for open space. Vehicular Access: • Driveway widths 20' max — lots 6-8 seem to exceed 20 feet. May need to add verification as a conditional approval. • Shared driveways are encouraged — lots 14 & 15 share. • Primary plat road 24' at SR 104 (Edmonds Way(, reduces to 18' with sidewalks on both sides. • Secondary access drives are 12' wide Garage Locations: Homes should have visually diminished garage fronts. The designs appear to meet the code, but side -loaded or one -door tandem parked would further reduce the visual impact. Landscaping and Buffering: • 36 trees will be retained out of 119 existing trees. • 31 street trees are proposed. • Additional trees will be installed throughout the site. One of the conditions will be to get a landscaping plan that shows landscaping for all the particular lots in order to determine compliance with Type II/Type III buffer landscaping along north, west, and south property lines. The Board will need to determine the appropriate type of buffer landscaping (Type II or Type III) for this site. Building Entrances: • Homes should have a dominant front porch with pedestrian access to main entrance. • Front porch entries are identifiable; some are more dominant than others. • Some designs have pedestrian connection to entry; some connect to driveway. Open Space Requirements: 10% of the lot area is required for usable open space. 10.5% is proposed which includes a play space and pond/seating. Both open space areas show guest parking over the areas, and there were question about whether that was consistent with the open space requirements; the code is not clear on this. Because of the street width reductions there is no parking allowed on the streets or access easements. There will be a fair amount of parking for each unit. Staff asked several questions, including whether the proposal needs more guest parking or if guest parking over open space areas is a reasonable use for a usable open space. A condition is proposed. Building Design Standards: Characteristics of Single -Family Development: Demonstrate residential quality — pedestrian access, human scale, sidewalks on plat road. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 4 1.a Materials: Materials should be consistent on all four sides. Each of the house designs uses varied modern design elements on all sides. Human scale — horizontal and vertical difference. Staff has proposed two conditions before the project is ready to go before the Hearing Examiner. One is verification that all curb cuts for driveways are a maximum of 20' wide. The other is an updated landscaping plan consistent with ECDC 20.13 showing all retained trees and proposed trees and landscaping throughout the development. It should also show any fencing being considered throughout the project. Additional questions/conditions to address in the Hearing Examiner staff report: 1. Whether guest parking can be included in usable open space. 2. Whether Type H or Type II landscaping is appropriate for the north, west, and south sides of the development. Guest Parking in Open Space: Staff feels that guest parking is not consistent with usable open space. Open space is to be used by people, not cars. However, the code is not clear on that. Board Member Loch asked if they would still meet the 10% requirement for open space if the parking areas are removed. Senior Planner Clugston did not think so. The applicant explained the original plan for those parking spaces was to provide basketball hoops. At the public hearing some of the neighbors were concerned that parking could overflow onto their neighboring streets. The idea is that most of the time these will be basketball hoops, but every once in a while, somebody could park on them. They would be paved but not necessarily striped. The developer is fine with removing the parking if desired by the City. He also noted that all of the yards will be fenced with 6-foot-tall cedar fences, especially the perimeter. The fences were important to neighbors because of the removal of trees and the proximity of homes to the property lines. He noted that there are 16 lots with 8 different housing types. The housing types were designed so that they will not necessarily have the same roofline and siding, and there will be variety. Board Member Herr asked about the garages which appeared to be three -car garages with two doors. The applicant explained that this was so the garage doors don't cover more than 50% of the front of the house. They are large garages, but they are only two -car garages. People like to have the extra space. Board Member Herr referred to Lot 6 and said it looks like it has a full -width driveway. The applicant said all the driveways should be less than 20 feet. Mr. Clugston commented that when staff looked at this, it looked like 6, 7, and 8 were wider than 20 feet. This should be verified. Board Member Strauss asked about access to SR 104. The applicant explained that you have to turn right coming out of the development but coming down the hill there is a left turn lane to turn into the development. This is a limited access portion of 104. There was an easement on this property that limited the access to one access drive per lot. The applicant had to work with WSDOT in order to get that to be a road instead of an entrance drive. They are planning on putting a gate on it for added security and to prevent accidental public access. The applicant explained they are required to plant a minimum of 80 trees, but they are planting 120 trees. He added that the pond is actually a beautiful waterfall from the previous property owners. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 5 1.a Board Member Strauss thought one of the houses looked very close to the sidewalk on 104. The applicant explained it has the prescribed setback. Mr. Clugston said it was 25 feet. The applicant explained they have larger setbacks around the perimeter per the PRD requirements. Board Member Strauss referred to the basketball court/guest parking area and said she didn't have a problem with the basketball court being used for guest parking occasionally. The houses have large driveways that can accommodate four cars plus two in the garage. She wondered about just taking the word parking off it. Board Member Jeude recommended doing away with the guest parking. Board Member Herr noted these are nice large lots. It's a shame they have three car garages that can't be used as three -car garages, but he understands why they did it. He likes the shared easements. There are only a few people that live on the main street; everybody else lives down their own private little drive. He thinks the site layout is really good. He said he was impressed with the plans. Board Member Loch said he thinks there will be a need for extra parking, and there really isn't a place for overflow parking in the neighborhood. He suggested keeping one of the two guest parking areas. Board Member Jeude did not think guest parking should be included in open space. There was consensus that guest parking cannot be included as part of the usable open space, the applicant should change the wording to basketball hoops, leave the concrete where it is, and let the neighborhood figure out how they want to use it. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER STRAUSS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LOCH, THAT THE GUEST PARKING CANNOT BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE USABLE OPEN SPACE. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Clugston reviewed the difference between Type II and Type III landscape requirements. Board Member Loch asked if perimeter landscaping would be required if this was a regular subdivision. Mr. Clugston replied that it would not. Board Member Loch said, based on that and based on the fact that it is single- family on the other side of the fence, he thinks it should be the lesser requirement (Type IIl). He thinks this is adequate to screen from another single-family home. Board Member Herr asked what the advantage was of doing a PRD instead of a subdivision. The applicant explained it allows them to build the houses closer to the street. As long as they have a 20-foot-deep driveway, the front porch can be within 10 feet of the back of the sidewalk. This makes a suburban area look more urban because the houses appear to be closer to the street. It also gives modulation. They can also adjust the lot sizes so some are smaller and some are larger. The PRD also allows modification of the access drive and allows them to go a little above the 35% lot coverage. Board Member Herr expressed frustration with the City of Edmonds requirement that the sidewalk has to come up to the entry because nobody uses it. Everyone comes from the driveway to the front door. This creates issues for builders because of the lot coverage area. Mr. Clugston acknowledged that the PRD code needs some updates. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Page 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 6 1.a MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER STRAUSS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LOCH, TO ALLOW TYPE III LANDSCAPING WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY DON'T TAKE OUT ANY TREES THEY ALREADY SAID THEY ARE GOING TO PROVIDE. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER HERB, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER STRAUSS, THAT THE ADB RECOMMEND THAT THE HEARING EXAMINER APPROVE THE DESIGN FOR THE PROPOSED GREENWALK PARK PROJECT IN PLN2022-0049, SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS ON PAGE 34 AS AMENDED ABOVE. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Board Member Strauss commented that she was also impressed with the design. PUBLIC HEARINGS Request for continuance of public hearing for 627 Dayton Apartments Mr. Clugston explained that the hearing had previously been continued to July 27, 2023. The applicant was not able to resubmit during that window and is requesting additional time to prepare updated plans. The request is to extend the public hearing until the Board's September 28 meeting, since a separate hearing is already scheduled for the Board's August 24 meeting. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR BROOKS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 627 DAYTON APARTMENTS TO SEPTEMBER 28, 2023. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. BOARD REVIEWS ITEMS None BOARD DISCUSSION ITEMS None ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: Board Member Strauss said she would be out of town for the September 28 meeting and on east coast time, but she will try to join in remotely. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting July 27, 2023 Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 7 Architectural Design Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/24/2023 611 on Main Mixed -Use Phase 1 Hearing (Continued from May 25, 2023) Staff Lead: Michele Q. Szafran Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michele Szafran Background/History According to ECDC 20.12.010, proposals in the BD zones that require a SEPA threshold determination are reviewed by the ADB in a two-phase public hearing process leading to a Type III -A decision by the Board. The ADB opened the Phase 1 portion of the public hearing on May 25, 2023. After a brief discussion, the Board approved a motion to continue the hearing to a special meeting on June 15, 2023. On June 15, the ADB reviewed and discussed the proposal, took public testimony, and filled out and prioritized the Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 5), as required by ECDC 20.12.005.A. At the conclusion of the meeting, the ADB approved a motion to continue the phase 2 portion of the hearing to August 24, 2023. According to ECDC 20.12.005.B, the purpose of the continuance to the Phase II public hearing is to allow the applicant to revise the initial concept to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. The applicant has summarized their responses to the checklist in Attachment 1 and provided updated building elevations (Attachment 2), site and floor plans (Attachment 3), and landscape plans (Attachment 4) that incorporate the ADB and public comments on the Phase I submittal. Minutes from the June 15 meeting are included in Attachment 6. A weblink to the June 15 meeting packet is also provided. The ADB is scheduled to complete their design review of the project and make their final decision at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process. Staff Recommendation Review the Phase 2 staff report and 11 attachments and complete the design review of the project with a final decision at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and attachment provided in the staff report as well as the Phase 1 meeting materials, staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board approve the proposal under File No. PLN2022-0085 with the conditions listed on pg. 14 of the staff report and any additional conditions established by the ADB. Narrative Phil Frisk, representing GBH Holdings, has applied for design review of a multifamily residential building and site improvements on a 9,889 square foot site at 60%)11 Dayton Street. The building would be three stories and include 18 dwelling units, approximately 2,600 sf of office space, and underground Packet Pg. 8 O parking. The existing structures on the site would be removed. The subject site is located within the Downtown Mixed Commercial (BD2) zone, which requires district - based design review when necessary. Since the project triggers a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), design is reviewed as part of a two -phased public hearing process before the Architectural Design Board (ADB). The process is identified in Chapter 20.12-ECDC and is summarized below. For Phase 1 of the process, the applicant provided a preliminary design and a description of the property to be developed noting all significant characteristics, according to ECDC 20.12.005.A. The ADB used this information to make factual findings regarding the characteristics of the property and to prioritize the design guideline checklist based on these facts, in addition to the design objectives in the City's Comprehensive Plan and those within the Edmonds Community Development Code. Following public testimony at the Phase 1 hearing and completion of the design guideline checklist by the ADB, the public hearing has been continued to a date certain, not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 hearing date. According to ECDC 20.12.005.13, the purpose of the continuance to the Phase II public hearing is to allow the applicant to revise the initial concept to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. The applicant has summarized their responses to the checklist in Attachment 1 and provided updated building elevations (Attachment 2), site and floor plans (Attachment 3), and landscape plans (Attachment 4) that incorporate the ADB and public comments on the Phase I submittal. Minutes from the June 15 meeting are included in Attachment 6. The ADB will further review the design of the project and will make the final decision on the design at the conclusion of Phase 2 of the public hearing. Attachments: Attachment 1- Applicant Letter addressing Design Guidelines Checklist Phase II Staff Report Attachment 2 - Building Elevations and Renderings Attachment 3 - Project Plans and Drawings Attachment 4 - Landscape Plan Attachment 5 - Design Guidelines Checklist Attachment 6 - June 15, 2023 ADB Special Meeting Minutes Attachment 7 - Department of Ecology Comment Letter Attachment 8 - Engineering Division August 2023 Comments Attachment 9 - Public Comments Received Since Phase I packet published Attachment 10 - Phase I Staff Report Attachment 11- Aerial Image of Site Phase I Meeting Packet Packet Pg. 9 2.a y PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (206( 920.5554 phone PWFArchilecture.com July 31, 2023 Michael Clugston, Senior Planner City of Edmonds Planning Division 121 5t" Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 RE: Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) Dear Mr. Clugston, Below is my response to the comments from our ADB meeting on June 15, 2023. The items below are numbered according to the Design Guidelines summary in your minutes, and correlate to the revised drawings, dated July 31, 2023. Site Planning 1. Reinforce site characteristics. Although the consensus was that this is a low priority, the volume of the building is slightly reduced, allowing for a slight reduction in shadows cast on adjacent structures. 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics. The existing streetscape characteristics include large multi -story residential and commercial buildings close to the adjacent sidewalks. Our project maintains that tradition while also providing the pedestrian amenity of a canopy over a portion of the sidewalk, subject to approval by the City. Landscaping between the building and the sidewalk is provided, in keeping with such features found on other buildings in the immediate vicinity. 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street. The entrance to the commercial space is immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and features a covered entry porch along with the canopy over the adjacent sidewalk. Like other buildings in the downtown area, this communicates not only a place of shelter but also an entrance to the building. The entrance to the apartments is from a large plaza accessed from the sidewalk, with signage and another canopy communicating the point of entry to the residential space. 4. Encourage human activity on the street. The plaza leading to the entrance of the residential units is of sufficient size to accommodate people gathering there, and is just far enough removed from the sidewalk so as to provide a slightly more secluded environment. The canopy at the entrance to the commercial space also promotes gathering by providing shelter from inclement weather. Packet Pg. 10 2.a Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) July 31, 2023 Page 2 of 4 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites. This is accommodated by minimizing windows on the north side of the building and maintaining a fifteen -foot building c setback from the property to the east. The plaza will also have landscaping at the east side to provide privacy for U those on the plaza as well as those on the adjacent property. a, c 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy, and interaction. The space between the building and the sidewalk will be landscaped to provide privacy to those in the commercial N space. The potential for interaction is provided under the canopy at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as y at the porch immediately outside the commercial space entrance. There is no residential use adjacent to the space z between the sidewalk and the building at ground level. a as N R 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site. Even though there isn't a requirement to provide open space for the residential portion of the building, a large plaza x is nonetheless provided at the residential entrance, to facilitate gathering and interaction of residents. c 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property. Vehicle access is off the alley, so no significant impact by vehicle traffic on pedestrians is anticipated. Parking is o underneath the building and likewise is not seen to have any adverse impact on the pedestrian environment. co 9. Discourage parking on the street front. This is noted as not applicable. 10.Orient building to corner and parking away from corner on public fronts. This is noted as not applicable. Bulk and Scale 1. Provide sensitive transition to nearby, less intensive zones. The transition to the less -intensive zoning to the east is accomplished by the fifteen -foot setback mandated by the City, as well as providing landscape screening along the east property line. Residentially -scaled treatments are also integrated in the building design, including exterior finishes, windows sizes, and roof overhangs. Architectural Elements 1. Complement positive existing character and/or response to nearby historic structures. Although noted as a low priority, the project seeks to improve the existing character of the immediate vicinity by providing a large canopy over a portion of the sidewalk, transparency of the ground -floor commercial space, and access to an adjacent plaza. 2. Unified architectural concept An architectural rhythm is expressed with the inclusion of brick pilasters dividing equal -width bays of glazing at the ground -floor commercial space, along with a more symmetrical fagade above featuring a pair of cantilevered gables and matching window configurations and supplemental decorative medallions. This provides an overall perceptible architectural concept. 3. Use human scale and human activity. Human -scaled elements include brick pilasters, brick veneer, residentially -scaled siding, windows, and trim. The canopies at both the commercial and residential entrances are about nine feet above the walking surface, commensurate with the pedestrian scale of those elements of the building. Packet Pg. 11 2.a Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) July 31, 2023 Page 3 of 4 4. Use durable, attractive, and well -detailed finish materials. Brick veneer is featured on the south elevation and includes brick pilasters and pre -cast trim. Other human -scaled materials include lap siding, panel siding with metal reveals, wood trim, and decorative medallions surrounding two window groupings. The window trim for the residential units throughout the building is 2x2 cedar. This is the appropriate size, given the close spacing of pairs of small windows in most units. If larger trim was used, the resulting architectural proportions of window trim and window size would not fit with the small scale and close spacing of those windows. And in general window trim should be consistent throughout a building, to avoid a haphazard, inconsistent aesthetic. 5. Minimize garage entrances. This is a low priority given that the alley is the only way to access parking. A twenty -foot -wide driveway will minimize the impact. Pedestrian Environment 1. Provide convenient, attractive, and protected pedestrian entry. Entry to the commercial space is directly off the sidewalk under a projecting canopy, with a covered porch o underneath the floor above it. The residential entrance is off a generous plaza accessed directly from the sidewalk via stairs and a ramp, with a canopy providing protection at the entrance door. 2. Avoid blank walls. There are no blank walls on the building. Windows on the north elevation are reduced to a minimum to provide privacy to the neighbors to the north. It also features increased masonry veneer and a variety of siding types and colors. Modulation of the north wall is introduced to further reduce the apparent bulk of the building. 3. Minimize height of retaining walls The height of retaining walls is minimized but is largely dictated by the existing topography of adjacent properties 4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on pedestrian areas. This is noted as not applicable. 5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures. This is noted as not applicable. 6. Screen dumpsters, utility, and service areas. The dumpster enclosure is screened. The transformer must be accessible by PUD personnel and therefore cannot be obscured. 7. Consider personal safety. The entrance to the residential area will be through a secured door, accessed from a large open plaza. Access from the parking level to the building will also be through a secured door. The parking area will be partially open on two sides, enhancing visibility into and from that space. Landscaping 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of neighborhood. The existing streetscape features landscaping between the sidewalk and most buildings. This is maintained in the proposed project, along with the addition of street trees. Planters are at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as at the access to the plaza and along its east side. Additional landscaping is provided along the stairway from the sidewalk down to the parking level, along the west side of the building. Packet Pg. 12 2.a Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) July 31, 2023 Page 4 of 4 2. Landscape to enhance the building or site. By maintaining and enhancing the existing landscape character of the neighborhood as described above, the proposed landscaping enhances the building and site to provide a more enjoyable pedestrian experience. 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions. This was noted as a low priority, as there aren't any special site conditions that can be taken advantage of. Several comments by ADB members are addressed in the revised plans. The revisions are summarized below. The building now features a sloping roof with overhangs, reducing the apparent bulk of the structure and providing additional modulation and articulation of the parapets and overhangs. We are seeking approval for a portion of the architectural parapet at the south elevation to exceed the allowable building height by one foot. This architectural element visually ties the two projecting gabled elements together, for a more cohesive and resolved architectural composition. Juliet balconies are now provided for most of the units. A prefabricated metal railing will be installed at the sliding o glass door in each unit, adding another layer of architectural detail and interest. co A canopy is added to the commercial entrance, and some uniformity in modulation and articulation is introduced to the south elevation, with two cantilevered gable -roof elements, and a rhythm of brick pilasters modulating the increased area of glazing (now just over 75% of the required wall area). The area of brick veneer is increased, being added along the west side, adjacent the stairs to the parking level. The north elevation features a higher brick wainscoting, as well as the introduction of modulation and a variation in parapet height and configuration. Comments from other City Staff are addressed in other correspondence. Let me know if you have any questions about this. Thanks again for your help in getting our approvals. Sincerely, PWF Architecture, LLC Philip W. Frisk, AIA, Principal Washington State Architect Registration Number 7320 cc: Glenn Safadago, GBH Holdings Packet Pg. 13 2.a y PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 (206( 920.5554 phone PWFArchilecture.com July31, 2023 Jeanie McConnell Engineering Program manager City of Edmonds 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 RE: Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) Dear Ms. McConnell, Below is my response to your correction letter for the above -referenced project, dated April 27, 2023. The items below are numbered according to your letter. 1. The utilities along the frontage will be undergrounded, as shown on the separate revised civil engineering drawings. Items 2-6 we previously resolved. 6. The parking layout now shows a minimum of 8'-6" clearance between stall striping and structural columns. However, the structural design has not yet started, and we would like your approval to have any required columns intrude slightly on the 8'-6" wide parking space, as was done at the recently completed Post Office building parking garage, located at 130 2nd Avenue North. See attached pictures. I regularly use the parking garage and have no issues navigating the parking stalls. Presumably the encroachment of the concrete columns was allowed as it was recognized that it doesn't impact the usability of the parking spaces. 7. The dumpster enclosure adjacent the alley is now 3'-4" from the edge of the alley, to improve visibility for those exiting the driveway. We are also including a convex mirror at the end of the driveway, to provide full visibility down the alley for those exiting the driveway. While a mirror may not yet be an approved alternate, we request that it be considered as one. The parking garage at the Post Office building mentioned above includes a convex mirror, and it is very helpful in improving the visibility for drivers leaving the parking garage. See attached picture. The size of the dumpster enclosure is reduced to provide increased visibility. According to Greg Hale, President of Sound Disposal (the garbage service provider), the size of the dumpsters to be used are 50" deep, 78" wide, and 54" high. I have shown the actual size of the two dumpsters to be used, and they fit well within the smaller enclosure space. I believe the smaller enclosure will also serve as a deterrent to non-residents throwing trash into the dumpster enclosure, a potential problem given the alley location. Packet Pg. 14 2.a Corrections for Design Review Application at 605/611 Main Street (PLN2022-0085) July 31, 2023 Page 2 of 2 Feel free to contact t me directly to discuss any questions you have about our response. Thanks for your help with getting our approvals from the City. Sincerely, PWF Architecture, LLC Philip W. Frisk, AIA, Principal Washington State Architect Registration Number 7320 Attachments c 0 r cc: Glenn Safadago, GBH Holdings Packet Pg. 15 2.a Packet Pg. 16 0 Packet-Pg. 17 2.a ' V Il r ( a Packet Pg. 18 2.a 3cket Pg. 19 2.b `nc. 1S9" Project: File Number: Date of Report: Staff Contact: ADB Meeting CITY OF EDMONDS 121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION'S REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD "PHASE 2" DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW 611 On Main Ia101F411 N PAF811%%7 August 17, 2023 Michele Q. Szafran, Associate Planner Thursday — August 24, 2023 at 6:00 P.M.* Continued from the June 15th Hearing, Brackett Room, 3rd Floor, Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Or by Zoom at: https://edmondswa-gov.zoom.us/i/88959586932 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Passcode: 591531 Or join by phone: 253-205-0468 I. PROJECT PROPOSAL AND PROCESS Architect Phillip Frisk, representing property owner GBH Holdings, submitted a design review application for a new three-story mixed -use building at 605/611 Main Street to include approximately 2,600 square feet of office space, 18 apartment units and an underground parking garage for approximately 21 stalls. Projects in the Downtown Business zones are subject to district -based design review under the regulations of Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). According to ECDC 20.01.003 and 20.12.010, district -based design review applications that trigger SEPA Packet Pg. 20 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.b review are Type III-B decisions, which require a two-phase public hearing and design decision by the Architectural Design Board (ADB). The ADB opened the Phase 1 portion of the public hearing on May 25, 2023. After a brief discussion, the Board approved a motion to continue the hearing to a special meeting on June 15, 2023. On June 15, the ADB reviewed and discussed the proposal, took public testimony, and filled out and prioritized the Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 5), as required by ECDC 20.12.005.A. At the conclusion of the meeting, the ADB approved a motion to continue the phase 2 portion of the hearing to August 24, 2023. According to ECDC 20.12.005.13, the purpose of the continuance to the Phase II public hearing is to allow the applicant to revise the initial concept to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. The applicant has summarized their responses to the checklist in Attachment 1 and provided updated building elevations (Attachment 2), site and floor plans (Attachment 3), and landscape plans (Attachment 4) that incorporate the ADB and public comments on the Phase I submittal. Minutes from the June 15 meeting are included in Attachment 6, and a video of the meeting is available here. The ADB is scheduled to complete their design review of the project and make their final decision at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the hearing process. The following attachments are included with this Phase 2 staff report and are focused on new or updated materials that were not included in the Phase I meeting packet: 1. Applicant's Phase 2 cover letters 2. Building Elevations Volume Model Revised 3. Site and Floor Plans Revised 4. Landscape Plan Revised 5. Completed Design Guidelines Checklist 6. June 151" ADB minutes 7. Department of Ecology SEPA comment letter 8. Engineering Review Letter 9. Public Comments received after Phase 1 Staff Report 10. Phase 1 staff report (attachments available in Phase I meeting packet) 11. Aerial Image of Site II. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS A. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS The subject property is located at the eastern edge of the Edmonds downtown business core. The property is zoned BD2 (Downtown Mixed Commercial) as are the properties to the west and south. Properties to the north and east are zoned RM-1.5 (Multiple Residential RM-1.5). Uses surrounding the project site are primarily residential with a mix of commercial and office uses to the south and west. Refer to Attachment 11 for an aerial view of the site in relation to the surrounding area. Page 2 of 15 Packet Pg. 21 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 B. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS Because the hearing was continued to a date certain during Phase 1 of the hearing process, no additional public notice is required. However, staff emailed a link to the Phase II meeting packet to parties of record/interest and posted the meeting agenda at the Public Safety Complex and City Hall as well as on the city website on August 17. To date, ten (10) parties have provided written comments on the subject proposal, which are summarized in the Phase 1 staff report and the ADB minutes. Comments received after the publication of the Phase I meeting packet are included in Attachment 9. The commentors are included as parties of record as listed on pg. 15 (Section IV) of this report. Public testimony was provided by five (5) individuals during the Phase I hearing, which is summarized on pages 2-6 of the ADB minutes (Attachment 6). ADB members requested clarification on several topics during the June 15t" public hearing, including concerns related to moving trucks in the alley (and their potential to block neighboring garages) and whether a traffic study would be required. The City issues permits to residents moving in or out of a building to use 3-hr parking for limited periods of time and does not allow alleys to be blocked for this purpose. A traffic study is triggered based on the number of PM peak hour (4-6 pm) trips for a development. The threshold is 25 PM peak hour trips, and the current proposal does not reach the threshold for a traffic study. No further comments have been received as of the date of this staff report. C. TECHNICAL STAFF REVIEW The Phase 1 portion of the application was reviewed and evaluated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue and the city's Building Division, Public Works Department, and Engineering Division. Initial comments by these reviewers were included in the Phase I meeting packet. One SEPA comment was received after the Phase 1 staff report was initially published. The Washington State Department of Ecology indicated that should any environmental contamination be encountered during construction it should be reported to Ecology, and if any underground storage tanks (USTs) are encountered during construction they must be decommissioned in accordance with local fire department regulations (Attachment 7). South County Fire, Public Works, and the Building Division will provide further comments during the subsequent building permit review. The Engineering Division reviewed the Phase 2 resubmittal and noted that several items must still be addressed, including site distance visibility, dumpster enclosure sizing, and parking stall dimensions. These are prescriptive development standards that can be addressed during building permit review but should be considered during the ADB's review as it relates to overall site design. Other technical comments related to the undergrounding of power, storm system control, and transportation will be further reviewed with the building permit phase. Page 3 of 15 Packet Pg. 22 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Downtown Mixed Commercial" within the "Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center" overlay. Goals and policies from the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center related to this project have been included in detail with the phase 1 staff report (Attachment 10). Design objectives for the downtown area addressing site design, building form, and building fagade are provided in the Comprehensive Plan (pages 125-127). Staff finds that the revisions made by the applicant further address urban design goal B, and the underlying policies, including B.6 (with the addition of a canopy for weather protection), B.11 building fagade (by providing additional scale elements to the northern fagade) and B.12 (by increasing the transparency along the street). As conditioned, staff finds the proposal is consistent with the referenced goals and design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. E. DESIGN GUIDELINES CHECKLIST During Phase 1 of the public hearing on June 15, 2023, the ADB established design priorities for the project based on the characteristics of the site and the surrounding area using the Design Guidelines Checklist (Attachment 5). The applicant has provided responses to the checklist in Attachment 1, while ADB discussion of the checklist is summarized in the June 15 meeting minutes (Attachment 6) and the revised project design's consistency with the guidelines are discussed below, with the exception of guidelines that were determined to be not applicable by the ADB. A. Site Planning. 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics. While the reinforcement of existing site characteristics was deemed a lower priority, the volume of the building has been slightly reduced, allowing for a slight reduction in shadows cast on adjacent structures. 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics. The existing streetscape characteristics include large multi -story residential and commercial buildings close to the adjacent sidewalks. The project maintains that tradition while also providing the pedestrian amenity of a canopy over a portion of the sidewalk. Landscaping between the building and the sidewalk is provided, in keeping with such features found on other buildings in the immediate vicinity. The updated project plans (Sheet A1.01 of Attachment 3) now show that roof eaves along the Main Street side of the building now project approximately 14" into the public right-of-way (ROW). ECDC 18.70.030 notes that such encroachments shall be approved by the ADB but "shall not exceed 30 percent of the length of the fagade on any one side of the building", which the revised proposal currently does not meet. Staff has included compliance with this requirement as a recommended condition of approval in Section III and it should be incorporated into the ADB's decision on the design review. Page 4 of 15 Packet Pg. 23 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street. The entrance to the commercial space is immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and features a covered entry porch along with the canopy over the adjacent sidewalk. Like other buildings in the downtown area, this communicates not only a place of shelter but also an entrance to the building. The entrance to the apartments is from a large plaza accessed from the sidewalk, with signage and another canopy communicating the point of entry to the residential space. 4. Encourage human activity on street. The plaza leading to the entrance of the residential units is of sufficient size to accommodate people gathering there and is just far enough removed from the sidewalk to provide a slightly more secluded environment. The canopy at the entrance to the commercial space also promotes gathering by providing shelter from inclement weather. 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites. The guideline has been addressed by minimizing windows on the north side of the building and maintaining a fifteen -foot building setback from the property to the east. The plaza will also have landscaping at the east side to provide privacy for those on the plaza as well as those on the adjacent property. 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy and interaction (residential projects). The space between the building and the sidewalk will be landscaped to provide privacy to those in the commercial space. The potential for interaction is provided under the canopy at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as at the porch immediately outside the commercial space entrance. There is no residential use adjacent to the space between the sidewalk and the building at ground level. 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential projects). Although there isn't a requirement to provide open space for the residential portion of the building, a large plaza is provided at the residential entrance, to facilitate gathering and interaction of residents. 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property. Vehicular access is provided from the alley, so no significant impact by vehicle traffic on pedestrians is anticipated. Parking is underneath the building and likewise is not seen to have any adverse impact on the pedestrian environment. Staff Analysis The proposed project has been slightly reduced in volume and is proposed to be built within two feet from the street property line with space to provide landscaping along the frontage of the building. The subject site along with the property to the west and the parcels along the south side of Main Street are in a transition area from a Downtown Business zone to residential zones and thus the streetscape begins to change slightly within this transition area. In general, the existing streetscape includes large multi -story residential and commercial buildings. The code requires a side setback of 15 feet from the adjacent residential property to the east. The entries are clearly visible from the street to the commercial space and the Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 24 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 residential space via the proposed plaza. The applicant has proposed an awning over the entrance to add and encourage human activity on the street. The proposal includes at least 75 percent transparent windows along the street front. The proposal minimizes windows on the north fagade and is setback 15 feet from the eastern residential property to help minimize privacy on the adjacent site. The landscaped plaza along the eastern side of the building provides privacy and transition between the residences and street as well as an open space amenity. The approved project design will be required to show compliance with ECDC 18.70.030 as it relates to encroachment into the Main St ROW. B. Bulk and Scale. 1. Provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less- intensive zones. The transition to the less - intensive zoning to the east is accomplished by the fifteen -foot setback mandated by the City, as well as providing landscape screening along the east property line. Residentially scaled treatments are also integrated in the building design, including exterior finishes, windows sizes, and roof overhangs. Staff Analysis The adjacent property to the east is of a different zone (residential multi -family), and the proposal includes a code required 15-foot setback with landscaping. Additionally, the eastern fagade includes slight step backs thus reducing the perceived bulk and scale C. Architectural Elements. 1. Complement positive existing character and/or respond to nearby historic structures. Although noted as a low priority, the project seeks to improve the existing character of the immediate vicinity by providing a large canopy over a portion of the sidewalk, transparency of the ground -floor commercial space, and access to an adjacent plaza. 2. Unified architectural concept. The applicant notes that an architectural rhythm is expressed with the inclusion of brick pilasters dividing equal -width bays of glazing at the ground -floor commercial space, along with a more symmetrical fagade above featuring a pair of cantilevered gables and matching window configurations and supplemental decorative medallions. This provides an overall perceptible architectural concept. 3. Use human scale and human activity. Human -scaled elements include brick pilasters, brick veneer, residentially -scaled siding, windows, and trim. The canopies at both the commercial and residential entrances are about nine feet above the walking surface, commensurate with the pedestrian scale of those elements of the building. 4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials. A brick veneer is featured on the south elevation and includes brick pilasters and pre -cast trim. Other human -scaled materials include lap siding, panel siding with metal reveals, wood trim, and decorative medallions surrounding two window groupings. The window trim for the residential units throughout the building is 2x2 cedar. This is the appropriate size, given the close spacing of pairs of small windows in most units. If larger trim were to be used, the resulting architectural proportions of window trim and window size would not fit with the small scale and close spacing of those windows. In general, window trim should be consistent throughout a building to avoid a haphazard, inconsistent aesthetic. Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 25 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 5. Minimize garage entrances. The ADB determined this to be a low priority given that the alley is the only way to access parking. A twenty -foot -wide driveway will minimize the impact. Staff Analysis While there may not be one cohesive design style in the vicinity, the applicant has revised the plans to include a sloped roof with mixed materials which generally appear to be in line with the architectural characteristics of the surrounding buildings. The applicant has revised the plans to introduce a unified plan by adding more symmetry to the fagade, matching windows, and decorative medallions in a cohesive way. To better achieve architectural consistency, the street fagade could benefit from the addition of a belly band to tie off the ends of the perceived brick pillars. Additional balance may be achieved by adding a belly band mid -way along the north fagade, both of which are included as recommended conditions of approval in Section III. The proposed awning will need to meet the criteria in ECDC 18.70.030.F related to height and projection into the ROW, which will be further reviewed at the building permit stage. The revised site plan includes two projections along the street front with eave projections into the right-of-way that appear to exceed the maximum 30 percent of the length of the fagade. As a condition of approval eaves and projections must comply with the criteria outlined ECDC 18.70.030.D. Overall staff finds that the applicant has made positive changes to the proposal and has also increased the transparency at street front to now meet the 75 percent minimum requirement, and added an awning which helps define the commercial space. The proposal includes architectural concepts, human scale, and durable cohesive materials. D. Pedestrian Environment. 1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry. The entry to the commercial space is directly off the sidewalk under a projecting canopy, with a covered porch underneath the floor above it. The residential entrance is off a generous plaza accessed directly from the sidewalk via stairs and a ramp, with a canopy providing protection at the entrance door. 2. Avoid blank walls. There are no blank walls on the building. Windows on the north elevation are reduced to a minimum to provide privacy to the neighbors to the north. The revised design also features increased masonry veneer and a variety of siding types and colors. Modulation of the north wall is introduced to further reduce the apparent bulk of the building. 3. Minimize height of retaining walls. The height of retaining walls is minimized but is largely dictated by the existing topography of adjacent properties. 6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas. The dumpster enclosure is screened. The transformer must be accessible by PUD personnel and therefore cannot be obscured. 7. Consider personal safety. The entrance to the residential area will be through a secured door, accessed from a large open plaza. Access from the parking level to the building will Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 26 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 also be through a secured door. The parking area will be partially open on two sides, enhancing visibility into and from that space. Staff Analysis The revised project design improves the pedestrian environment along the street front by providing a projecting canopy for weather protection, while the use of landscaping along the street front helps enhance the pedestrian environment. The applicant has revised the plans to address concerns of blank walls by adding balconies to the units, increasing masonry along the northern fagade, with pitched roofs and mixed materials. Staff recommends the addition of a bellyband midway along the northern fagade to help provide more interest, which has been included as a recommended condition of approval. Personal safety is achieved by providing adequate site lighting without being excessive onto adjacent sites as well as having adequate window placement. E. Landscaping. 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of neighborhood. The existing streetscape features landscaping between the sidewalk and most buildings. This would be maintained in the proposed project, along with the addition of street trees. Planters are provided at the entrance to the commercial space, as well as at the access to the plaza and along its east side. Additional landscaping is provided along the stairway from the sidewalk down to the parking level, along the west side of the building. 2. Landscape to enhance the building orsite. The applicant notes that by maintaining and enhancing the existing landscape character of the neighborhood as described above, the proposed landscaping enhances the building and site to provide a more enjoyable pedestrian experience. 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions. The ADB deemed this a low priority, as there aren't any special site conditions that can be taken advantage of. Staff Analysis Staff finds that with the recommended conditions of approval, the revised project design satisfies the Board's prioritization for Site Planning, Bulk and Scale, Architectural Elements, Pedestrian Environment, and Landscaping. Other comments by ADB members have been addressed in the revised plans, such as incorporating sloped roofs with overhangs to provide additional modulation and articulation, the addition of balconies for additional architectural detail and interest, and a canopy for the commercial entrance. The south elevation has been revised to include uniform modulation with increased glazing and brick pilasters, while the brick veneer has been increased along the west and north elevations. F. APPLICABLE CODES ECDC 16.43 regulates uses, setbacks, ground floor requirements, and open space in the Downtown Business zones, the project's compliance with which are addressed in the Phase staff report (Attachment 10). The number of parking stalls remains unchanged but is subject to Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 27 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 further review by the Engineering Division at the building permit stage; however, this is not anticipated to impact the current design review proposal. Sections of code that require additional analysis and consideration by the ADB are included below. A. Height. The maximum allowed height in the BD2 zone is 30 feet, with certain exceptions provided in ECDC 16.43.030.C.3. The elevations in Attachment 2 shows much of the building height at approximately 30 feet, the applicant is requesting a height exception of one foot to allow for an architectural element that visually ties the two projecting gabled roof elements together for a more cohesive look which staff finds consistent with 1:1ybZaiE1.7-1191113exal All zoning requirements (and related building, engineering, and public works codes) will be verified through review and approval of future building permits. ECDC 17.115 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure and ECDC 17.120 Bicycle Parking Facilities have been addressed in the Phase 1 staff report (Attachment 10). 1. ECDC 22.43 Design Standards for the BD Zones Design standards applicable to the BD zones are provided in ECDC Chapter 22.43. A. ECDC 22.43.010 Massing and Articulation. Intent- To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Staff Response: The revised plans include a brick base and a sloped roof which convey a visually distinct base and top. The addition of the awning and the mixed pattern along the west side of the south elevation helps to emphasize the commercial entrance. 2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building exceeds the historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as a combination of materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional building widths. Staff Response: Older building widths in the downtown area typically vary from about 30 to 60 feet. The proposed building uses materials as well as vertical and horizontal modulation to create 'widths' that are between 5 and 30 feet wide along the south, west and east building facades. The previous plan provided for the north fagade was approximately 66 feet in width with little articulation or modulation. The applicant has revised the plans to help break up the northern fagade to meet these widths and has added higher brick wainscoting and more modulation and variation in the parapet height and configuration. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to provide a bellyband along the north and south facades. Page 9 of 15 Packet Pg. 28 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 B. ECDC 22.43.020 Orientation to Street. Intent — To reinforce pedestrian activity and orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street through building design. 1. Building frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a parking lot or alley. Staff Response: The building is oriented to Main Street and includes a prominent pedestrian entry to the commercial space along with pedestrian scale details to the south elevation facade. Pedestrian access is also provided directly off Main Street to the residential entry off the eastern fagade of the building. A recessed entry for the commercial space with the addition of a canopy as shown on the revised plan help to further emphasize the entrances. 2. Entrances to buildings in the BD1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street and accessible from the adjacent sidewalk. Staff Response: Entrances to both the commercial and residential spaces are accessible from the sidewalk. 3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of the following elements: a. Higher bay(s); b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet); c. Forecourt and entrance plaza. Staff Response: As noted above, canopies are provided that help emphasize the entrances for the commercial and residential spaces. C. ECDC 22.43.030 Ground Level Details. Intent — To reinforce the character of the streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets. 1. Ground floor, street facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall incorporate at least five of the following elements: a. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets; b. Medallions, c. Belt courses; d. Plinths for columns; e. Bulkhead for storefront window; f. Projecting sills; g. Tile work; h. Transom or clerestory windows; i. Planter box, j. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent. Staff Response: Numerous ground level details provide visual interest, including lighting, precast lintels, masonry, concrete planter, and rowlock courses for the ground floor windows. 2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the sidewalk, as provided for in ECDC 16.43.030. Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 29 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.b Staff Response: As shown on sheet A1.01 of Attachment 3 and pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030, the proposal meets the entry/ground floor criteria by being within seven inches of the grade at sidewalk to the commercial space along Main Street. D. ECDC 22.43.040 Awnings/Canopies and Signage. Intent —1) To integrate signage and weather protection with building design to enhance business visibility and the public streetscape. 2) To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to improve way finding for visitors. 3) To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered, and to minimize distraction from overuse of advertisement elements. 1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not provided, then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a metal or other framework. Staff Response: A recessed entry with a projecting canopy is proposed for the commercial space along Main Street while a separate canopy is provided over the pedestrian entrance to the residential units along the east side of the building. 2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage. Front valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns. Staff Response: All proposed canopies are open -sided. 3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted. Staff Response: None of the canopies are marquee, box, or convex in shape. 4. Retractable awnings are encouraged. Staff Response: No retractable awnings are proposed. 5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame store- fronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies should be hung just below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists. Staff Response: The recessed entry proposed for the commercial space along Main Street and the proposed canopy does not appear to conceal architectural details. 6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale, and position, but need not be identical. Staff Response: Not applicable, as the proposal does not include multiple storefronts. 7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are not permitted. Staff Response: Nonstructural awnings are not proposed. 8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Com- binations of sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while minimizing the size of individual signs. Page 11 of 15 Packet Pg. 30 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Staff Response: Signs in the BD zones are subject to the design standards in ECDC 22.43.040. Staff will review signage at the building permit stage. Some wall signs are anticipated and appear to be in compliance with the code. The ADB has previously discussed the potential addition of a mural on the north fagade, which would require a sign permit. 9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements are preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or less are permitted and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage permitted for a business in ECDC 20.60. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one of the required elements under ECDC 22.43.030(B). Staff Response: See #8 above. 10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering. Staff Response: See #8 above. 11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design. Staff Response: Signage will be reviewed for compliance with the applicable design standards of ECDC 22.43.040 and the sign code requirements of ECDC 20.60 when a sign application is submitted. 12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or con- tributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or on a city council -approved historic survey. Staff Response: Not applicable. The subject site is not on the National Register, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, nor on a city council -approved historic survey. 13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An historic sign may be used to meet this standard. Staff Response: See #8 above. E. ECDC 22.43.050 Transparency at Street Level. Intent — To provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building. 1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front shall have transparent windows covering a minimum of 75 percent of the building fagade that lies between an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade. Staff Response: Main Street has a designated street front requirement. As proposed in the revised plans, the ground level fagade along the designated street front complies with the minimum 75 percent transparency for windows. 2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 31 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Staff Response: As conditioned, staff finds that the proposal meets the transparency requirement. 3. Where transparency is not required, the facade shall comply with the standards under ECDC 22.43.060. Staff Response: See section F below for treating blank walls that do not require transparency. 4. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. Staff Response: Not applicable, as the proposal is within the BD2 zone. ECDC 22.43.060 Treating Blank Walls. Intent — To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street. 1. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where windows are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under ECDC 22.43.050). At least five of the following elements shall be incorporated into any ground floor, street facing facade: a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative concrete block); b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall; c. Belt courses of a different texture and color; d. Projecting cornice; e. Decorative tile work; f. Medallions; g. Opaque or translucent glass, h. Artwork or wall graphics; i. Lighting fixtures; j. Green walls; k. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. Staff Response: The east, west and south facades do not propose blank walls and contain numerous windows and mixed materials. As requested by the ADB during the Phase I hearing, the applicant has revised the plans to include higher brick wainscoting as well as additional modulation and variation of parapet height and configuration for added design elements to the north facade. A recessed covered patio has also been introduced. Additional visual interest could be provided by adding a bellyband midway along the north and south facades, which staff has included as a recommended condition. The addition of a mural to the north facade could also provide additional visual interest. 2. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements Chapter 20.13 ECDC contains specific landscaping requirements for new developments, which the ADB and Hearing Examiner are allowed to interpret and modify according to ECDC 20.13.000. Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 32 2.b 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 As conditioned, the proposed landscaping appears to be consistent with the requirements of the Street Tree Plan, ECDC 16.43.030 and ECDC 20.13. III. RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020, when approving proposed development applications, the ADB is required to find that the proposed development is consistent with the zoning ordinance, the design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, and the specific design criteria identified by the ADB during Phase 1 of the public hearing. Based on the findings, analysis, conclusions, and attachment to this report as well as the Phase 1 meeting materials, staff recommends that the Architectural Design Board APPROVE the proposal under File No. PLN2022-0085 with conditions as stated in the following recommended motion: THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ADOPTS THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND FINDS THAT THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE DESIGN CRITERIA IDENTIFIED DURING PHASE 1 OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF ECDC 22.43, AND APPROVES THE PROPOSAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS BUILDING AND ENGINEERING DIVISION AND SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENTS 9 & 11 OF THE JUNE 15 MEETING PACKET AND ATTACHMENT 8 TO THIS STAFF REPORT. 2. ANY MURALS WILL REQUIRE A SIGN PERMIT PER ECDC 20.60.015.C. 3. STREET -LEVEL WINDOWS ON BOTH BUILDINGS ALONG MAIN STREET MUST BE TRANSPARENT AND UNOBSTRUCTED CONSISTENT WITH ECDC 22.43.050.B. 4. ALL UTILITY CABINETS MUST BE RELOCATED, BURIED, SCREENED WITH VEGETATION, OR CAMOUFLAGED WITH ART TO REDUCE THEIR VISUAL IMPACT. 5. ADDITIONAL HANGING BASKETS AND STREET FURNITURE MUST BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK IF THERE IS SUFFICIENT ROOM BETWEEN OTHER REQUIRED FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND UTILITIES. 6. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INTEREST TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH FACADES BY INCLUDING A BELLY BAND MIDWAY ALONG THE NORTH FACADE AND ON THE SOUTH FACADE TO TIE OFF THE ENDS OF THE BRICK PILLARS. r�_NTAIul►[eleABWW-10A1N Ly3•7Sy.Wlaa16721ato] 9.[ 1I 1 1.11 Lai ilk] [e]:rgo] Avd,r_ld Al Ill, COMPLY WITH ECDC 18.70.030.D AND F. 8. STAFF WILL VERIFY COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH ALL RELEVANT CODES AND LAND USE PERMIT CONDITIONS THROUGH REVIEW OF BUILDING AND ENGINEERING PERMITS. MINOR CHANGES TO THE APPROVED DESIGN MAY BE APPROVED BY STAFF AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT WITHOUT FURTHER DESIGN REVIEW BY THE BOARD AS LONG AS THE DESIGN IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THAT ORIGINALLY APPROVED. Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 33 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.b IV. PARTIES OF RECORD City of Edmonds 121— 5t" Ave North Edmonds, WA 98020 Lynda Fireman 600 Bell St. #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Annette Border 600 Bell St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Dale Shoup 600 Bell St. Apt. 301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Greg Brewer Via email John & Jolene Smith Via email Michelle Dotsch Edmonds Resident Via email Theresa Hollis Edmonds Resident Via email Will Magnuson Edmonds, WA Via email Glenn Safadago Attn: GBH Holdings / Applicant Via email Phil Frisk Attn: PWF Architecture, LLC Via email Sea Breeze Condos C/O Cindy Bruce & Steve Beck Via email Kathy Brewer Via email Page 15 of 15 Packet Pg. 34 taim 7w I 0 111 � � � �S� � ®ice � - • _ z ���Mm IN mmi f *. � _ :tom^_ ��;�•,� .. ' �'�'+ _ •�. , F k. .. � :s• r Rom.-^"— � - :�'i•: '��'- _. �_ 3—'^�- �"�'—'S,p— fir"` '•l,�-�: ._-- - � - __-_ _- i S I � I � JI . III ► _��-.- - .._ :7i��- -_. � - __- _ a- _.- . ' Via.- + _.F 'd• . _- ; �� t Ls= 4y � ; OR Fil mwmmmw� w,r r ■ r'Y + If FF � t yF o' ■ ad LO 3 LA rJ 7 Co Q Packet Pg. 40 2.c Packet Pg. 42 2.d 6" CURB AT PROPERTY LINE A CONCRETE BOLLARDS 5' O.C. 70"x 70 " TRANSFORMER ELECTRIC METER BANK (20 METERS) 96 --- Cn —0 o O O W � 700 _ M ROOF OVERHANG, TYP. RETAINING WALL DOWN TO PARKING LEVEL 48" FENCE ON RETAINING WALL PARKING LEVEL BELOW ACCESS TO RISER ROOM STAIRS FROM SIDEWALK DOWN TO PARKING LEVEL 42" WIDE PLANTER 36"WIbE I I �I IW 0 to I- I I I - - 59.99' - 1 L_ 15.00' ALLEY COVERED PORCH AT STAIRWAY EXIT N89059'44"W 89.96' 0 0 Proposed (Building ON NTER' , RAMP DOWN 6" TO OVER D N RY TO COMMERCIAL SPJACE SIDEWALK CANOPY PROJECTS 4' INTO .O.W. 100 POST -MOUNTED CONVEX MIRROR 7' ABOVE GRADE 8' x I0' DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AT ALLEY LEVEL (3'-4" FROM ALLEY) m oLUwQQ QZ� Lu = v 9P v, 4u ELEVATION AT CORNER OF RECTANGLE ENCOMPASSING PROPOSED WORK, 4 LOC. LOW LANDSCAPING ONLY AT DRIVEWAY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SIGHT TRIANGLE FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC DASHED LINE INDICATES EXTENT OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT I � DASHED LINE IND AT: BUILDING OUTLINE ABOVE F 5T =L OR LEVEL, TYP. ROOF OVERI-IA MAX. 30" INTO SETBACK �II r24" WIDE LANDSCAPING ALONG DRIVEWAY N I ,;1 41'RAILINC; CANOPY PROJECTS �30" INTO SETBA K BENCH ENTRANCE TO �o 0 JI APARTMENT UNITS 90 0 M II \ Plaza it 10 5' �I y/ ij 36"WIDE PLANTER ALONG TERRACE ADA -COMPLIANT RAMP ' ir---_---106 2' CANTILEVER AT UPPER FLOOR LEVEL 89.96' LANDSCAPING BETWEEN BUILDING AND LEI S89°59'39"E OVERHANG 14" INTO PUBLIC R.O.W. / MAIN STREET;/ r i i o o� o i 6' FENCE AND LANDSCAPING AT EAST PROPERTY LINE 2 SNORT -TERM BICYCLE PARKING SPACES 4' FENCE AND LANDSCAPING BETWEEN -- SIDEWALK AND TERRACE - - - Site Plan Scale: 1" = 10' 1. See survey drawing for existing site conditions. 2. Parcel Numbers: 004342-098-039-00 (west parcel), 004342-098-037-00 (east parcel). 3. Site addresses: 605 & 611 Main Street. 4. Existing buildings to be demolished, new 24-unit, 3-story, Type VA, fully sprinklered (NFPA Type 13) apartment building proposed. 5. Total lot area: 9,889 square feet. 6. Total building area: approximately 18,000 square feet gross. 7. Zoning: Downtown Business, BD2 8. Average grade (97.8 + 99 + 101.9 + 106)/4 = 101.17' 9. Allowable building height = 101.17' + 30' = 131.17' 10. See landscape and civil drawings for additional proposed site improvements PO BOX Hl [AMS, WRSUWON MOO O 0 6 ) 9)0.3554 P WWW.PWIAPCHItIC1URE.00 �.Y Member of the American Institute of Architects 611 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 01.21004 1�t[: July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K WASHINGTON N01E: The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. S H [ [ t t 1 t 1 S: Site Plan SHEET NUMBER: Al mo 1 1 Packet Pg. 43 2.d Retaining Wall Landscaping UP Line of Building Above -1 ®®o UP � ®®o Riser G R Parking = 21 Stalls 3 Bicycles 100 00, UP 1Cvd W OC Storage LL Mech.:Elevator _ 0 D 14 Bicycles > APT _' 0----------�rJ Q 20' Driveway I� Im Ramp Up to Alley 0 I ParkingLevel Plan Scale: 1/4" = V-0" Retaining Wall 24" Wide Landscape Strip O Convex Mirror 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 PO BOX 141 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIARCHITECTURI.00 �.Y Member of the American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 01.21004 July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K- WASHINGTON ''I I[I. The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. STTTT TITI Parking Level SHEET NUMBER: Al 102 1 Packet Pg. 44 M N O N T E O N CD N cc a m CD X E cc T T 2.d Landscaping F I I Canopy DN I I i I I - I I �� e o I I � o I �IaD CUI Covered Entry Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' Office 11' x 14' DN Bike Bike DN Planter Planter Reception 14' x 20' Storage Storage Conference 12' x 22' Plaza N Cn E LL O Women 17'4// Parking Below Sliding Glass Door & 42" Railing 101 103 Studio _ Studio ADA if B" ADA if B" Partial Accessibility Partial Accessibility 520 SF I 475 SF Men 11' Ceiling11' Ceiling 9 I � I — 0 — — — E rt I I I I �— � 00 — 00 E —o -- L -- — � — — — -- Kitchen E 0 8' x 11' O 0 E I Closet I UP 00 Office 102 10' x 15' Studio 0 ADA "Type B" Partial Accessibility - - 430 SF Q0 11' Ceiling Elevator] DN I I L canopy J Bench Mail F Q Parking Access Ramp Below a� 0 CV V Level 1 Floor Plan Scale: 1/4" = V-0" 105 Studio ADA "Type B" Partial Accessibility 490 SF 11' Ceiling 0 OD 104 I 1-Bedroom ADA "Type A" I Fo Additional Accessibility h0 505 SF -" 11' Ceiling I b II l6'=6 L— Q) i_0/i Transformer,_„ 70" x 70" c5 O Front o ED U) L '- Q) m O J�Jb Covered Porch op 00 DN UP 0 Line of Building Above Bedroom 10'-6" x 11'-7" x PO BOX 141 IAOHS, WASUNCTON (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWEARCNITECTHI MITIMember of the American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: N 0 611 On Main " Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 C d PROJECT NUMBER: N 01.21004 a N E X July 31, 2023 O STAMP: REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K — WASHINGTON 1I T [ I. The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. REVISIONS: STEET TITI Level 1 Floor Plan Landscaping SHEET NUMBER: Al 03 1 Packet Pg. 45 2.d Sliding Glass Door & 42" Railing, typ. Level 2 Floor Plan Scale: 1 /4" = V-0" Sliding Glass Door & 42" Railing, typ. PO BOX 141 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIAPCHItICTURI.00 �.Y Member of the American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 01.21004 F. July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K — WASHINGTON ''I',!T[I. The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. STTTT TITI Level 2 Floor Plan M N O N T E O EL d N CD N cc a m CD E cc T T SHEET NUMBER: Al 104 1 Packet Pg. 46 2.d Level 3 Floor Plan Scale: 1 /4" = V-0" PO BOX 141 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIARCHITECTURI.00 �.Y Member of the American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 01.21004 F. July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K — WASHINGTON ''I',!T[I. The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. STTTT TITI Level 3 Floor Plan M N O N T E O EL d N CD N cc a m CD E cc T T SHEET NUMBER: Al 05 1 Packet Pg. 47 ARCPI TEC TURAL FARAFE T, T YF. FIBER CEMENT PANEL 3 + % " METAL REVEAL 3 ACTUAL OUILOING qT 132.17' (EXCEE03 MAX. ALLOWED 1'=O" FOR 0ECORATIVE ARCgITECTURAL FARAFET FEATURE) I.1? (�;i �')P�Qv7� MAX. BUILDING q 131.17' 2.d 0ECORA T I vE MEOAL L ION FANEL 3 4" BRICK VENEER ME TAL CANOFY FRECA3T CAFI TAL BRICK FILA5TER fROJECT3 I'; AREA OF WINDOW UNIT GLAZING, FIBER CEMS� IRE CA 3 T BA 3E ENTRY FROM 310EWALK OFFICE ENTRANCE OA3PEO LINE REFRE3ENTS 310EWALK South Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" /--I1 !I= —/--I 1=�✓= 1 VNk--- �-_—I N L /--I 1=�4. Y j=_ �_41 N/--I✓=-94---- /--1I Y 9 10' ABODE MAIN FLOOR Maximum building height 30' above average grade. Total glazing area between 2' above grade and 10' above main floor level: 295 SF (75.3% of 392 SF of wall area between 2' above grade and 10' above main floor level). 1:12 GOOF 3L OFE -\ L OW L AN03CAFI N6 AT FROFERT Y LINE North Elevation Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" WOOS FENCE TE FLANTER AVERAGE GRADE 1007' - WOOD TRIM f=ROJECT3 1 " BE FOND 310IN6i, T YF. MENT FANEL 3 + % " ME TAL RE VEAL 3 PO BOX III 1 0 NDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 920.3554 P WWW.PWIARCHItICTURI.00 Member of the American Institute of Architects P R 0 J I C I NAME. 611 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 01.21004 F. July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I �((� WASHINGTON NOTE The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. STTTI TITI North & South Elevationc. SHEET NUMBER: Al 06 1 Packet Pg. 48 2.d PEW 0 BOX III DM0N1)S, WASHINGTON 98020 206) 920.3554 P NWW.PWIARCHItICTURI.00 Member of the American Institute of Architects IROJICI NAME. 511 On Main Mixed -Use Building 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 'ROJECT NUMBER: D1.21004 F. July 31, 2023 REGISTERED ARCHITECT W. I K - WASHINGTON JOTS The information contained herein is intended to )e used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide :or construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted ndustry standards of construction. Any conflicts Nithin and between these documents and such ;odes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for ;larification as needed. �FTTT t I t East & West Elevations ;HEFT NUMBER: Al 107 1 Packet Pg. 49 M N O N T E O EL d N CD N cc a m CD E cc T T 2.d C) N O N L r O C 3 E O L 4m Qi C O U_ c �L d N N f3 t d d U1 D X C 2 r Q Packet Pg. 50 2.d PWF Architecture Landscaping UP Line of Building Above < —i — I i - Riser UP 6 COMPACT COMPACT EV EV EV EV EV EV � CAPABLE CAPABLE READY READY READY READY er,� w Q U ry Parking R } 21 Stalls w � 3 Bicycles w m w In EV UP EV READY U EV EV READY COMPACT Y" \ J 00 Storage co w J W Q Mech. 0 J � Elevator � > Q 14 Bicycles w Q U N ^ � W > J 0 w Q Q a 20' Driveway U-0 m Ramp Up to Alley 0 U JW In C J Retaining Wall 'os 'oQ 'o� 'o� � — _ 24" Wide Landscape Strip El Convex M � I n I „+ no.,+h Existing Encroachments POWER -BASEMENT LEVEL O SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PO BOX 141 E D M 0 N 0 S , WASHING10N 98020 (206)920.3554 P WWW,PWFARCHITECTUPI. C0M Member of the j' •�i American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 MAIN ST APTS 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 21067 DATE: October 31, 2021 is Electrical Consultants, Inc. 19015 36th Avenue West, Suite E Lynnwood, Washington 98036 Phone (425) 775-1799 FAX (425) 774-9870 NOTE; The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. SHEET TITLE: POWER - BASEMENT LEVEL M N 0 N E 0 4m 0 U N aD x O to al C fC L a a� 'o a M a a SNEEi NOYBER: E3,00 Packet Pg. 51 2.d Landscaping Dumpster Below Co o DN o Line of Building Above Transformer `L 70" x 70" Landscaping o ° DN Front Cn aD 0 L - Q CU E = m O .Q CU O Q C(1) G C U N J -0 C vered Porch a� > 0 U) U ni, r 10'x10' Line of Building Above DN Canopy Plaza c Bike Bike Bench DN � Parking Access Ramp Below a� 0 DN DN N Landscaping LIGHTING - LEVEL 1 N SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PWF Architecture PO BOX 141 EDMON0S, WASHING10N 98020 (206) 920A554 P WWW,PWFARCHITECTUPI.COM j ♦._ Member of the American Institute of Architects PROJECT NAME: 611 MAIN ST APTS 611 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 PROJECT NUMBER: 21067 DATE: October 31, 2021 IN Electrical Consultants, Inc. 19015 36th Avenue West, Suite E Lynnwood, Washington 98036 Phone (425) 775-1799 FAX (425) 774-9870 NOTE; The information contained herein is intended to be used in conjunction with shop drawings, approved submittals, diagrams, specifications, and any other documents as required as a guide for construction in a manner consistent with applicable codes and generally -accepted industry standards of construction. Any conflicts within and between these documents and such codes and standards shall be brought to the attention of the Architect prior to construction for clarification as needed. SHEET TITLE: LIGHTING - LEVEL 1 SNEEi NOIIBER: E 1 101 Packet Pg. 52 2.d FIBER CEMENT PANELS + %"METAL REVEALS DECORATIVE MEDALLION PANELS PRECAST CAP 4"BRICK VENEER PRECAST CAPITAL BRICK PILASTER PROJECTS I° TYP. PRECAST BASE ENTRY FROM SIDEWALK DASWED LINE REPRESENTS SIDEWALK OFFICE ENTRANCE 611 on Main Preliminary South Elevation July 24, 2023 PARAPET TYP. M N O N d C 7 E O L ACTUAL BUILDING WT. 132.17' (EXCEEDS MAX. ALLOWED 1'-0" FOR DECORATIVE ARCHITECTURAL PARAPET FEATURE, 'a 1:12 ROOF SLOPE MAX BUILDING WT. 131.17' --- - - - - -� — ---- c 0 Ll BER CEMENT 7 0 4 8 16 MEE MEN a IN PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 c .0 m x TWIRD FLOOR N a _ N IRNI d TE PLANTER AVERAGE GRADE I01.17' Packet Pg. 53 2.d M. [t" =nnC CI n=' CIQCG /`CMCAIT CDAAIC1 C . IL n MCTAI OCvC AI C TYC 611 on Main B P Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Preliminary East Elevation 206.920.3554 July 24, 2023 4 8 16 Packet Pg. 54 2.d 1. i1 =nnC ci nor' 611 on Main PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Preliminary West Elevation Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 July 24, 2023 0 4 8 16 Packet Pg. 55 2.d FIBER CEMEr I_n r^^r cl ^f- ✓VI II �/ILI\ LIYVLV�/VI\L � ✓I\IVI\ YI...IYL.L I\ VYlln I I\LV/"l �/I V/"ll LOW LANDSCAPING AT PROPERTY LINE 611 on Main Preliminary North Elevation July 24, 2023 0 4 8 16 PWF Architecture PO Box 141 Edmonds, Washington 98020 206.920.3554 WOOD TRIM PROJECTS I" BEYOND SIDING, TYP. `SENT PANELS + % "METAL REVEALS NER Packet Pg. 56 2.e SD SS G Z O N O 1.0 A 0) SD SS - G I 29.99' o � o i 59.99, N89°59'39"W 659.70' ,wv N IIVIP'%I IN V I I \LL I'll i O� ^o I 59.97' CB RIM = 99.38' SD SS SS I I\UVIUL `t A`t II\LL CRATE FROM OLYMPIC FOUNDRY (TYP.) (206) 764-6200 0 5 10 20 SCALE: 1 INCH =10 FEET G SS PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE/COMMENTS TIDCCc CITY APPROVED STREET TREE —THUJA OCCIDENTALIS 'SMARAGD' / EMERALD GREEN ARBORVITAE CL DI IQc CALAMAGROSTIS x ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER' / 'KARL FOERSTER' FEATHER REED GRASS ILEX CRENATA 'SKY PENCIL' / 'SKY PENCIL' HOLLY MAHONIA NERVOSA / LOW OREGON GRAPE GROUNDCOVER VINCA MINOR / COMMON PERIWINKLE NASSELA TENUISSIMA / MEXICAN FEATHER GRASS PLANTING NOTES: 2" CAL., SPECIMEN QUALITY, BRANCHED @ 4' 4-5' HT., B&B; PLANT ® 3 Y" O.C. 5 GAL. CONT., 18" MIN. HT., SPECIMEN QUALITY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 15-18" HT., FULL & BUSHY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 15-18" HT., FULL & BUSHY, PLANT ® 3' O.C. 1 GAL. POTS AS SHOWN 2 GAL. CONT., PLANT ® 30" O.C. 1. ALL PLANTS MUST BE HEALTHY, VIGOROUS MATERIAL, FREE OF PESTS AND DISEASE. 2. ALL PLANTS MUST BE CONTAINER GROWN OR BALLED AND BURLAPPED AS INDICATED IN THE PLANT LIST. 3. ALL TREES MUST BE STRAIGHT TRUNKED AND FULL HEADED AND MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED. 4. ALL PLANTS ARE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER INSTALLATION. 5. ALL TREES MUST BE GUYED OR STAKED AS SHOWN IN THE DETAILS. 6. ALL PLANTING AREAS MUST BE COMPLETELY MULCHED AS SPECIFIED, 2" DEPTH OF BARK MULCH. 7. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND SHALL AVOID DAMAGE TO ALL UTILITIES DURING THE COURSE OF THE WORK. LOCATIONS OF EXISTING BURIED UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE BASED UPON BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION AND ARE TO BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO (1) VERIFY THE LOCATIONS OF UTILITY LINES IN AND ADJACENT TO THE WORK AREA, (2) PROTECT ALL UTILITY LINES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, AND (3) REPAIR ANY AND ALL DAMAGE TO UTILITIES, STRUCTURES, SITE APPURTENANCES, ETC. WHICH OCCURS AS A RESULT OF THE LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION. 8. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING ALL QUANTITIES OF PLANTS REPRESENTED BY SYMBOLS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS BEFORE PRICING THE WORK. 9. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FULLY MAINTAINING ALL PLANTING (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: WATERING, SPRAYING, MULCHING, FERTILIZING, MOWING, ETC.) OF THE PLANTING AND LAWN AREAS UNTIL THE WORK IS ACCEPTED IN TOTAL BY THE OWNER. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETELY GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOR A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS BEGINNING ON THE DATE OF TOTAL ACCEPTANCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROMPTLY MAKE ALL REPLACEMENTS DURING THE NORMAL PLANTING SEASON. 11. AFTER BEING DUG AT THE NURSERY SOURCE, ALL TREES IN LEAF SHALL BE ACCLIMATED FOR TWO (2) WEEKS UNDER A MIST SYSTEM PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 12. ANY PLANT MATERIAL WHICH DIES, TURNS BROWN, OR DEFOLIATES (PRIOR TO TOTAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK) SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND REPLACED WITH MATERIAL OF THE SAME SPECIES, QUANTITY, AND SIZE AND MEETING ALL PLANT LIST SPECIFICATIONS. 13. STANDARDS SET FORTH IN "AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK" REPRESENT GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS ONLY AND SHALL CONSTITUTE MINIMUM QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANT MATERIAL. 14. SAFE, CLEARLY MARKED PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR ACCESS TO ALL ADJACENT PROPERTIES MUST BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. 15. DURING THE GROWING SEASON ALL ANNUALS SHALL REMAIN IN A HEALTHY, VITAL CONDITION THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 16. ALL PLANT MATERIALS QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETE COVERAGE OF ALL PLANTING BEDS AT SPACING SHOWN ON PLANT SCHEDULE. 17. ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE 12" OF TOPSOIL, SEE SPECIFIC SITE NOTE #20 FOR RAISED PLANTERS. 18. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS ARE TO BE WATERED VIA AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM (DESIGN —BUILD). PROVIDE SLEEVING 2x SIZE OF PIPE UNDER ALL HARDSCAPE AND THRU RAISED PLANTERS. 19. INSTALL A WEED BARRIER IN ALL LANDSCAPE BED AREAS AND ALL ROCK AREAS (SEE SPECIFICATIONS). 20. RAISED PLANTERS TO RECEIVE DRAINAGE ROCK AND TUBING, TIE—IN TO STORM WATER SYSTEM. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO PROVIDE FILTER FABRIC BEFORE INSTALLING 18" OF CEDAR GROVE'S LIGHTWEIGHT #2 BLEND. Know what's below Call before you dig. 0 � O J Q H �+ U 00 m W 0 \ V) w IL W D_ � a Z .� 3 I • I I 'I • / I 00 O 00 T ul r, N Lf N M 0 L m ra ul M WA4�fi ���' Orl EXPIRES: 6/28/2025 N 0 W R W o a 0- Z � z � a � Q � � 0 Q r r Z O J � W L-1 .0 M N O N T a� c 0 c 0 U 2 N d y R s a a� c c 0 T T m a m 0. m u c 0 J c CD u m 2.e LANDSCAPE DETAILS "✓ 6 PLAN 8" 2-PLY RUBBER HOSE DOUBLE STRAND 12 GAUGE WIRE COVERED W 2-PLY RUBBER HOSE PAINTED FLUORESCENT ORANGE WHITE FLAGGING (TYP.) TREE WRAP 2 INCHES MULCH 1 4 INCH DEEP SAUCER 8' STEEL TEE POST c° BACKFILL MIX (V UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL REMOVE BURLAP & ROPE FROM TOP 1/3 OF THE BALL NOTE: SEE LANDSCAPE NOTES FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH MATERIAL TO USE. 1 TREE PLANTING N.T.S. CHES MULCH E LANDSCAPE NOTES TYPE OF MULCH ) 1RU6 IS B & B, THEN DVE BURLAP & ROPE d TOP 1/3 OF BALL (FILL MIX STURBED SUBSOIL 2 SHRUB PLANTING N.T.S. GROUND COVER PLANTING SOIL ROOT BALL 12„ MULCH OR E.Q. TO PLANT SPACING HARD SURFACE c (( �.i-,t =i, vim``=-�, p ° JI III-1I II i III III III III D ° ll-1II-1I1=1 NOTE: TAPER MULCH THICKNESS DOWN TO TOP OF ROOT MASS. AGROUND COVER DETAIL (4" POTS AND SMALLER) NO SCALE STEEL LANDSCAPE EDGING RIVER ROCK 2" MULCH AREA TOPSOIL 0 0 0 IRRIGATION DETAILS METER METER NOTE: FOR INSTALLATION OF POINT OF CONNECTION WITHIN A STRUCTURE REFER TO THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND MECHANICAL ENGINEER / CONTRACTOR. BOX AMETEK ECONOMY TURF BOX 6 GATE P.V.C. SLEEVE VALV -UNION 8" 12 POINT OF CONNECTION NO SCALE NOTE: ALL FITTINGS TO BE GALV. PAINT ALL GALVANIZED PIPE WITH ONE COAT CARBON ELASTIC PAINT BOX AMETEK 12" JUMBO BOX `V I DOUBLE CHECK BOX AMETEK STANDARD BOX TRIPPLE N SWING JOINT UNION BUNION ELL ELL 1" QUICK °O COUPLER ECv 11 4 LJI LIB YL`U pLL _ PEA G FT 3>, NIPPLEEAAND ELL C 4- 6" X 6" X 16"a 2 C /FT CONCRETE BLOCK PEA GRAVEL SCH. 80 MALE ADAPTER MAIN LINE �� EL 0 4" DIAMETER DRAIN LINE (AS REQUIRED) RUN TO DAY LIGHT PRESSURE QUICK REDUCING COUPLING BACKFLOW PREVENTER VALVE VALVE TEST COCKS TO FACE UP FOR TESTING TO BE SET FOR FOR WINTERIZATION +/- 70 PSI. BLOW-OUT AND CUT IN DETAIL PRESSURE TESTING POINT OF CONNECTION INSTALLATION OF POINT OF CONNECTION OUTSIDE OF STRUCTURE PVC MINIMUM TWO TIMES THE DIAMETER / 18" 24" SLEEVE OF PIPE TO BE INSERTED INTO SLEEVE. J TYP. TYP. PLANTER �j / MAIN OR LATERAL WIRE _ — STUB -UP AND PLUG PLANTER PAVING WIRE SLEEVE (MINIMUM OF TWO INCHES CURB DIAMETER.) CURB BUILDING 18 24 TYP. YP. ENTRY WIRE SLEEVE WALK WIRE, MAIN OR LATERAL SLEEVE I MAIN OR LATERAL w ¢ w CURB © 24" �18" © Z � Z TYP. TYP. SIDEWALKc1f WIRE SLEEVE CURB LINE OF CURB CURB OR WALK PLANTING PAVING e TYpICA� Igo � IRRIGATION FLAG TAPE CLOSED VERTICAL STUB -OUT MARKER PIPE OR 1. IRRIGATION WIRE TRENCH a , OR 2. METALIC TAPE O \ a N> � � o METALIC TAPE U RRIGATION WIRE SLEE PVC VE MAIN LINE OR LATERAL LINE PVC ELL p TYPICAL SLEEVING DETAIL NO SCALE w w P5 PVC SUPPLY HEADER TOP OF SLOPE AIR VACUUM RELIEF ASSEMBLY LIN FLUSHING VALVE ASSEMBLY LATERAL TUBING PVC EXHAUST HEADER TOE OF SLOPE CONVENTIONAL SPACING ON TOP 2/3 OF SLOPE —REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY WITH DISC FILTER CONVENTIONAL SPACING AND PRV PLUS 25% ON BOTTOM 1/3 OF SLOPE NOTE: ALIGN LATERALS PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS OF THE SLOPE © SLOPE FEED LAYOUT DETAIL - N.T.S. 3" 12" SIDEWALK, CURB, ETC. / 12" MAX. ° 4 / SCH. 40 PVC ELBOW PVC SUPPLY LINE (SxSxT) FITTING QUICK COUPLING VALVE SET FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE IN LAWN AREA 3" ABOVE FINISH GRADE IN OTHER AREAS FINISH GRADE LAWN AREAS FINISH GRADE SHRUB AREAS A,=_II Il- 12" ROUND PLASTIC BOX AND COVER STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP SIZE AND LENGTH AS REQUIRED SCH. 80 PVC NIPPLE PEA GRAVEL SCH, 40 PVC STREET ELBOW SCH. 80 PVC NIPPLE SIZE AND LENGTH AS REQUIRED PVC SUPPLY LINE SCH. 40 PVC STREET ELBOW 1-1/2" PVC PIPE STAKE (SCH. 40 MIN. 36" LONG OR AS SITE REQUIRES NOTE: USE TEFLON TAPE ON ALL THREADED FITTINGS TYPICAL QUICK COUPLING VALVE ASSEMBLY NO SCALE BOX TO BE PLACED AT RIGHT ANGLE TO SIDEWALK, CURB, ETC, HARDSCAPE EDGE 12" OR AS NOTED 12"X18" PLASTIC BOX AND COVER WITH LOCK TOP N D CURL TYPE EXPANSION LOOP (MIN 24") WATERPROOFED WIRE CONNECTION % % X : % I- CHRISTY'S I.D. TAG (STANDARD), x x x x x% NON -PRESSURE SECURE TO SOLENOID x x LINE FITTING PIGTAIL FINISH GRADE 3/4" n LAWN AREA o>, ' " PVC LINE PIPE FINISH GRADE SHRUB AREA /i %``' o0o SOLENOID Ca6 0 3' 08 0 0 o o o0 0� FLOW ADJUSTMENT 12" MAX. o� o� o '°o TOP OF VALVE o q� o o p o PEA GRAVEL (MIN. 3 Cu. FT.) 18" MIN. PVC SCH. 40 MALE ADAPTOR (TYP. 2 PLACES) PVC LINE PIPE PVC ELBOW PVC LINE PIPE PVC SUPPLY LINE FITTING(SxSxT) COMMON WIRE NOTE: CONTROL WIRE 1. VALVES ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN SHRUB AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. WHEN MORE THAN ONE VALVES IS LOCATED IN THE SAME AREA, PROVIDE A SPACE A MIN. OF 3 FEET APART. 3. USE TEFLON TAPE ON ALL THREADED FITTINGS. TYPICAL REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY NO SCALE (STRAIGHT TYPE) LOW VOLUME APPLICATION COMPONENTS LINE FLUSHING VALVE #F-TLFV-1 COMPRESSION RING BLANK TL (TYP.) LATERAL (OR EXHAUST HEADER) TEE ) 0O o� ASTALLLOPER SPECS) °OO �_/o�—o SHUT-OFF VALVE /4' GRAVEL UMP #TLSOV (BLANK 1 CUBIC FOOT TUBING MAY BE ATTACHED TO OUTLET) BRICK SUPPORTS (THREE) E LINE FLUSHING VALVE SECTION - N.T.S. FINISH GRADE . 180 2-WAY TEE SEE SPECS TUBING II 1 I� SEE SPECS 3/4" SCH 80 PVC NIPPLES PVC TEE (SxSxT) PVC PIPING F START CONNECTION W P VC R I S E R SECTION - N.T.S. 3/4" DISC FILTER PVC MAINLINE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE 1" FPT 3/4" PRV 45 PSI LF I LO 2" MINIMUM CLEARANCE PVC OR POLY O OO OO OO OO O OO OO OO OO OO O LATERAL LINE O o0 00 I 0 16 00 O o0 00 00 06 0(1 c �O0000000000 C0000000000c OooOo000OHO00000 oOroOroOroOro ro Ij 1" x 3/4" SCH 40 BRICK SUPPORT 1 CU. FT. PEA RED BUSHING TxT 12" x 18" (1- EA. CORNER) GRAVEL SUMP VALVE BOX LOW FLOW ZONE CONTROL VALVE KIT N.T.S. 10 MULCH 3 �2 FINISH GRADE 4 ( GRATED CAP ® HUNTER 0.25 or 0.50 GPM PCB BUBBLER (OPTIONAL) 2 �5 HUNTER HCV CHECK VALVE 9 (OPTIONAL) 5 © PATENTED STRATA ROOT SYSTEM 07 HUNTER SWING JOINT 6 (OPTIONAL) ® LATERAL TEE OR ELL/PIPE 09 ROOT INTRUSION BARRIER / �/ o NOTE: INSTALL HUNTER 9 000 00000 FILTER SLEEVE- #RZWS-SLEEVE 18" AND 36" ROOT ZONE WATERIN�GS YSTEM (RZWS) M DETAIL - N.T.s. MTI1ft' IRRIGATION DETAIL FINISH GRADE 6" ROUND VALVE BOX AIR VACUU RELI F VALVE 3/4"M x 1 /2"F Tx REDUCTION BUSHING 3/4" PVC COUPLING (TxT) 3/4" SCH 80 RISE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) BRICK SUPPORTS 04O ov (THREE) �°�O �^ n 3/4" CRUSHED l O o00 o O o GRAVEL SUMP POLY TUBING CLAMPED TO PVC STAINLESS STEEL INSERT FITTING CLAMPS AIR/VACUUM RELIEF (PLUMBED TO POLY) TO POLY) SECTION -N.T.S. SECTION - N.T.S(P�LUMBED MANUAL FLUSH VALVE PLUMBED TO PVC OR POLY (TYP) ��Llil] GCi 11] \'■ �ZI:I:IIi.`I ■:I �:11] � Gi PERIMETER LATERALS 2" TO 4" FROM EDGE Techline® CV DRIPLINE Techline® START CONNECTION REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH DISC FILTER AND PRV PVC OR POLY SUPPLY HEADER AREA PERIMETER START CONNECTION PIER Techline CV CENTER FEED LAYOUT 44METAFIM" J NOT TO SCALE DETAIL — C102 '"ISH GRADE SPECS FOR DEPTH SEE PLANS FOR LATERAL SPACING SUB GRADE H SUBGRADE INSTALLATION N.T.S. MANUAL FLUSH VALVE PLUMBED TO PVC OR POLY Techline® CV DRIPLINE Techline® START CONNECTION MALE ADAPTER EXHAUST HEADER Techline@ TEE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE WITH DISC FILTER AND PRV AREA PERIMETER SUPPLY HEADER Techline CV IRREGULAR AREAS: Triangular 44NETAFIMTM K NOT TO SCALE DETAIL — C104 N Cu 0 0 Q c N 00 \ 12 m V w m m Iu N N v G N 00 LO o T_ oo T CD E; I c Ln N — CD 7 . �o M 00 0 +•' 0 ... < a� c co CD 2 ' — fu N d N o z L U 6 x � M 2 c c 0 IL Q C,1 N } r` N C��ry 3-. u 8 ,f E WRCHV 7 C,1 j m U / T. SHAWN PARSONS s EXPIRES:6/28/202S 0 Q CO `Q 1 W 0 o Z W o W o I— � Q ca Z TE co Z a Q c 0 r 0 ^W Q 1.� W rU^ VJ Z Q J L=2.0 Know what's below Call before you dig. I Packet Pg. 58 2.f Design Guidelines Checklist This checklist is intended as a summary of the issues addressed by the guidelines. It is not meant to be a regulatory device or a substitute for the language and examples found in the guidelines themselves. Rather, it is a tool for assisting the determination about which guidelines are the most applicable on a particular site. A. Site Planning N/A Lower Priority Higher Priority 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics ❑ ❑ 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics ❑ ❑ 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street ❑ ❑ 4. Encourage human activity on street ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites ❑ ❑ 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy and interaction (residential projects) ❑ ❑ 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential projects) ❑ ❑ Ndf 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property ❑ ❑ 12( 9. Discourage parking in street front ❑ ❑ 10.Orient building to corner and parking away from corner on public street fronts (corner lots) ❑ ❑ B. Bulk and Scale N/A Lower Higher Priority Priority 1. provide sensitive transitions to nearby, less- ❑ ❑ intensive zones Packet Pg. 59 2.f C. Architectural Elements and Materials N/A Lower Priority Higher Priority 1. Complement positive existing character and/or respond to nearby historic structures ❑ ❑ 2. Unified architectural concept ❑ ❑ 3. Use human scale and human activity ❑ ❑ 4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish materials ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize garage entrances ❑ ❑ D. Pedestrian Environment N/A Lower Priority Higher Priority 1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected pedestrian entry ❑ ❑ 2. Avoid blank walls ❑ ❑ 3. Minimize height of retaining walls ❑ 9 ❑ 4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on pedestrian areas ❑ ❑ 5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures ❑ ❑ 6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas ❑ ❑ Id 7. Consider personal safety ❑ ❑ E. Landscaping N/A Lower Higher Priority Priority 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of ❑ ❑ neighborhood 2. Landscape to enhance the building or site ❑ ❑ 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site ❑ ❑ conditions Packet Pg. 60 2.f Applying the Design Guidelines When designing projects and issuing permits for new developments, applicants and City staff will rely on these guidelines to help define specific design conditions that will be required for project approval. As these design guidelines get applied to particular development projects, some important things to remember are: 1. Each project is unique and will pose unique design issues. Even two similar proposals on the same block may face different design considerations. With some projects, trying to follow all of the guidelines could produce irreconcilable conflicts in the design. With most projects, reviewers will find some guidelines more important than others, and the guidelines that are most important on one project might not be important at all on the next one. The design review process will help designers and reviewers to determine which guidelines are most important in the context of each project so that they may put the most effort into accomplishing the intent of those guidelines. 2. Project must be reviewed in the context of their zoning and the zoning of y their surroundings. The use of design guidelines is not intended to change the zoning designations of land where projects are proposed; it is intended x to demonstrate methods of treating the appearance of new projects to 2 help them fit their neighborhoods and to provide the Code flexibility necessary to accomplish that. Where the surrounding neighborhood exhibits a lower development intensity than is current zoning allow, the o lower -intensity character should not force a proponent to significantly reduce the allowable size of the new building. 3. Many of the guidelines suggest using the existing context to determine appropriate solutions for the project under consideration. In some areas, the existing context is not well defined, or may be undesirable. In such cases, the new project should be recognized as a pioneer with the opportunity to establish a pattern or identity from which future development can take its cues. In light of number 2 above, the site's zoning should be considered an indicator of the desired direction for the area and the project. 4. Each guideline includes examples and illustrations of ways in which that guidelines can be achieved. The examples are just that — examples. They are not the only acceptable solution. Designers and reviewers should consider designs, styles and techniques not described in the examples but that fulfill the guideline. 5. The checklist which follows the guidelines (Checklist) is a tool for determining whether or not a particular guideline applies to a site, so that the guidelines may be more easily prioritized. The checklist is neither a regulatory device, nor a substitute for evaluating a sites conditions, or to summarize the language of examples found in the guidelines themselves. ATTACHMENT 14 1 Packet Pg. 61 2.f Considering the Site Edmond's Land Use Code sets specific, prescriptive rules that are applied uniformly for each land use zone throughout the city. There is little room in the Code's development standards to account for unique site conditions or neighborhood contexts. A project architect can read the Code requirements and theoretically design a building without ever visiting the site. However, to produce good compatible design, it is critical that the project's design team examine the site and its surrounding, identify the key design features and determine how the proposed project can address the guidelines' objectives. Because they rely on the project's context to help shape the project, the guidelines encourage an active viewing of the site and its surroundings. For a proposal located on a street with a consistent and distinctive architectural character, the architectural elements of the building may be key to helping the building fit the neighborhood. On other sites with few attractive neighboring buildings, the placement of open space and treatment of pedestrian areas may be the most important concerns. The applicant and the project reviewers should consider the following questions and similar ones related to context when looking at the site: What are the key aspects of the streetscape? (The street's layout and x visual character) Are there opportunities to encourage human activity and neighborhood interaction, while promoting residents' privacy and physical security? o How can vehicle access have the least effect on the pedestrian environment and on the visual quality of the site? Are there any special site planning opportunities resulting from the site's N configuration, natural features, topography etc.? What are the most important contextual concerns for pedestrians? How U could the sidewalk environment be improved? Does the street have characteristic landscape features, plant materials, that could be incorporated into the design? c� Are there any special landscaping opportunities such as steep' topography, significant trees, greenbelt, natural area, park or boulevard c that should be addressed in the design? . Do neighboring buildings have distinctive architectural style, site configuration, architectural concept? E Packet Pg. 62 2.f A-1: Responding to Site Characteristics The siting of buildings should respond to specific site conditions and opportunities such as non -rectangular lots, location on prominent intersections, unusual topography, significant vegetation and other natural features. Explanations and Examples Site characteristics to consider in project design include: 1) Topography • Reflect, rather than obscure, natural topography. For instance, buildings should be designed to "step up" hillsides to accommodate significant changes in elevation. • Where neighboring buildings have responded to similar topographic conditions in their sites in a consistent and positive way, consider similar treatment for the new structure. • Designing the building in relation to topography may help to reduce the visibility of parking garages. 2) Environmental constraints • Site buildings to avoid or lessen the impact of development on environmentally critical areas such as steep slopes, wetlands and stream corridors. 3) Solar orientation • The design of a structure and its massing on the site can enhance solar 2 exposure for the project and minimize shadow impacts on adjacent structures o and public areas. 4) Existing vegetation `° • Careful siting of buildings can enable significant or important trees or other vegetation to be preserved. 5) Existing structures on the site Where a new structure shares a site with an existing structure or is a major addition to an existing structure, designing the new structure to be compatible with the original structure will help it fit in. A-2: Streetscape Compatibility The siting of buildings should acknowledge and reinforce the existing desirable spatial characteristics of the right-of-way. Explanation and Examples The character of a neighborhood is often defined by the experience of traveling along its streets. We often perceive streets within neighborhoods as individual spaces or "rooms." How buildings face and are set back from the street determine the character and proportion of this room. Packet Pg. 63 2.f A-3: Entrances Visible from the Street Entries should be clearly identifiable and visible from the street. Explanation and Examples Entries that are visible from the street make a project more approachable and create a sense of association among neighbors. A-4: Human Activity New development should be sited and designed to encourage human activity on the street. Explanation and Examples Livelier street edges make for safer streets. Ground floor shops and market spaces providing services needed by residents can attract market activity to the street and increase safety through informal surveillance. Entrances, porches, awnings, balconies, decks, seating and other elements can promote use of the street front and provide places for neighborly interaction. Siting decisions should consider the importance of these features in a particular context and allow for their incorporation. Also, architectural elements and details can add to the interest and excitement of buildings and spaces. Elements from the following list should be incorporated into all projects. Projects in pedestrian oriented areas of the City should include an even greater number of these details due to the scale of the buildings and the proximity of the people that will experience them. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets Belt courses Plinths for columns Kickplate for storefront window Projecting sills Tilework Transom or clerestory windows Planter box Variations in applied ornament, materials, colors or trim. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent. Packet Pg. 64 2.f In pedestrian oriented areas, ground floor commercial space is encouraged to be at grade with the sidewalk. If the entrance can not be located at the grade of the sidewalk, special care must be taken to ensure that there is both a visual and physical connection between the pedestrian way and the entrance that enhances the pedestrian orientation of the building. The ground level fagades of buildings that are oriented to street fronts in the CW, BC, BN, and BP zones shall have transparent windows to engage the public. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. Where transparency is not provided, the fagade shall comply with the guidelines under the section 'Treating Blank Walls'. In the Downtown Commercial Core The ground level fagades of buildings that are oriented to streets should have a substantial amount of transparent windows, especially in the retail core. A primary function of the pedestrian oriented retail core is to allow for the visual interaction between the walking public and the goods and services businesses located on the first floor are providing. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. Where transparency is not provided, the fagade shall comply with the guidelines under the section 'Treating Blank Walls'. Buildings that are entirely residential do not have a specific transparency requirement. However, all -residential buildings shall be treated as if they have blank walls facing the street and must comply with the guidelines under the section 'Treating Blank Walls'. That portion of Ground level spaces that opens up to the , sidewalk through means of sliding or roll up doors shall be considered to comply with any transparency requirements regardless of the amount of glass in the opening. Awnings are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. They may be structural (permanently attached to and part of the building) or non-structural (attached to the building using a metal or other framework). To enhance the visibility of business signage retractable awnings are encouraged and should be open -sided. Front valances are permitted and signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns. Marquee, box, or convex awning shapes are not permitted. Awnings should be located within the building elements that frame storefronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings should also be hung just below a clerestory or "transom" C c 0 co N StandardL< i Y v as U N N a� Boxi c a� .y m 0 LO c Convexi d E M. 0 a . c m Marquee Packet Pg. 65 2.f window, if it exists. Awnings on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale and position, but need not be identical. Non-structural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high - gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are not permitted. Structural Awnings should be designed to incorporate natural light. Artificial lighting should only be used at night. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Combinations of sign types are encouraged which result in a coordinated design while minimizing the size of individual signs. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements are encouraged. This type of detail is consistent with the design elements mentioned above that enhance the interest of the area. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering. Signage in the "Arts Center Corridor" defined in the Comprehensive Plan is required to include decorative sign frames or brackets in its design. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or contributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places A-5: Respect for Adjacent Sites Buildings should respect adjacent properties by being located on their sites to minimize disruption of the privacy and outdoor activities of residents in adjacent buildings. Explanation and Examples One consideration is the views from upper stories of new buildings into adjacent houses or yards, especially in less intensive zones. This problem can be addressed in several ways. Reduce the number of windows and decks on the proposed building overlooking the neighbors. Step back the upper floors or increase the side or rear setback so that window areas are farther from the property line. Take advantage of site design which might reduce impacts, for example by using adjacent ground floor area for an entry court. Minimize windows to living spaces which might infringe on the privacy of adjacent residents, but consider comfort of residents in the new building. Stagger windows to not align with adjacent windows. Packet Pg. 66 2.f A-6: Transition Between Residence and Street For residential projects, the space between the building and the sidewalk should provide security and privacy for residents and encourage social interaction among residents and neighbors. Explanation and Examples The transition between a residential building and the street varies with the depth of the front setback and the relative elevation of the building to the street. A-7: Residential Open Space Residential projects should be sited to maximize opportunities for creating usable, attractive, well -integrated open space. Examples and Explanations Residential buildings are encouraged to consider these site planning elements: Courtyards which organize architectural elements, while providing a common garden or other uses. Entry enhancement such as landscaping along a common pathway. A-8: Parking and Vehicle Access Siting should minimize the impact of automobile parking and driveways on the pedestrian environment, adjacent properties and pedestrian safety. Explanation and Examples Techniques used to minimize the impacts of driveways and parking lots include: Locate surface parking at rear or side lots. Break large parking lots into smaller ones. Minimize number and width of driveways and curb cuts. Share driveways with adjacent property owners. Locate parking in lower level or less visible portions of site. Locate driveways so they are visually less dominant. Access should be provided in the following order of priority: 1 i) If there is an alley, vehicular access should use the alley. Where feasible, the exit route should use the alley. 'V'5'fwz 3 /N Packet Pg. 67 2.f ii) For corner parcels, access should be off the secondary street rather than the primary street. iii) Share the driveway with an adjacent property. This can be a driveway with two-way traffic. iv) A driveway serving a single project is the least preferred option. Drive -through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores, espresso stands, etc., should comply with the following: i) Drive -through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the building that face a street. ii) Drive -through speakers shall not be audible off -site. iii) The entrance and exit from the drive -through shall be internal to the site, not a separate entrance and/or exit to or from the street. A-9: Location of Parking on Commercial Street Fronts Parking on a commercial street front should be minimized and where possible should be located behind a building. Explanation and Examples Parking located along a commercial street front where pedestrian traffic is desirable lessens the attractiveness of the area to pedestrians and compromises the safety of pedestrians along the street. A-10: Corner Lots Building on corner lots should be oriented to the corner and public street fronts. Parking and automobile access should be located away from corners. Explanation and Examples Corner lots offer unique opportunities because of their visibility and access from two streets. (above and below) Corner lot treatments. Page 10 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 68 2.f B-1: Bulk, and Scale Compatibility Projects should be compatible with the scale of development anticipated by the applicable Land Use Policies for the surrounding area and should be sited and designed to provide a sensitive transition to near -by, less intensive zones. Projects on zone edges should be developed in a manner that creates a step in perceived bulk, and scale between anticipated development potential of the adjacent zones. Explanation and Examples For projects undergoing Design Review, the analysis and mitigation of bulk and scale impacts will be accomplished through the Design Review process. Careful siting and design treatment based on the technique described in this and other design guidelines will help to mitigate some bulk and scale impacts; in other cases, actual reduction in the bulk and scale of a project may be necessary to adequately mitigate impacts. Design Review should not result in significant reductions in a project's actual bulk and scale. Bulk and scale mitigation may be required in two general circumstances: 1. Projects on or near the edge of a less intensive zone. A substantial -� incompatibility in scale may result from different development standards in the x two zones and may be compounded by physical factors such a s large development sites, slopes or lot orientation. 2. Projects proposed on sites with unusual physical characteristics such as large lot size, or unusual shape, or topography where buildings may appear o substantially greater in bulk and scale than that generally anticipated for the area. Factors to consider in analyzing potential bulk and scale impacts include: distance from the edge of a less intensive zone differences in development standards between abutting zones (allowable building width, lot coverage, etc.) effect of site size and shape bulk and scale relationships resulting from lot orientation (e.g. back lot lineto back lot line vs. back lot line to side lot line) type and amount of separation between lots in the different zones (e.g. separation by only a property line, by an alley or street, or by other physical features such as grade changes). Page 11 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 69 2.f In some cases, careful siting and design treatment may be sufficient to achieve reasonable transition and mitigation of bulk and scale impacts. Some techniques for achieving compatibility are as follows: use of architectural style, details (such as roof lines or fenestration), color or materials that derive from the less intensive zone. (See also Guideline C-1: Architectural Context.) creative use of landscaping or other screening location of features on -site to facilitate transition, such as locating required open space on the zone edge so the building us farther from the lower intensity zone. treating topographic conditions in ways that minimize impacts on neighboring development, such as by using a rockery rather than a retaining wall to give a more human scale to a project, or stepping a project down a hillside. in a mixed -use project, siting the more compatible use near the zone edge. In some cases, reductions in the actual bulk and scale of the proposed structure may be necessary in order to mitigate adverse impacts and achieve an acceptable level of compatibility. Some techniques which can be used in these cases include: articulating the building's facades vertically or horizontally in intervals that conform to existing structures or platting pattern. increasing building setbacks from the zone edge at ground level reducing the bulk of the building's upper floors limiting the length of, or otherwise modifying, facades reducing the height of the structure reducing the number or size of accessory structures. C-1: Architectural Context New buildings proposed for existing neighborhoods with a well-defined and desirable character should be compatible with or complement the architectural character and siting pattern of neighboring buildings. Explanation and Examples Paying attention to architectural characteristics of surrounding buildings, especially historic buildings, can help new buildings be more compatible with their neighbors, especially if a consistent pattern is already established by similar: building articulation building scale and proportion or complementary architectural style or complementary roof forms building details and fenestration patterns or complementary materials Even where there is no consistent architectural pattern, building design and massing can be used to complement certain physical conditions of existing development. In some cases, the existing context is not so well-defined, or may be undesirable. In such cases, a new project can become a pioneer with the opportunity to establish a pattern or identity from which future development can take its cues. co Page 12 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 70 2.f In most cases, especially in the downtown commercial area, Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base' and 'top'. Abase' can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth' above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Architectural Features Below are several methods that can help integrate new buildings into the surrounding architectural context, using compatible: architectural features fenestration patterns, and - building proportions. Building Articulation Below are several methods in which buildings may be articulated to create intervals which reflect and promote compatibility with their surroundings: modulating the facade by stepping back or extending forward a portion of the facade repeating the window patterns at an interval that equals the articulation interval providing a porch, patio, deck or covered entry for each interval providing a balcony or bay window for each interval changing the roofline by alternating dormers, stepped roofs, gables or other roof elements to reinforce the modulation or articulation interval changing the materials with a change in the building plane providing a lighting fixture, trellis, tree or other landscape feature with each interval C-2: Architectural Concept and Consistency Building design elements, details and massing should create a well-proportioned and unified building form and exhibit an overall architectural concept. Buildings should exhibit form and features identifying the functions within the building. In general, the roofline or top of the structure should be clearly distinguished from its facade walls. Explanation and Examples This guideline focuses on the important design consideration of organizing the many architectural elements of a building into a unified whole, so that details and features can be seen to relate to the structure and not appear as add-ons. The other objective of this guideline is to promote buildings whose form is derived from its function. Buildings which present few or no clues through their design as to what purpose they serve are often awkward architectural neighbors. For example, use of expansive blank walls, extensive use of metal or glass siding, or extremely large or small windows in a residential project may create architectural confusion Is middle base Page 13 of 22 Attachment 12 Revised by ADB 311/06 Packet Pg. 71 2.f or disharmony with its neighbors. Conversely, commercial buildings which overly mimic residential styles might be considered inappropriate in some commercial neighborhoods. Often times, from an architectural design perspective buildings will convey a visually distinct base' and 'top'. Abase' can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth' above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Other architectural features included in the design of a building may include any number of the following: building modulation or articulation bay windows corner accent, such as a turret garden or courtyard elements (such as a fountain or gazebo) rooflines building entries building base Architectural details may include some of the following: treatment of masonry (such as ceramic tile inlay, paving stones, or alternating brick patterns) treatment of siding (such as wood siding 000000-0 combined with shingles to differentiate 14 floors) articulation of columns sculpture or art work architectural lighting detailed grilles and railings �® special trim details and moldings a trellis or arbor top base co Page 14 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 72 2.f C-3: Human Scale The design of new buildings should incorporate architectural features, elements and details to achieve a good human scale. Explanation and Examples The term "human scale" generally refers to the use of human -proportioned architectural features and site design elements clearly oriented to human activity. A building has a good human scale if its details, elements and materials allow people to feel comfortable using and approaching it. Features that give a building human scale also encourage human activity. The following are some of the building elements that may be used to achieve better human scale: pedestrian -oriented open space such as a courtyard, garden, patio, or other unified landscaped areas bay windows extending out from the building face that reflect an internal space such as a room or alcove individual windows in upper stories that o are approximately the size and proportion of a traditional window x o include a trim or molding that appears substantial from the sidewalk o are separated from adjacent windows by a vertical element windows grouped together to form larger areas of glazing can have a human scale if individual window units are separated by moldings or jambs o windows with small multiple panes of glass window patterns, building articulation and other treatments that help to identify individual residential units in a multi -family building w upper story setbacks a porch or covered entry pedestrian weather protection in the form of canopies, awnings, arcades or other elements wide enough to protect at least one person visible chimneys C-4: Exterior Finish Materials Building exteriors should be constructed of durable and maintainable materials that are attractive even when viewed up close. Materials that have texture, pattern, or lend themselves to a high quality of detailing are encouraged. Explanation and Examples The selection and use of exterior materials is a key ingredient in determining how a building will look. Some materials, by their nature, can give a sense of permanence or can provide texture or scale that helps new buildings fit better in their surroundings. Page 15 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 73 2.f Materials typical to the northwest include: clear or painted wood siding shingles brick stone ceramic and terra-cotta tile Many other exterior building materials may be appropriate in multifamily and commercial neighborhoods as long as the materials are appropriately detailed and finished, for instance, to take account of the northwest's climate or be compatible with nearby structures. Some materials, such as mirrored glass, may be more difficult to integrate into residential or neighborhood commercial settings. D-1: Pedestrian Open Spaces and Entrance Convenient and attractive access to the building's entry should be provided. To ensure comfort and security, paths and entry areas should be sufficiently lighted and entry areas should be protected from the weather. Opportunities for creating lively, pedestrian -oriented open space should be considered. Explanation and Examples If a building is set back from the sidewalk, the space between the building and public right-of-way may be conducive to pedestrian or resident activity. In business districts where pedestrian activity is desired, the primary function of any open space between commercial buildings and the sidewalk is to provide visual and physical access into the building and perhaps also to provide a space for additional outdoor activities such as vending, resting, sitting or dining. Street fronts can also feature art work, street furniture and landscaping that invite customers or enhance the building's setting. Where a commercial or mixed -use building is set back from the sidewalk a sufficient distance, pedestrian enhancements should be considered in the resulting street front Examples of desirable features to include: visual and pedestrian access (including barrier -free access) into the site from the public sidewalk walking surfaces of attractive pavers pedestrian -scaled site lighting areas for vendors in commercial areas landscaping that screens undesirable elements or that enhances the space and architecture signage which identifies uses and shops clearly but which is scaled to the pedestrian site furniture, artwork or amenities such as fountains, benches, pergolas, kiosks, etc. Examples of features to avoid are: asphalt or gravel pavement adjacent unscreened parking lots adjacent chain -link fences co Page 16 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 74 2.f adjacent blank walls without appropriate screening The following treatment of entrances can provide emphasis and interest: special detailing or architectural features such as ornamental glazing, railings and balustrades, awnings, canopies, decorative pavement, decorative lighting, seats, architectural molding, planter boxes, trellises, artwork signs, or other elements near the doorway. visible signage identifying building address Higher bay(s) Recessed entry (recessed at least 3 feet) Forecourt D-2: Blank Walls — See pages 8-9 from guidelines blank walls Buildings should avoid large blank walls facing the street, especially near sidewalks. Where blank walls are unavoidable they should receive design treatment to increase pedestrian comfort and interest. Explanation and Examples A wall may be considered "large" if it has a blank surface substantially greater in size than similar walls of neighboring buildings. The following examples are possible methods for treating blank walls: installing vertical trellis in front of the wall with climbing vines or plants materials setting the wall back and providing a landscaped or raised planter bed in front of the wall, including plant materials that could grow to obscure or screen the wall's surface providing art (mosaic, mural, decorative masonry pattern, sculpture, relief, etc.) over a substantial portion of the blank wall surface employing small setbacks, indentations, or other means of breaking up the wall's surface providing special lighting, a canopy, horizontal trellis or other pedestrian -oriented features that break up the size of the blank wall's surface and add visual interest An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent D-3: Retaining Walls lighting fixture, opaque glass projecting cornice coo masonry r N belt course �c v metal canopy - -- recess Retaining walls near a public sidewalk that extend higher than eye level should be avoided where possible. Where higher retaining walls are unavoidable, they should be designed to reduce their impact on pedestrian comfort and to increase the visual interest along the streetscapes. Blank walls shall be treated with architectural elements to provide visual interest. Page 17 of 22 Attachment 12 Revised by ADB 311/06 Packet Pg. 75 2.f Explanation and Examples The following are examples of methods to treat retaining walls: - any of the techniques or features listed under blank walls above terracing and landscaping the retaining walls substituting a stone wall, rockery, modular masonry, or special material locating hanging plant materials below or above the wall D-4: Design of Parking Lots Near Sidewalks Parking lots near sidewalks should provide adequate security and lighting, avoid encroachment of vehicles onto the sidewalk, and minimize the visual clutter of parking lot signs and equipment. Explanation and Examples The following examples illustrate some considerations to address in highly visible parking lots: Treatment of parking area perimeter d the edges of parking lots pavement adjacent to landscaped areas and other pavement can be unsightly and difficult to maintain. Providing a curb at the perimeter of parking areas can alleviate these problems. Security lighting provide the appropriate levels of lighting to create adequate visibility at night. Evenly distributed lighting increases security, and glare -free lighting reduces impacts on nearby property. Encroachment of cars onto the sidewalk without wheel stops or a low wall, parked cars can hang over sidewalks. One technique to protect landscaped and pedestrian areas from encroachment by parked cars is to provide a wide wheel stop about two feet from the sidewalk. Y Another technique is to widen a sidewalk or planting bed basically "building aci in" a wheel stop into the sidewalk or olantina bed. This is more durable than wheel stops, does not catch debris and reduces tripping hazards. U) Signs and equipment reduce sign clutter by painting markings on the pavement or by consolidating signs. Provide storage that is out of view from the sidewalk and adjacent properties for moveable or temporary equipment like sawhorses or barrels. Screening of parking screening of parking areas need not be uniform along the property frontage. Variety in the type and relative amount of screening may be appropriate. screen walls constructed of durable, attractive materials need not extend above waist level. Screen walls across a street or adjacent to a residential zone could also include landscaping or a trellis or grillwork with climbing vines. screening can be designed to provide clear visibility into parking areas to promote personal safety. Page 18 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 76 2.f D-5: Visual Impacts of Parking Structures The visibility of all at -grade parking structures or accessory parking E garages should be minimized. The parking portion of a structure should be architecturally compatible with the rest of the structure lil;il " and streetscape. Open parking spaces and carports should be screened from the street and adjacent properties. Explanation and Examples___.. The following examples illustrate various methods of improving the — appearance of at -grade parking structures: incorporating pedestrian -oriented uses at street level can = �� reduce the visual impact of parking structures in commercial areas. Sometimes a depth of only 10 feet along the front of the building is enough to provide space for newsstands, ticket booths, flower shops and other viable uses. setting the parking structure back from the sidewalk and installing dense landscaping incorporating any of the blank wall treatments listed in Guideline D-2 visually integrating the parking structure with adjacent buildings continuing a frieze, cornice, canopy, overhang, trellis or other devices at the top of the parking level incorporating into the parking structure a well -lit pedestrian walkway, stairway or ramp from the sidewalk to the upper level of the building setting back a portion of the parking structure to allow for the retention of an existing significant tree using a portion of the top of the larking level as an outdoor deck, patio or garden with a rail, bench or other guard device around the perimeter D-6: Screening of Dumpsters, Utilities, and Service Areas Building sites should locate service elements like trash dumpsters, loading docks and mechanical equipment away from the street front where possible while maintaining access to utilities. When elements such as dumpsters, utility meters, mechanical units and service areas cannot be located away from the street front, they should be situated and screened from view and should not be located in the pedestrian right-of-way. Explanation and Examples Unsightly service elements can detract from the compatibility of new projects and create hazards for pedestrians and autos. The following examples illustrate considerations to address in locating and screening service areas and utilities: plan the feature in a less visible location on the site screen it to be less visible. For example, a utility meter can be located behind a screen wall so that it is not visible from the building entrance. use durable materials that complement the building incorporate landscaping to make the screen more effective locate the opening to the area away from the sidewalk. Page 19 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 77 2.f incorporate roof wells, utility rooms or other features to accommodate utility and mechanical equipment needs. D-7: Personal Safety and Security Project design should consider opportunities for enhancing personal safety and security in the environment under review. Explanation and Examples Project design should be reviewed for its contribution to enhancing the real and perceived feeling of personal safety and security within the environment under review. To do this, the question needs to be answered: do the design elements detract from or do they reinforce feelings of security of the residents, workers, shoppers and visitors who enter the area? Techniques that can help promote safety include the following:= - providing adequate lighting retaining clear lines of site use of semi -transparent security screening, rather than opaque walls, where appropriate avoiding blank, windowless walls that attract graffiti and that do not permit residents or workers to observe the street use of landscaping that maintains visibility, such as short shrubs and pruning trees, so there are no branches below head height creative use of ornamental grille as fencing or over ground floor windows in some locations absence of structures that provide hiding places for criminal activity design of parking areas to allow natural surveillance by maintaining clear lines of sight both for those who park there and for occupants of nearby buildings clear directional signage encouraging "eyes on the street" through placement of windows, balconies and street -level uses ensuring natural surveillance of children's play areas. E-1: Landscaping to Reinforce Design Continuity with Adjacent Sites Where possible, and where there is not another overriding concern, landscaping should reinforce the character of neighboring properties and abutting streetscape. Explanation and Examples Several ways to reinforce the landscape design character of the local neighborhood are listed below: Street Trees If a street has a uniform planting of street trees, or a distinctive species, plant street trees that match the planting pattern or species. Page 20 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 78 2.f Similar Plant Materials When many lots on a block feature similar landscape materials, emphasis on these materials will help a new project fit into the local context. Similar construction materials, textures, colors or elements Extending a low brick wall, using paving similar to a neighbor's or employing similar stairway construction are ways to achieve design continuity. E-2: Landscaping to Enhance the Building and/or Site Landscaping, including living plant material, special pavements, approach, screen walls, planters, site furniture and similar features should be appropriately incorporated into the design to enhance the project. Examples Landscape enhancements of the site may include some of the approaches or features listed below: Soften the form of the building by screening blank walls, terracing retaining walls, etc. ` Increase privacy and security through screening and/or sharing. Provide a framework such as a trellis or arbor for plants to grow on. Incorporate a planter guard or low planter wall as part of the architecture. Distinctively landscape open areas created by building modulation. Incorporate upper story planter boxes or roof planters. Include a special feature such as a courtyard, fountain or pool. Emphasize entries with special planting in conjunction with decorative paving and/or lighting. Screen a building from view by its neighbors, or an existing use from the new building. E-3: Landscape Design to Address Special Site Conditions The landscape design should take advantage of special on -site conditions such as high -bank front yards, steep slopes, view corridors, or existing significant trees and off -site conditions such as greenbelts, ravines, natural areas, and boulevards. Explanation and Examples The following conditions may merit special attention. The examples suggest some ways to address the issue. High Bank Front Yard Where the building's ground floor is elevated above a sidewalk pedestrian's eye level, landscaping can help make the transition between grades. Several techniques are listed below. - rockeries with floral displays, live ground cover or shrubs. - terraces with floral displays, ground covers or shrubs. - low retaining walls with raised planting strips. - stone or brick masonry walls with vines or shrubs. Page 21 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 79 2.f Barrier -free Access Where wheelchair ramps must be provided on a street front, the ramp structure might include a planting strip on the sidewalk side of the elevated portions of the ramp. Steep Topography Special plantings or erosion control measures may be necessary to prevent site destabilization or to enhance the visual qualities of the site in connection with a neighborhood improvement program. Boulevards Incorporate landscaping which reflects and reinforces . Greenbelt or Other Natural Setting Minimize the removal of significant trees. Replace trees that were removed with new trees. Emphasize naturalizing or native landscape materials. Retain natural greenbelt vegetation that contributes to greenbelt preservation. Select colors that are more appropriate to the natural setting. On -site Vegetation Retain significant vegetation where possible. Use new plantings similar to vegetation removed during construction, when that vegetation as distinctive. Page 22 of 22 Revised by ADB 311/06 Attachment 12 1Packet Pg. 80 2.g CITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Special Meeting June 15, 2023 Chair Bayer called the special meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at City Hall, 121— 5`h Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Kim Bayer, Chair Alexa Brooks, Vice Chair Joe Herr Maurine Jeude Corbitt Loch Steve Schmitz Lauri Strauss Board Members Absent None APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. PUBLIC HEARINGS Staff Present David Levitan, Planning Manager Michele Szafran, Planner A. 7592: 611 on Main Mixed -Use Phase 1 Hearing (continued from May 25, 2023) Chair Bayer reviewed the purpose of the Phase 1 hearing which was continued from the May 25 regular meeting. She reopened the public hearing, discussed procedures. She asked if any board members had engaged in communication with opponents or proponents regarding the design review of this project outside of this hearing process. All members replied they had not. She solicited any conflict -of -interest issues. None were raised. She asked if anyone objected to her participation or any other board member's participation as a decision maker in the hearing. No one raised any objections. She asked anyone planning to testify to affirm that their testimony would be truthful. Planner Michele Szafran made the staff presentation. She explained there was an updated Staff Report in the packet along with 19 attachments. Public comments are included as attachment 19. Three additional comments have been received. The commentors have been listed in the staff report as a party of record. She discussed Phase 1 of the two-phase hearing process, reviewed the site and proposal context, discussed BD2 zoning requirements, and highlighted design standards. Staff believes that there could be a little more improvement with massing and treating blank walls as well as transparency at street level. Staff has recommended additional T c� Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 1 of 9 Packet Pg. 81 2.g design elements be used on the northern facade to help break up the facade to echo historic patterns. Historically building widths vary from 30-60 feet. Staff recommendations for ADB consideration: • Prioritize design guidelines and standards. • Revisions to transparency. • Address city staff corrections (visibility, fire). • Break up north facade. • Provide additional trim around windows. • Additional sidewalk amenities on Main if power lines are buried. • Screening of utility cabinets. Staff recommends August 24 as a date certain for Phase 2 of the design hearing. Clarifying questions and answers followed. Applicant Testimony: Phil Frisk, architect, stated they have worked hard to make sure they are in compliance with the zoning and 2 design requirements. They are looking forward to having this building be a positive impact to the neighborhood. E He expressed appreciation for all the input and stated they would continue to work with city staff to address the questions raised. They can easily accommodate the issues raised in the presentation and will have changes ready G for the August hearing. Public Testimony: Lynda Fireman, 600 Bell Street, commented on the impact the development would have on those who live across from and on the alley on the north side. The impact to the alley is never addressed. She expressed concern about noise impacts of HVAC equipment. She proposed a mural on the entire blank wall commemorating and including the historic cottage that is being torn down with many trees and shrubs showing in the background. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify back alleys and commercial spaces. Even though the property is below the threshold to require open space she believes there should be more than one outdoor bench. She wondered if there is air conditioning or a heat pump. She wondered if the height of the lofts could be reduced to allow HVAC on the roof. Will Ma 1g,� uson stated that the building design lacks creativity. Neither the commercial nor the residential entry is dominant. The overall design is not consistent with downtown character, nor does it provide any beneficial interest to the community. He expressed concern that the design for commercial portions does not meet many of the commercial requirements for the BD2 zone. The residential levels reflect much of the same design as the Dayton Street apartments providing ADA units isolated to the lower level because the building does not have elevators to the upper floor. Residential entry is located around the corner with access gained by descending stairs or ramps to the basement level. This appears to be more of a side alley entry approach than a prominent entry and represents an overall safety issue. He stated that the community wants creative, interesting, community -oriented mixed -use development in the downtown area and other core walkable communities. They need better mixed -use development than what this project proposal provides. He does not think the community will be supportive of this project if it goes forward. This proposal could paralyze further public support for real Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 82 2.g progress on the development code and future quality, mixed -use projects. Neither Dayton nor Main Street are the quality projects the community desires as they offer little enhancement or benefit to the community. Greg Brewer, Edmonds resident, stated that the proposed project on 611 Main has problems that need to be addressed. He is a citizen and builder in Edmonds. He is not opposed to development, but he is opposed to bad development in the quaint downtown core. This building does not check all the boxes and he implored the ADB to suggest specific changes to this building. It's a plain, big, ugly box that doesn't fit, and if allowed to be built, will be an eyesore for the foreseeable future. This building's lack of design features has stirred the criticism of many citizens, and the developer doesn't seem to care. The building doesn't seem to even meet the bare minimum design standards. Much of the building's design goal appears to be to yield the cheapest possible structure for the highest profit. He stated that the following items need work: • The public and private amenity space is extremely small for such a large building. The glazing on the streetside is not even close to being in compliance. • Main street entrance is small and will limit future use of the building. It does nothing for the interplay between pedestrians and visitors to the building. • The ADA is horrible. There is no elevator connecting the first and second floors. One elevator going to all floors is the right thing to do. • The dumpster space appears to have two large doors opening five feet out into a 15-foot alley. This design shows a complete lack of respect for the neighbors' access to the alley use. • He stated he also has ideas about the front and plaza side of the building he would like to share later in the hearing if allowed by Chair Bayer. Michelle Dotsch, Edmonds resident, referred to design objectives and goals in the code and expressed concern about the following aspects: • Building entry location — The building should be configured to provide clear entry points to buildings and be oriented to pedestrian walkways and pathways and support the overall intent of the streetscape environment. • Building entry space — An area for gathering or seating is desirable for residential or mixed -use buildings. • Setbacks — Create and maintain a landscape and site characteristics of each neighborhood and provide a common street frontage tying each site to its neighbor. Setbacks should be appropriate to the desired streetscape, providing for its transition areas between public streets and private building entries where a variety of activities and amenities can occur. • Open space — For residential settings, create green spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the development and provide places for interaction, play, seating, and other activities. • Building Form, Wall Modulation — A variety of materials, decorative elements, or other features should be employed to support pedestrian scale environments and streetscapes or help break up large building masses to keep in scale with the surrounding environment. The back of the building is blank, so it is not to scale with the condos directly behind it. • Building Facade — The exterior of the building is the portion of the 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. • She stressed that the code says that urban design in the downtown waterfront area should encourage its unique design, character, and important placemaking status within the city. • Building Setbacks — Create common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie each site to its neighbor. This is not achieved, and the ADB should recommend a setback. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 3 of 9 Packet Pg. 83 2.g • She encouraged the ADB to carefully review all Comprehensive Plan elements that apply to this project. Cathy Brewer, Edmonds resident, said she is dismayed at what is about to happen to Edmonds' historic, quaint downtown with two proposed buildings by one developer that may meet building codes but definitely do not meet the design standards that Edmonds residents expect and desire in this special city. Both of the buildings require the removal of historic buildings that add charm to our town, while replacing them with bland, oversized, boxy, cheap looking structures that will negatively impact our downtown. She hopes that the ADB and planners will take this to heart and act appropriately to request the improvement of these buildings' designs so they won't be regrettable structures that we will all have to live with. Good design is of the utmost importance for both of these buildings. She shared many criticisms. This building would be an out -of -scale eyesore compared to the moderate -sized historic buildings surrounding the charming fountain nearby. The street appeal from Main is uninviting. The entry is smaller than what most houses have. The building spans from sidewalk to alley with no open space which is conducive to livability and pedestrian access. The continuous planter box along the front is a barrier to pedestrian traffic. The glazing requirements are meant to connect business and pedestrian traffic. The small area of windows does not meet the BD2 standards. The public amenity space is Spartan at best. There are no outside private community spaces of any kind. Plazas, patios, and decks are lacking or non -existing. The ADA access is the bare minimum. The ADA ramp takes up 40% of the plaza and would be better located at the front where the planter box is. There is no elevator to the second story units. She stated that this design needs to go back to the drawing board, and some major thought and consideration must be put into it before the planners should even consider it. 6th and Main is a gateway and deserves a quality building, not this one that could mar it forever. She urged the ADB to request positive changes for this development. Clarification Questions by the Board: Board Member Loch asked staff about permitted uses in the BD2 zone. Staff reviewed allowed uses. Vice Chair Brooks said she was also curious about the HVAC location and noise pollution. Mr. Frisk stated that this is a conceptual design so they haven't yet engaged a mechanical contractor to figure out the HVAC systems. There are a lot of minimum code requirements that address the sound of compressors and other equipment so they are sensitive to that and will be code compliant. Chair Bayer asked Mr. Frisk about the suggestion to have a mural on the north wall. He replied that he is open to it and has already contacted the Art Walk group regarding the process. There is a waitlist, and it could take 18 months to two years depending on the funding. He added that they reduced their windows because on the first review they were told there were too many windows. Chair Bayer asked about the 75% versus 45% transparency being proposed by the applicant. Ms. Szafran replied that the 75% minimum is in the code. Board Member Schmitz asked how they calculate the area and requirements for the windows. Ms. Szafran reviewed how this is calculated. Mr. Frisk explained they were asking for the reduction because of the expectation that this will be office space needing privacy and relief from the sun. He expects that the windows will be covered with miniblinds anyway. He asked if the ADB has the authority to reduce the requirement to 70%. Board Member Jeude commented on the high amount of use that the alleys in Edmonds get by pedestrians and noted that with the building so close to the edge it doesn't seem to be allowing for community access to those areas. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 4 of 9 Packet Pg. 84 2.g Chair Bayer asked if staff had any comments on the location of the dumpster. Ms. Szafran replied that the applicant still needs to address comments from fire and engineer. Staff does not have a problem with it as long as it is screened and on the property. There was some discussion about having a sliding gate to address the swinging door issue. Chair Bayer asked about reason for the location of the residential entrance. Mr. Frisk explained that that there is a requirement of 45 feet of commercial space on the designated street front so they had to go around the corner. He stated it is coming off a very large plaza with stairs and an ADA ramp right off the Main Street side. It will be quite visible. Chair Bayer asked staff if there is a requirement for awnings on Main Street. Ms. Szafran explained the code says that structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. Mr. Frisk said there is a small canopy over the residential entrance with signage so which will be visible from the Main Street sidewalk. Chair Bayer asked Greg Brewer about his ideas about the entry. Mr. Brewer commented that the building on 2nd and Main has the same situation with the slope, but they pulled the main floor back slightly. He recommended eliminating the planter box on this building and pulling the wall back three feet. That would 6 provide a five-foot access that can then go along the front of the building. The window glazing can drop down lower and to allow a higher percentage of glazing. They could get rid of the ADA ramp in the plaza and allow c it to actually be a plaza. Then you could roll a wheelchair all the way across the front of the building and have 2 a level entry. He noted that the first design the applicant had showed a central entrance. Mr. Brewer also c suggested backing up the back of the building two feet to have enough room for cars to pass. r c� Chair Bayer asked if there has been a traffic study on the alley. Ms. Szafran replied that they have a transportation impact analysis worksheet that has already been provided. She didn't think it would require a study. Mr. Frisk said they thought they were below the threshold to require a traffic study. Planning Manager Levitan explained that the general threshold is 25 PM peak hour trips. He agreed that this project wouldn't be anywhere near that. Staff can consult with engineering to get their opinion. Clarifying Questions from the Public: Lynda Fireman noted that the alley width is only 15 feet, and the entrance on 66' is 12 feet. There are drop offs on either side, and you cannot pass a car in that alley. Chair Bayer asked where most people who live on that alley park their cars. Ms. Fireman replied that her building has garages that enter onto the alley. Some others have parking in the back, and some have garages that you enter from the street. A member of the public noted that the idea that the office windows would be covered by miniblinds is conceptual, as it would be up to the commercial tenants. Mr. Frisk agreed. The commentor also said that the issue with the gate on the dumpster is not just once a week when the dumpster is emptied but every time a resident opens the gate to throw garbage in. Another Edmonds resident commented that the applicant doesn't want to have any move ins and outs off Main Street so that means that the moving truck will be parked in front of her garage in the alley for hours on end every time someone moves in or out. She thinks they should be able to move in and out from the front of the building. Mr. Levitan indicated he would check with the building traffic engineer prior to the Phase 2 hearing. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 85 2.g Mr. Brewer asked if it is the intent of the development code to put residential entries on the side of the building. He didn't think it made sense that they couldn't do both commercial and residential on the streetside. Regarding the dumpster, he wondered if they could just turn them 90 degrees so they open into the property and not the alley. Board Member Strauss asked how the ADA residents would get to the dumpsters. Mr. Frisk replied that there would be separate garbage cans that are accessible in the parking area. Deliberation: Board Member Strauss referred to the front elevation. She agreed that it is very blank and seems sort of haphazard. She would like to see smaller chunks that go all the way up on the front elevation to break it up a little bit. She recommended eliminating the planter near the front entrance, coming up to the sidewalk, and putting a canopy over it. She thinks an awning across the commercial space would help to make it more appealing and blend into the downtown area. She also agreed with pulling the first floor level back several feet and getting the ramp out of the plaza. She noted that putting an elevator up to the second floor would be very helpful. Regarding the back side of the building, the mural idea is nice, but just some modulation would be helpful. Mr. Frisk made some suggestions, and stated they were open to suggestions. Board Member Strauss recommended adding some balconies. If they are able to open up the plaza, she recommended putting some big planters and trees to make it feel like a courtyard and not just a big ramp. Vice Chair Brooks commented that the south side colored rendering looks "patchworky" and confusing. Board Member Schmitz thought extending the brick under the sill of the second -floor unit and along the stair going down into the residential area could help. Board Member Herr recommended pitching the roofs on both sides to give it more character. There was some discussion about other roof design possibilities. There appeared to be interest in this by the ADB. Board Member Schmitz asked if there is a minimum size for the commercial space other than the back wall being 45 feet back. Ms. Szafran replied that there was not. Board Member Schmitz noted that there is some opportunity to add more articulation to the fagade on the first floor. Mr. Frisk asked about getting a height variance so they could do a pitched roof with a ridge at 35 feet. There was discussion about the variance process which Ms. Szafran said was not an easy process. Board Member Herr asked when they made the 30-foot maximum height. Mr. Levitan indicated he would have to look at the legislative history. Board Member Herr commented that this is the reason they are getting the "boxy" buildings. Design Guidelines Checklist Site Planning: Reinforce site characteristics Bayer — High priority. High visibility area, gateway to downtown Herr, Strauss, Schmitz — Low priority. The existing site has no characteristics to reinforce. Jeude — High priority. Minimizing shadow impacts on adjacent structures and public areas. This is a consideration for the folks to the north of the building. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 86 2.g • Consensus was low priority. 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics • High priority 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street • High priority 4. Encourage human activity on the street • High priority 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites • High priority 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide security, privacy, and interaction (residential projects) • High Priority 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site. • High priority 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians and adjoining property. • High priority 9. Discourage parking on street front. • Not applicable. 10. Orient building to corner and parking away from corner on public street fronts (corner lots) • Not applicable. Bulk and Scale: 1. Provide sensitive transition to nearby, less -intensive zones • High priority — alley, neighbors to the east Architectural Elements: 1. Complement positive existing character and/or responds to nearby historic structures • Low priority — not a consistent character on the street except the awning 2. Unified architectural concept • High priority 3. Use human scale and human activity • High priority based on where it's at. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 7 of 9 Packet Pg. 87 2.g 4. Use durable, attractive, and well -detailed finish materials • High priority based on where it's at 5. Minimize garage entrances • Low priority — It's where it needs to be. They can't make it any smaller. Pedestrian Environment: 1. Provide convenient, attractive, and protected pedestrian entry • High priority 2. Avoid blank walls • High priority 3. Minimize height of retaining walls • Low priority — Zero lot line. There are retaining walls but you can't make them any smaller 4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking lots on pedestrian areas • Not applicable 5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures • Not applicable 6. Screen dumpsters, utility, and service areas • High priority 7. Consider personal safety • High priority Landscaping: 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of neighborhood • High priority — Everyone has flowers and nice landscaping along the pedestrian path. How the architect decides to treat that front will play a big role in how the community responds to it. 2. Landscape to enhance the building or site • High priority 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site conditions • Low priority MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER SCHMITZ, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER JEUDE, TO CONTINUE THIS TO THE PHASE 2 HEARING ON AUGUST 24. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15,2023 Page 8 of 9 Packet Pg. 88 2.g The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Q Minutes of Special Meeting June 15, 2023 Page 9 of 9 Packet Pg. 89 5TA'V J � Oy � r 1819 N STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Region Office PO Box 330316, Shoreline, WA 98133-9716 • 206-594-0000 May 25, 2023 Michele Q. Szafran, Associate Planner Planning Division City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: 611 on Main Apartments File# PLN2022-0085, Ecology SEPA# 202302235 Dear Michele Q. Szafran: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination of nonsignificance (DNS) for the 611 on Main Apartments project. Based on review of the checklist associated with this project, the Department of Ecology (Ecology) has the following comments: One active cleanup site is located within 750 feet of the proposed project: the Edmonds Public Safety Building cleanup site (cleanup site ID 9238; facility site ID 44622633; non -halogenated petroleum organics in soil) at 250 51h Ave N, Edmonds. Any existing environmental contamination encountered during construction should be reported to Ecology within 90 days through Ecology's Environmental Report Tracking System (ERTS). Releases should be reported via Ecology's web form, by phone (206-584-0000) or by email (nwroerts@ecy.wa.gov). For more information, please visit Ecology's website: https://ecology.wa.gov/Footer/Report-an- environmental-issue/Report-a-spill. This project proposal includes limited onsite excavation. The Snohomish County property database indicates that the property contains one residence built in 1915. Homes constructed prior to the mid-1960s were commonly fueled by heating oil from underground storage tanks (USTs). If USTs are encountered during construction of the project, they must be decommissioned in accordance with local fire department regulations. In addition, if soil or groundwater contamination is encountered during UST decommissioning, the contamination must be characterized and cleaned up in accordance with Ecology regulations (WAC 173-340). If a release is encountered, it may be reported via Ecology's web form Packet Pg. 90 2.h Michele Q. Szafran May 25, 2023 Page 2 (https://ecoIogy.wa.gov/Footer/Report-an-environmental-issue/statewide-issue-reporting- form). Thank you for considering these comments from Ecology. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please contact Michelle Myers from the Toxics Cleanup Program at (206) 773-3498 or by email at michelle.myers2@ecy.wa.gov. Sincerely, Kelli Price SEPA Coordinator Sent by email: Michele Q. Szafran, michele.szafran@edmondswa.gov ecc: Michelle Martin, City of Edmonds Michelle Myers, Ecology Packet Pg. 91 2.i LJ Date: To: From: Subject: MEMORANDUM August 10, 2023 Michele Szafran, Associate Planner Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer PLN2022-0085 — Design Review 611 on Main Apartments — 611 Main Street The comments provided below are based upon review of the application and documents submitted for the subject design review application. Additional information is requested from the applicant at this time. Please note, the current review is limited to a determination of feasibility and addressing major design/construction issues. Please respond to the following: Comments 1 — December 16, 2022 (Phase I) Comments 2 — April 27, 2023 (Phase I) Comments 3 — August 10, 2023 (Phase II) General Engineering Review: The following comments are provided by the Engineering Division. Please contact Jeanie directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at Jeanie.mcconnell(a),edmondswa.gov with any specific questions you may have regarding these comments. 1. August 10, 2023 — Comment remains for reference as civil plans still only indicate the undergrounding of power. 8/27/2023 — Thank you for revising the civil plans to show undergrounding of power along Main Street. This comment remains to provide clarification that any and all overhead facilities along the Main Street property frontage will need to be undergrounded. This includes any power and/or communication facilities. 12/16/2022 comment - Please refer to Fire Department comments regarding the requirement to underground power along Main Street property frontage. Please revise plans as needed to address this requirement. 2. ok 3. ok 4. ok 5. ok 6. August 10, 2023 — Parking stall widths have been adjusted to reflect 8'/2'. Response comment letter requests approval to have columns intrude on the 8 %' wide parking Packet Pg. 92 2.i space. Please refer to the comment below. Your project may qualify for reduced parking width as provided below; however, any parking width must exclude the structural column. April 27, 2023 — Response letter states structural design is not yet complete and approval is requested to allow for structural columns to be included within parking stall dimensions. Per Edmonds Community Development Code 18.95.020, all stalls must meet the minimum width requirements exclusive of columns/poles. Please note, this code section includes provisions for a mixture of full width (8 1/2') and reduced width (8') stalls. Please review this code section for applicability to the subject project. 12/16/2022 comment - Sheet A1.02 — Confirm parking stall dimensions exclude building columns. 7. August 10, 2023 — Response comment letter states the dumpster enclosure is now 3'-4" N from the edge of the alley and the dumpsters inside the enclosure have been reduced in 0 size. Please confirm the overall dimensions of the entire dumpster enclosure are a. acceptable to the trash hauler. In addition, it is unclear if the dumpster enclosure y location meets sight distance requirements. Please refer to City standard detail TR-590 for additional information. A convex mirror is not an approved alternative. April 27, 2023 — see comment below. 12/16/2022 comment - Site distance triangle requirements: E a. Buildings; April 27, 2023 — Response letter states a convex mirror is provided to address o required visibility. A convex mirror is not an approved alternative and sight r �o lines are to be addressed with the building design. Please revise plans as needed such that the building design does not interfere with providing clear sight lines. E 12/16/2022 comment - provide a site window or clear area to ensure line -of -sight c exiting parking garage. v b. ok M N 0 8. August 10, 2023 — Please note for future storm design, the City will request that storm N system exposure to illicit discharges be minimized. Currently the storm system control structure is designed to fall within the limits of the trash enclosure. A spill from the trash a receptable into the storm system could constitute an illicit discharge. Stormwater Engineer Review: No further comments Transportation Engineer Review: Comment retained for reference: A Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet was provided and has received preliminary approval. Specific mitigation fees will be further reviewed during the building permit phase of the project. Packet Pg. 93 2.j The proposed project at 611 Main Street has problems that need to be addressed. As a citizen and builder in Edmonds I'm not against development. I am, however, vehemently opposed to bad development in our quaint downtown core. This building doesn't check all the boxes, and I implore the ADB to suggest specific changes to this building. It's a plain, big, ugly box that doesn't fit in and if allowed to be built will be an eyesore for the foreseeable future. I don't subscribe to the thought that this year's ugly building will be the gem of the future. Or that we can't require the developer to do anything that isn't spelled out in the code. We can and we have in the past. This building's lack of design features has stirred the criticism of many citizens. The developer doesn't seem to care that he is about to drop two big, featureless, boxy buildings into our quaint downtown core. This building doesn't even seem to meet the bare minimum design standards. Much of the building's design goal appears to be to yield the cheapest possible structure for the highest profit. If that was the design team's goal then a great job. Mission accomplished. Again, I implore the ADB to dig deep and suggest meaningful changes to the developer to help improve the look and function of this mundane addition to our downtown core. The following items need work: -The public and private amenity space is extremely small for such a large building. -Glazing on the street side is not even close to being in compliance. - The Main Street front entrance is small and will limit future commercial use of the building. It does nothing for the interplay between pedestrians and visitors to the building. - ADA access is horrible. There is no elevator connecting the 1 st and 2nd floors. One elevator going to all floors is the right thing to do. Packet Pg. 94 2.j -The dumpster's space appears to have two large doors opening out 5' into a 15' alley. This design shows a complete lack of respect for the neighbors' access to alley use. The 15' alley with the building built on the line is too tight for increased traffic flow and will hamper other residents' use of the alley. Edmonds deserves better. This project needs specific changes brought forth by the ADB to address its shortcomings. I have ideas about the front and plaza side of this building that I would like to share later in the hearing if allowed by Chairman Bayer. I applaud Chairman Bayer for allowing additional public comments at the Dayton project last month and hope she will see fit to allow it again tonight. Thank you Received by Greg Brewer on 6-15-2023 Packet Pg. 95 2.j Kathy Brewer, Edmonds resident I am dismayed at what is about to happen to our historic, quaint downtown with two proposed buildings by one developer that may meet building code but definitely do not meet the design standards that Edmonds residents expect and desire in our special city. Both of the buildings require the removal of historic buildings that add charm to our town while replacing them with bland, oversized, boxy, cheap looking structures that will negatively impact our downtown. The designs lack the qualities that would add to livability for their future residents and will mar the neighborhoods and impact the neighbors negatively. I am hoping that the ADB members and the planners will take this to heart and act appropriately to request the improvement of these buildings' design so they won't be regretful structures that we will all have to live with. Better design is of the utmost importance for both of these buildings. Here are some of my criticisms for the proposed development at 611 Main Street As I described previously, the building is unattractive, oversized and unfit for our quaint downtown. At the gateway, it will be an out -of -scale eye sore compared to the moderate sized, historic buildings surrounding the charming fountain nearby. The street appeal from Main is totally uninviting. The entry is smaller than what most houses have. The building spans from sidewalk to alley with no open space which is conducive to livability and pedestrian access. The continuous planter box along the front is a barrier for pedestrian traffic. The glazing requirements are meant to connect business and pedestrian traffic. The smaller windows do not and do not meet BD2 standards. The public amenity space is spartan at best. There are no outside private amenity spaces of any kind. Plazas, patios and decks are welcoming and promote livability. These are lacking or non-existent. Packet Pg. 96 2.j The ADA access is the bare minimum. The ADA ramp takes up 40% of the plaza and would be better located at the front where the planter box is. There is no elevator to the second story units. This is not inclusive and the result will be to deny certain people from living there or visiting. This does not fit our welcoming Edmonds nature. These are just some of the many faults of this design. This development needs to go back to the drawing board and some major thought and consideration should be put into it before the planners should even consider it. Please ... I ask the ADB members and planners to acknowledge our concerns and help this developer achieve a better design. The bare minimum is not acceptable for our precious downtown. 6th and Main is the gateway and this development will mar it forever. This location deserves a quality building, not this one that could be located anywhere. The future of our downtown is in your hands. Please do the right thing for Edmonds and our residents and request positive changes for this development. Thank you Packet Pg. 97 2.j From: Levitan, David To: Citizens Arch Design Board Cc: Szafran, Michele; Clugston, Michael Subject: Fwd: Comments for tonight"s hearings for the Main and Dayton Street Projects. Date: Thursday, May 25, 2023 5:55:20 PM One additional public comment. Get Outlook for 10S From: Kathy Brewer <brewerkathyk@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 5:47 PM To: Planning <planning@edmondswa.gov>; Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Comments for tonight's hearings for the Main and Dayton Street Projects. To ADB, Planning Board and City Council, Here are my comments for tonight's hearings for the Main and Dayton Street Projects. simply want to say that both of them are ugly, unimaginative, and unfit for our charming, historical downtown. The developer, architect and planners have no respect for Edmonds nor the wishes of our citizens, boards and council. These should never be approved. Once built, they will be a permanent eyesore and change the appearance and feel of our downtown and open the door to more inappropriate, unattractive buildings. We can do better than this. Sincerely, Kathy Brewer Packet Pg. 98 2.j Packet Pg. 99 2.j To: The Architectural Design Board Special Meeting regarding 611 on Main From: Lynda Fireman, Resident 600 Bell Street, #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 My comments are on the impact this development will have on those of us who live across from and on the alley. The impact on the alley is never addressed. I'm only addressing some of the items in the provided materials with some additiona comments and questions. Packet Pg.6 Comments from the Planning Department: 1. "The site is relatively level with a "gentle" downward slope from east to west with an elevation change of about 5 feet across the 90-foot -wide site". This is only on Main Street. On the alley, there is change of about 10 feet from the SE elevation on Main to the NW corner of the lot. It will be a flat 4-Story wall on the alley. The 11t floor of the present building is higher than my 2"d floor condo. 2. "When HVAC equipment is at ground level, it shall be integrated into building design and/or use screening techniques to avoid both visual and noise impacts on adjoining properties" ...and again, on the alley? It's already visual pollution, please no noise pollution! 3. "Breakup the approx. 66-foot wide largely blank wall along the north facade" I'd like to propose a mural, on the entire blank wall, commemorating and including the historic cottage, that is being torn down, with many trees and shrubs showing in the background. The Comprehensive Plan "encourages the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed -use areas in the downtown areas. Since there is no "space", please beautify the wall. Packet Pg. 100 2.j O Packet Pg. 29 Comments from the Architect: "Even though the property is well below the threshold requiring outdoor open space, a plaza is provided as a gathering space along the east side of the building accessed directly from the sidewalk and providing access to the apartment entrance." In an 18-unit building, is space for one bench considered a gathering space? Please address this. Packet Pg. 72 Fire Comments: N " -6 "South Elevation measures over 33' height" x "Requires fire la,nthat is 26' wide and will need to be'between 15' and 30' away from the building on ain Street" Maxi m height is supposed . unless he means the No elevation. Plea explain "fire lane", '`iat it a ils and where it will be N Packet Pg. 74 Architect Corrections: CL 1. "The north elevation now has a base of masonry veneer. " CL Again, I propose/suggest a mural, on the entire blank wall, honoring the historic cottage that is being torn down, including both shrubs and trees above the veneer. This provides visual interest and is in keeping with the murals that are on many buildings in downtown Edmonds, even in the alleys. 2. "No HVAC equipment is going to be installed on the roof." Does this mean that the building will not have air conditioning? Is there enough air flow in E the building. There is also climate change and temperatures are rising. 0 There are no measurements given. Can the height of the lofts be reduced to allow HVAC on 2 the roof? a. If equipment is installed, other than on the roof, I respectfully ask that it not be installed where it will cause noise pollution in the alley as well as on the adjacent properties. The alley will already have visual pollution, please don't add noise pollution. Packet Pg. 82 Architect Response a r E "The transformer is now on the NW corner" Question: What is the noise level of the transformer as it is now in the alley? a Packet Pg. 101 2.j Packet pg. 101 Applying the Design Guidelines & Considering the Site My request of the Architectural Design Board is to please consider the impact the building is having on the North side/alley. For some reason we are not considered adjacent nor is the impact considered for anyone else that lives on this alley. Please consider: 1. Visual Pollution on the alley: My view of this building, from 13 of my 27 windows, will be of a 4-story flat wall. It will eliminate direct sunlight and openness to my environment. We're all going to feel hemmer in. Again, my request/suggestion is a mural honoring the historic cottage, that is being torn down with many shrubs and trees. This will provide a reprieve from looking at a "4-story flat wall" and will add visual interest and relief. It is in keeping with the murals that are on many buildings in downtown Edmonds, even in the alleys. 2. Possible Noise Pollution on the alley: Please don't allow any noise producing equipment around the perimeter of the building. We need to sleep. 3. Vehicle Safety on the alley: Our 3 garages are at a lower level than the alley and our garbage enclosure is also raised up to alley level making it hard to see and be seen when exiting. Please make sure that the sight lines from the 611 Main garage are addressed. Convex mirrors are not approved. Both entrances/exits to the alley on 6th & 7th are narrow and sight lines are obscured by parking on 6th and 71h too close to the alley openings. It would be good to have the yellow lines extended on both sides on 61h and 7th to prevent accidents. Please make sure we are safe. 4. Pedestrian/Personal Safety on the alley: There is, at times, a lot of pedestrian use of this alley. School children walk to and then back from the school bus every school day. Families with small children and visitors to Edmonds frequently walk up and down the alley, particularly in good weather and when there are special events. This narrow alley fluctuates in size, at the most 15 ft and often as narrow as 12 feet. Please make sure we are safe. Thank you for your consideration and help with this difficult situation. Packet Pg. 102 2.k CITY OF EDMONDS 121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION'S REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD "PHASE 1" DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW Project: 611 On Main File Number: PLN2022-0085 Date of Report: May 18, 2023; updated for June 15, 2023 special meeting Staff Contact: e Michele Q. Szafran, Associate Planner ADB Meeting: Thursday — May 25, 2023 at 6:00 P.M.* Continued to June 15, 2023 at 6:00 P.M. Brackett Room, 3rd Floor, Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Or by Zoom at: https://edmondswa-gov.zoom.us/m/88959586932 Meeting ID: 889 5958 6932 Passcode: 591531 Or join by phone: 253-215-8782 * Note: The public hearing will be continued to a date certain for Phase 2 of the two -phased design review process. I. PROJECT PROPOSAL Architect Phillip Frisk, representing property owner GBH Holdings, submitted a design review application for a new three-story mixed -use building at 605/611 Main Street to include approximately 2,600 square feet of office space, 18 apartment units and an underground parking garage for approximately 21 stalls. The site is located within the Downtown Mixed Commercial (BD2) zone (Attachment 12). The project site contains 9,889 square feet across two parcels and the current structures would be demolished. A subsequent lot line adjustment will be necessary to combine the two parcels into a single lot for construction of the building. Packet Pg. 103 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.k DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS The subject site is located within the Downtown Mixed Commercial (BD2) zone, which requires district -based design review when necessary. Since the project triggers a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), design is reviewed as part of a two -phased public hearing process before the Architectural Design Board (ADB). This design process was developed to provide for public and design professional input at an early point in the permitting process. The process is identified in Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and is summarized below. This submittal (Attachments 1— 6 & 13) initiates Phase 1 of the two -phased ADB public hearing process. Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.005.A, for Phase 1 of the process, the applicant must provide a preliminary conceptual design and a description of the property to be developed noting all significant characteristics. The ADB uses this information to make factual findings regarding the particular characteristics of the property and to prioritize the design guideline checklist (Attachment 14) based on these facts in addition to the design objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and within the ECDC. Following public testimony at the Phase 1 hearing and completion of the design guideline checklist by the ADB, the public hearing is continued to a date certain, not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 hearing date. Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.005.B, the purpose of the continuance of the hearing to Phase 2 is to allow the applicant to design or redesign the initial conceptual design to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. Once this is done, the design will be submitted to staff, who will review the proposal and schedule the project for final review (Phase 2). Staff will provide additional analysis of the proposal's compliance with the prioritized design guidelines and criteria as part of the Phase 2 hearing. The ADB will further review the design of the project and will make the final decision on the design at the conclusion of Phase 2 of the public hearing. The following attachments are included with this Phase 1 staff report: 1. Land use application 2. Applicant's narrative 3. Site Plan & Floor Plans 4. Elevation Views 5. Volume Models 6. Landscape Plan 7. Letter of Completeness 8. Notice of Application 9. Staff Pan Review Comments Consolidated 10. Applicants Response Letter 11. ENG Comments 2 12. Zoning & Vicinity Map 13. SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance 14. Design Guideline Checklist Page 2 of 19 Packet Pg. 104 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 15. Chapter 16.43 ECDC BD Zone 16. Chapter 22.43 ECDC Design Standards BD Zones 17. Public Hearing Notice & SEPA 18. Sound Disposal Email Confirmation 19. Public Comments III. FINDINGS A. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS The subject property is located at the eastern edge of the Edmonds downtown business core. The property is zoned BD2 (Downtown Mixed Commercial) as are the properties to the west and south. Properties to the north and east are zoned RM-1.5 (Multiple Residential RM-1.5). Uses surrounding the project site are primarily residential with a mix of commercial and office uses to the south and west. Refer to Attachment 12 for an aerial view of the site in relation to the surrounding area. B. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 1. Topography. The site is relatively level with a gentle downward slope from east to west with an elevation change of about five feet across the 90-foot-wide site. 2. Critical Areas. A critical areas checklist was reviewed under file CRA2021-0215 and it was determined that no critical areas were located on or adjacent to the site; therefore a "waiver" from further critical area study was issued. 3. SEPA Review. Review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was required for this proposal because the new building exceeds four residential units, the categorical exemption threshold in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b) adopted by reference in ECDC 20.15A.080. A SEPA checklist was submitted with the application and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on May 11, 2023 (Attachment 13). A notice of the SEPA determination was included with the Notice of Public Hearing for the project, and declarations of posting and mailing and an affidavit of publication of the SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance are included for reference with the public notice materials in Attachment 17. C. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS An initial "Notice of Application" was issued on December 27, 2022 and was followed by a revised notice on January 10, 2023. This notice was posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, and the Community Development Department. It was not posted at the Edmonds Branch of the Sno-Isle Library due to closure. The notice was also mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site and published in the Everett Herald and on the city website. A "Notice of Public Hearing and SEPA Determination" was issued on May 11, 2023. This notice was posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, Community Development Department, and at the library. The notice was also mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site Page 3 of 19 Packet Pg. 105 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 and published in the Everett Herald and on the city website. A Notice of Special Meeting for the June 15, 2023 continued public hearing was published and posted on June 8, 2023. The public notice materials are included as Attachment 8 & 17. To date, twelve (12) comment letters have been received by nine (9) parties (Attachment 19) and are summarized below. The commentors are included as parties of record as listed on pg. 19 (Section V) of this report. Summary of Public comments (Consolidated public comments included in Attachment 19): Written comments provided by the public include concerns with public use of EV parking for the commercial space; traffic and designated drop off and/or delivery parking; visibility concerns for traffic and pedestrians off the alley; and ADA accessibility to the building. Other concerns include the lack of setbacks from the public sidewalk and the alley; overall design concerns of the building such as the lack of commercial glazing; the proposed public outdoor space; the size of the structure in comparison to the surrounding area; and overall building height. Staff response: Parking requirements for residential uses in the BD zones are found in ECDC 17.50.010.C, which requires one parking space per dwelling unit (18 units proposed) in the BD zones. The proposal includes 21 parking spaces as shown on sheet A1.02 and E.3.00 of Attachment 3. Pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.D, parking is not required in the BD2 zone for permitted commercial uses. EV parking requirements are provided in Chapter 17.115 ECDC and are calculated as a required percentage based on the provided parking stalls, EV parking is further discussed in Section G2. Traffic impacts are mitigated through the collection of traffic impact fees in accordance with ECC 3.36.125. The estimated fees are $92,230 which will be further reviewed during the building permit phase for specific mitigation fees. Regarding the use of the alley, per ECDC 18.80.060.B.5 alleys are the preferred method of providing vehicular access to a property and should be used unless there is no reasonable alternative available. Curb cuts on Main Street would not be permitted for access and the applicant will need to address clear line of sight entering/existing onto the alley from the parking garage, which has been included in the Engineering comments in Attachment 11. The Building Division provided preliminary review comments (Attachment 9), which included comments for providing an accessible path from the public right-of-way to the accessible units. The revised plans include an accessible path, and the proposal would undergo a more thorough review for compliance with all building and fire codes including ADA/accessibility at the building permit stage. Open space requirements are provided in ECDC 16.43.030.E. and are required for properties of 12,000 square feet or larger. According to the site survey on page 1 of Attachment 3, the subject site as combined measures approximately 9,889 square feet and thus open space is not required by code. See also section III.G.1.G. of this report. However as noted in section IV of this report Page 4 of 19 Packet Pg. 106 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 staff does provide a recommendation to include seating and hanging baskets if there is sufficient room in the sidewalk area along Main St while still providing adequate ADA access. Setbacks are discussed in Section III.G.1.0 below. The BD2 zone only requires setbacks when a site is adjacent to a residentially zoned property; the proposal includes a 15-foot setback from the RM-1.5 zoned property to the east. The applicant is requesting a deviation from the 75% transparency at street level requirement, which staff does not support, as discussed in more detail below. D. TECHNICAL STAFF REVIEW The Phase 1 portion of the application was reviewed and evaluated by South County Fire and Rescue and the City of Edmonds Building and Engineering Divisions. The Building Division and South County Fire provided several comments to be further addressed with the associated building permit (Attachments 9 & 11). Engineering, Stormwater, and Planning also had several corrections which the applicant addressed in response letters (Attachment 10) and updated plans. The Engineering Division noted additional corrections to be addressed before the second phase hearing (Attachment 11), including addressing site visibility for exiting the parking garage, verification of parking stalls dimensions, and providing for underground utilities along Main Street. South County Fire noted that to obtain roof access from Main Street, the existing overhead power lines in that location would have to be rerouted or placed underground. Additional reviews will be conducted by all applicable departments prior to ADB review of Phase 2. E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Downtown Mixed Commercial" within the "Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center" overlay. Goals and policies from the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center related to this project include: Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal A. Promote downtown Edmonds as an attractive setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region. A.1 Ensure that the downtown/waterfront area continues — and builds on — its function as a key identity element for the Edmonds community. A.3 Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region A.6 Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the downtown, especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population. Page 5 of 19 Packet Pg. 107 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal D. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity. D.1 Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character. D.5Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation. D.8 Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere with pedestrian and bicycle activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown area. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal E. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. Emphasize and plan for links between the retail core and these supporting areas. E.1 Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing, commercial, and cultural activities. The mixed -use proposal is consistent with Goal E by supporting and complementing downtown retail uses. The Comprehensive Plan also provides the following specific goal for the Downtown Mixed Commercial designation: Downtown Mixed Commercial. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses., with commercial entries at street level. Buildings can be built to the property line. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development. The first floor of buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian -scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area that is located behind commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow for "live - work" arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a residence as principal uses. Design objectives for the downtown area addressing site design, building form, and building fagade are provided in the Comprehensive Plan (pages 125-127). Refer to Attachments 3 — 6 for building renderings and plans. Urban Design Goal B: Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. Design objectives and standards should be carefully crafted for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center to encourage its unique design character and important place -making status within the city. Page 6 of 19 Packet Pg. 108 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 B.1 Vehicular Access and Parking. Driveways and curb cuts should be minimized to assure a consistent and safe streetscape for pedestrians. When alleys are present, these should be the preferred method of providing vehicular access to a property and should be used unless there is no reasonable alternative available. Configuration of parking should support a "park and walk" policy that provides adequate parking while minimizing impacts on the pedestrian streetscape. Staff Response: No curb cuts exist in this vicinity on Main St. The existing surface parking is accessed off the alley from 6t" Ave. N., which will be used for access to the off-street parking area for the proposal. B.2 Pedestrian Access and Connections. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings close to the street and sidewalks, and defining the street edge. Cross walks at key intersections should be accentuated by the use of special materials, signage or paving treatments. Transit access and waiting areas should be provided where appropriate. Staff Response: The existing building will be constructed approximately 2.5 feet from the back of sidewalk with upper -level projections up the property line. Crosswalks exist at the intersection of 61" and Main; transit is not located adjacent to the site. B.3 Building Entry Location. Commercial building entries should be easily recognizable and oriented to the pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk grade. Staff Response: A new pedestrian entrance will be created at the southwest corner of the building to provide a direct connection to Main Street. B.4 Building Setbacks. Create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie each site to its neighbor. Encourage the creation of public spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the development and encourage outdoor interaction. In the Waterfront area west of the railroad, buildings should be set back from the waterfront to preserve and provide a buffer from existing each areas. In the Waterfront area, site layout should be coordinated with existing buildings and proposed improvements to provide views of the water, open spaces, and easy pedestrian access to the beach. Staff Response: The building to the west was built in 1891 and the building to the east was built in 1953. Both buildings are set back from the sidewalk by approximately 8 feet. The existing buildings located at the southeast corner of 6t" and Main St. were built in 1990 and 1979 and are predominantly built up to the back of the sidewalk along the south side of Main St. The proposed building will include a planter area of about 2.5 feet from the back of sidewalk with upper -level projections up the property line. The proposal would be the first building near the northeast corner of 6t" and Main St. within the BD2 zone to be built near the sidewalk, which would contribute to an updated street front appearance. B.5 Building/Site Identity. In the downtown area, retain a connection with the scale and character of downtown through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms, masses or building elements. Encourage new construction to use designs that reference, but do not replicate historic forms or patterns. Staff Response: The proposed building is consistent with the scale and proportion of other buildings in the downtown area. A variety of materials or appearances are proposed that are Page 7 of 19 Packet Pg. 109 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 consistent with historic forms including brick, metal, and glass. The proposed fiber cement siding in lap form is similar to the surrounding area while the fiber cement panels would give the building a more modern appearance. A more detailed analysis of the building design is included below. B.6 Weather Protection. Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public sidewalks or walkways. Staff Response: The proposed building includes a recessed pedestrian entrance to the office space and to the residential space along the east side of the building that would provide weather protection at theses entries but not along the length of the sidewalk fronting Main St. B.7 Signage. Lighting of signs should be indirect or minimally backlit to display lettering and symbols or graphic design instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign. Signage using graphics or symbols or that contributes to the historic character of a building should be encouraged. Staff Response: Some wall signs are anticipated for the proposed building. Signage will be reviewed by staff with a future sign application, but in general wall -mounted signs with external illumination as shown are allowed by the sign code. B.8 Art and Public Spaces. Public art and amenities such as mini parks, flower baskets, street furniture, etc., should be provided as a normal part of the public streetscape. Whenever possible, these elements should be continued in the portion of the private streetscape that adjoins the public streetscape. In the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor, art should be a common element of building design, with greater design flexibility provided when art is made a central feature of the design. Staff Response: The site is not located within the 4t" Avenue Arts Corridor. In the public right-of-way, street tree grates are part of existing and proposed frontage improvements, but the ADB should consider recommending inclusion of additional hanging baskets and street furniture if there is sufficient room in the sidewalk area along Main St., as noted in the Staff Recommendations in Section IV. B.9 Building Height. Create and preserve a human scale for downtown buildings. Building frontages along downtown streetscapes should be pedestrian in scale. Staff Response: The proposed building is three stories with underground parking and complies with the 30-foot height limit of the BD2 zone. Height compliance will be further reviewed at the building permit phase. B.10 Massing. Large building masses should be subdivided or softened using design elements that emphasize the human scale of the streetscape. Building facades should respect and echo historic patterns along downtown pedestrian streets. Staff Response: The proposed building uses horizontal and vertical modulation together with varied materials in an attempt to reduce the bulk of the building. B.11 Building Fagade. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long facades into defined forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant spaces in commercial and mixed use areas. Avoid blank, monotonous and imposing building facades using design elements that Page 8 of 19 Packet Pg. 110 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.k add detail and emphasize the different levels of the building (e.g. the top or cornice vs. the pedestrian level or building base). Staff Response: The building provides variation in materials and form along the public frontages using human scale elements and has a distinct top and base. While not along the primary frontage along Main Street, staff is proposing that the north fagade include additional design elements to break up the blank wall (see Section IV). 8.12 Window Variety and Articulation. In the downtown retail and mixed commercial districts, building storefronts should be dominated by clear, transparent glass windows that allow and encourage pedestrians to walk past and look into the commercial space. Decorative trim and surrounds should be encouraged to add interest and variety. Upper floors of buildings should use windows as part of the overall design to encourage rhythm and accents in the fagade. Staff Response: Additional transparency at street level is warranted and has been recommended and addressed in more detail in section III.G.5.E of this report. Overall, the proposal includes window variety, but staff recommends the addition of trim around the windows to provide additional articulation and interest. Based on the above analysis, staff finds that the proposal, when incorporating the staff recommendations discussed in this report and summarized in Section IV, is consistent with the referenced goals and design objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. F. DESIGN GUIDELINES CHECKLIST The ADB utilizes a design guidelines and design review checklist applicable to the district -based design review process when conducting its review. These guidelines and checklist are included for reference as Attachment 14. The ADB will use the checklist to prioritize the design guidelines for the subject proposal. The applicant will take this information and respond to the direction provided by the Board for Phase 2 of the review process. G. APPLICABLE CODES 1. ECDC 16.43 — Downtown Business Zone (BD2) A. ECDC 16.43.020 Uses. The site is in the Downtown Mixed Commercial (BD2) zone and is subject to the requirements of ECDC 16.43. The proposal is for a mixed -use residential/commercial building with office use in a portion of the ground floor, and 18 residential units on the remaining ground floor, 2" d- and 3rd floors. The proposal also includes a basement level parking garage for off-street parking. These are permitted primary and secondary uses in the BD2 zone pursuant to ECDC 16.43.020. Per ECDC 16.43.030.G, there is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units. B. According to ECDC 16.43.030, development standards in the BD2 zone include: Page 9 of 19 Packet Pg. 111 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Minimum Height of Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Ground Minimum Maximum Zone Lot Area Street Side Rear Floor within (Sq. Ft.) Lot Width Setback Setback' Setback' Heightz the Designated Street Front4 BD1 None None 0' 0' 0' 30' 12' The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R) zoned property. ' Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in ECDC 16.43.030(C). "Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street -front" means the vertical distance from top to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground floor located within the designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground floor is the only floor above street grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. "Floor finish" is the exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a finished floor, and includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows an example of a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the "finished" ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. C. Setbacks. As required, a 15-foot setback is proposed along the eastern property line as the adjacent property is zoned RM-1.5. ECDC 16.43.030.H also notes that required setbacks from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot, which are shown in the landscape plan (Attachment 6). A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback. Prior to development, the two lots will need to be consolidated into a single parcel. D. Height. The maximum allowed height in the BD2 zone is 30 feet, with certain exceptions provided in ECDC 16.43.030.C.3. The preliminary elevations in Attachment 4 show the building at approximately 30 feet tall. Ground Floor. Chapter 16.43 ECDC has requirements that apply to uses within the designated street front as identified in Map 16.43-1 in ECDC 16.43.030.A, which includes the subject property. Per ECDC 16.43.030.13, several dimensional elements apply to the ground floor of new buildings within the designated street front at Main Street. First, each commercial space located on the ground floor within the designated street front must be directly accessible by an entry from the Main Street sidewalk. Second, the entry must be within seven inches of the grade level at the adjoining sidewalk. Third, the ground floor height within the designated street front must be a minimum of 12 feet. Page 10 of 19 Packet Pg. 112 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 As noted above and shown on sheet A1.01 (Attachment 3) the proposal meets the seven-inch requirement for access to the commercial space from the adjoining sidewalk. Pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.13 and as shown on sheet A1.03 (Attachment 3) the commercial space shows compliance with the 45-foot dimensional element as measured perpendicular to the street for the ground floor of new buildings within the designated street front. Additionally, the commercial space appears to meet the 12-foot height requirement as shown on sheet A1.06 (Attachment 4) for the height of the ground floor located within the designated street front pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.A. Only commercial uses may be located within the designated street front area and sheet A1.03 of Attachment 3 shows ground floor office tenant space that would meet this criterion. Staff will review future uses in the tenant spaces through business license applications and inspections. F. Parking. Per ECDC 17.50.010.C, one parking stall is required for each dwelling unit. 18 dwelling units are proposed, and 21 parking stalls are provided. Pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.D, no parking is required for any commercial floor area of uses permitted within the BD2 zone. The layout of parking may need to change at a later phase to address Engineering Division comments. G. Open Space. Open space is required pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.E for buildings on lots greater than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of more than 120 feet. The parcels combined are less than 12,000 square feet and the overall width of the combined parcels are less than 120 feet and thus the proposal is exempt from the open space requirement. All zoning requirements (and related building, engineering, and public works codes) will be verified through review and approval of future building permits. 2. ECDC 17.115 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure According to ECDC 17.115, electric vehicle charging must be provided for multifamily buildings according to the following table: Table 17.115.040: Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Requirements Type of Use Number of EV Capable Number of EV Ready Number of EV Installed Parking Spaces Parking Spaces Parking Spaces Multiple dwelling units 40% of parking spaces 40% of parking spaces 10% of parking spaces Twenty-one parking stalls are proposed, so at least 8 stalls must be provided as EV Capable, 8 stalls as EV Ready, and 2 stalls must be EV Installed. The required stalls are shown on Sheet E3.00 of Attachment 3 (electrical). 3. ECDC 17.120 Bicycle Parking Facilities According to ECDC 17.120, short- and long-term bike parking must be provided for multifamily buildings according to the following tables: Page 11 of 19 Packet Pg. 113 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Table 17.120-1: Short -Term Bicycle Parking Requirements Type of Use Minimum Number of Spaces Required Multiple dwelling units 1 per 10 dwelling units; not less than 2 spaces Nonresidential uses 1 per 12 vehicle parking spaces; not less than 2 spaces Table 17.120-2: Long -Term Bicycle Parking Requirements Type of Use Minimum Number of Spaces Required Number of E-bike Installed Spaces Multiple dwelling 0.75 per unit 40 percent of units spaces Nonresidential uses 2 per 25,000 square feet of floor area; not less than 3 10 percent of spaces spaces Eighteen dwelling units are proposed in the new building so at least two short-term bike stalls and fourteen (14) long-term stalls are required. Of those 14 long-term stalls, six must be E-bike installed spaces. Long term bike parking for the nonresidential floor is three spaces, with at least one additional E-bike installed stall. The proposal shows 17 secured spaces provided in the parking garage (Sheet E3.00 of Attachment 3); further review and compliance will be verified with future building permits. 4. ECDC 20.12 District -Based Design Guidelines A. Pursuant to ECDC 20.12.070.A, the ADB shall use the design guidelines and design review checklist applicable to the district -based design review process in conducting its review. These guidelines and checklist are included for reference as Attachment 14. The ADB will use the checklist to prioritize the design guidelines for the subject proposal. B. Compliance with the district -based design guidelines will be reviewed by the ADB during Phase 2 of the review process. 5. ECDC 22.43 Design Standards for the BD Zones Design standards applicable to the BD zones are provided in ECDC Chapter 22.43. A. ECDC 22.43.010 Massing and Articulation. Intent— To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale. 1. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Staff Response: The proposed building shows a brick base and includes a projecting cornice at the roof line to convey a visually distinct base and top. The mixed pattern Page 12 of 19 Packet Pg. 114 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 along the west side of the south elevation helps to emphasize the commercial entrance. 2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building exceeds the historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as a combination of materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional building widths. Staff Response: Older building widths in the downtown area typically vary from about 30 to 60 feet. The proposed building uses materials as well as vertical and horizontal modulation to create 'widths' that are between 5 and 30 feet wide along the south, west and east building facades. The north fagade is approximately 66 feet in width with little articulation or modulation, and staff is recommending additional breaks in the fagade by using a combination of materials, windows, or decorative details. B. ECDC 22.43.020 Orientation to Street. Intent — To reinforce pedestrian activity and orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street through building design. 1. Building frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a parking lot or alley. Staff Response: The building is oriented to Main Street and includes a prominent pedestrian entry to the commercial space along with pedestrian scale details to the south elevation fagade. Pedestrian access is also provided directly off Main Street to the residential entry off the eastern fagade of the building. A recessed entry for the commercial space and canopy for the residential entrance help emphasize the entrances. 2. Entrances to buildings in the BD1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street and accessible from the adjacent sidewalk. Staff Response: Entrances to both the commercial and residential spaces are accessible from the sidewalk. 3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of the following elements: a. Higher bay(s), b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet), c. Forecourt and entrance plaza. Staff Response: As noted above, a canopy and recessed entry emphasize the entrances for the commercial and residential spaces. C. ECDC 22.43.030 Ground Level Details. Intent — To reinforce the character of the streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets. 1. Ground floor, street facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall incorporate at least five of the following elements: a. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by ornamental brackets; Page 13 of 19 Packet Pg. 115 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 b. Medallions, c. Belt courses, d. Plinths for columns, e. Bulkhead for storefront window, f. Projecting sills, g. Tile work, h. Transom or clerestory windows, i. Planter box, j. An element not listed here, as approved, that meets the intent. Staff Response: Numerous ground level details provide visual interest, including lighting, precast lintels, masonry, concrete planter, and rowlock courses for the ground floor windows. 2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the sidewalk, as provided for in ECDC 16.43.030. Staff Response: As shown on sheet A1.01 (Attachment 3) and pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030 the proposal meets the 7-inch requirement for access to the commercial space and is accessible and at grade with the sidewalk along Main Street. D. ECDC 22.43.040 Awnings/Canopies and Signage. Intent —1) To integrate signage and weather protection with building design to enhance business visibility and the public streetscape. 2) To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to improve way finding for visitors. 3) To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered, and to minimize distraction from overuse of advertisement elements. 1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not provided, then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a metal or other framework. Staff Response: A recessed entry is proposed for the commercial space along Main Street while a separate canopy is provided over the pedestrian entrance to the residential units along the east side of the building. 2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage Front valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns. Staff Response: All proposed canopies are open -sided. 3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted. Staff Response: None of the canopies are marquee, box, or convex in shape. 4. Retractable awnings are encouraged. Staff Response: No retractable awnings are proposed. 5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame store- fronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies should be hung just below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists. Page 14 of 19 Packet Pg. 116 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.k Staff Response: The recessed entry proposed for the commercial space along Main Street does not appear to conceal architectural details. 6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale and position, but need not be identical. Staff Response: Not applicable, the proposal does not include multiple storefronts. 7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are not permitted. Staff Response: Nonstructural awnings are not proposed. 8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Com- binations of sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while minimizing the size of individual signs. Staff Response: Signs in the BD zones are subject to the design standards in ECDC 22.43.040. Staff will review signage at the building permit stage. Some wall signs are anticipated and appear to be in compliance with the code. 9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements are preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or less are permitted and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage permitted for a business in ECDC 20.60. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one of the required elements under ECDC 22.43.030(B). Staff Response: See #8 above. 10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering. Staff Response: See #8 above. 11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design. Staff Response: Signage will be reviewed for compliance with the applicable design standards of ECDC 22.43.040 and the sign code requirements of ECDC 20.60 when a sign application is submitted. 12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or con- tributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or on a city council -approved historic survey. Staff Response: Not applicable. The subject site is not on the National Register, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, nor on a city council -approved historic survey. 13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An historic sign may be used to meet this standard. Staff Response: See #8 above. Page 15 of 19 Packet Pg. 117 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 ECDC 22.43.050 Transparency at Street Level. Intent — To provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building. 1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front shall have transparent windows covering a minimum of 75 percent of the building facade that lies between an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade. Staff Response: Main Street has a designated street front requirement. As proposed the ground level facade along the designated street front does not provide the minimum 75 percent transparency for windows; the applicant is requesting a deviation from this requirement (Attachment 10). Staff does not support a deviation of this requirement, which has also been noted in the recommendations in Section IV. 2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. Staff Response: Staff is recommending that the proposal be revised to meet the transparency requirement. 3. Where transparency is not required, the facade shall comply with the standards under ECDC 22.43.060. Staff Response: See section F below for treating blank walls that do not require transparency. 4. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. Staff Response: Not applicable, as the proposal is within the BD2 zone. F. ECDC 22.43.060 Treating Blank Walls. Intent — To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where windows are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under ECDC 22.43.050). At least five of the following elements shall be incorporated into any ground floor, street facing facade: a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative concrete block),- b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall, c. Belt courses of a different texture and color, d. Projecting cornice, e. Decorative tile work, f. Medallions, g. Opaque or translucent glass, h. Artwork or wall graphics; i. Lighting fixtures; j. Green walls; k. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. Page 16 of 19 Packet Pg. 118 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Staff Response: The east, west and south facades do not propose blank walls and contain numerous windows. Staff is recommending that the north fagade provide additional design elements to break up the blank wall. G. ECDC 22.43.070 Building HVAC Equipment. Intent — To ensure that HVAC equipment, elevators, and other building utility features are designed to be a part of the overall building design and do not detract from the streetscape. Rooftop HVAC equipment, elevators and other rooftop features shall be designed to fit in with the materials and colors of the overall building design. These features shall be located away from the building edges to avoid their being seen from the street below. If these features can be seen from the adjoining street, building design shall use screening, decoration, plantings (e.g., rooftop gardens), or other techniques to integrate these features with the design of the building. Staff Response: Details on rooftop HVAC equipment are not provided in the Phase I package, but there is a parapet and projecting cornice incorporated into the building design. The proposed structure is nearly maxed out for the maximum building height and thus may limit the placement of any future rooftop equipment. Staff will review placement with future building permits for code compliance. 2. When HVAC equipment is placed at ground level, it shall be integrated into building design and/or use screening techniques to avoid both visual and noise impacts on adjoining properties. Staff Response: There appears to be a utility pad at the northwest corner of the site adjacent to the alley (Attachment 3 & 4). All utility cabinets must be relocated, buried, or screened with vegetation, or camouflaged to reduce their visual impact, a recommendation for which is included in Section IV. Based on the above analysis, staff finds that the proposal, when incorporating the staff recommendations in Section IV, is consistent with design standards contained within ECDC Chapter 22.43. 6. ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements Chapter 20.13 ECDC contains specific landscaping requirements for new developments, which the ADB and Hearing Examiner are allowed to interpret and modify according to ECDC 20.13.000. As is typical with most developments in the Downtown Business (BD) zones, the majority of the site will be covered by the proposed building. The subject development requires a 15- foot setback from the RM-1.5 zoned property along the eastern property boundary, which pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030.H must be landscaped with trees and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge must also be provided at some point in the setback. The application materials indicate a 15-foot building setback as shown on sheet A1.01 (Attachment 3), the planter area is shown on sheet L-1.0 (Attachment 6). Page 17 of 19 Packet Pg. 119 2.k 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 Street trees will be required to comply with the city's street tree requirements. Tree grates are shown along the Main Street property frontage. As conditioned, the proposed landscaping appears to be consistent with the intended requirements of the Street Tree Plan, ECDC 16.43.030 and ECDC 20.13. 7. ECDC 20.60 Signs Signs in the BD zone are subject to the design standards in ECDC 22.43.040. While staff will approve signage through future building permits, a few wall signs are anticipated, which appear to be in compliance with the code. IV. RECOMMENDATION According to ECDC 20.12.020.A.1, the purpose of Phase 1 of the public hearing process is for the ADB to identify the relative importance of design criteria that will apply to the project proposal during the subsequent design review. The basic criteria to be evaluated are listed on the design guidelines checklist (Attachment 14). In identifying the relative importance of the design criteria, the ADB must use the applicable design guidelines of the BD2 zone, the downtown design objectives in the Comprehensive Plan, and any relevant district -specific design objectives of ECDC Chapters 20.12 and 20.13. Staff recommends that the ADB consider the following after the public comment portion of the Phase 1 public hearing: 1. The ADB shall utilize the design guideline checklist (Attachment 14), to prioritize applicable design guidelines and objectives. 2. Additional issues identified by staff which should be addressed by the applicant prior to Phase 2 of the hearing include: a. Provide a minimum of 75% transparency at street level along Main St. b. Adequately address comments from Building, Fire and Engineering (Attachments 9 & 11). c. Breakup the approximately 66-foot wide largely blank wall along the north fagade by using a combination of materials, windows or decorative details or additional articulation and modulation. d. Provide additional trim around windows. e. If the power lines are undergrounded along Main Street to provide fire access, include street furniture and hanging baskets if there is sufficient room in the sidewalk area along Main St. f. All utility cabinets must be relocated, buried, or screened with vegetation, or camouflaged to reduce their visual impact. 3. The public hearing must be continued to a date certain for Phase 2 of the public hearing process, not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 meeting date. Staff recommends August 24, 2023, to allow sufficient time for the applicant to respond to the Board's Page 18 of 19 Packet Pg. 120 611 On Main File No. PLN2022-0085 2.k direction and for staff to review the resubmittal and prepare the staff report for Phase 2. V. PARTIES OF RECORD City of Edmonds Michelle Dotsch 121— 5t" Ave North Edmonds Resident Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Lynda Fireman Theresa Hollis 600 Bell St. #201 Edmonds Resident Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Via email Annette Border Will Magnuson 600 Bell St. Edmonds, WA Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Via email Dale Shoup Glenn Safadago 600 Bell St. Apt. 301 Attn: GBH Holdings / Applicant Edmonds, WA 98020 Via email Via email Greg Brewer Phil Frisk Via email Attn: PWF Architecture, LLC Via email John & Jolene Smith Via email Cindy Bruce, Sea Breeze Condos Edmonds Resident Via email Page 19 of 19 Packet Pg. 121 „4 " City of Edmonds Site Aerial 0 86.61 173.2 Feet 129.0 This ma is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for 1,548 p B p pp E; reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, WGS-1984-Web-Mercator-Auxiliary-Sphere current, or otherwise reliable. © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION 2.1 O U c •L Legend ArcSDE.GIS.STREET CENTERLIN N _ d — <all other values, N M 1 � d 2 G� to 5; 4 D 9;71;7;8 d K - - Sections Boundary Sections ' Edmonds Boundary c ArcSDE.GIS. PROPERTY _BUILDIP O ArcSDE.GIS.STREET CENTERLIN — <all other values, Interstate +�4 Principal Arterial 4- 0 Minor Arterial; Collector Local Street fC E State Highways —_ — <all other values> •L d -- 0 Q 1 2 r } C County Boundary O E Parks c.� ArcSDE.GIS. PROPERTY _WASHII Q ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY CITIES A-- — nonncn— --cc i E Notes r a Packet Pg. 122 1