Loading...
2017-05-03 Architectural Design Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Chair Walker called the meeting of the Architectural Design Board to order at 6:00 p.m., at the City Council Chambers, 250 - 5 h Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. Board Members Present Board Members Absent Staff Present Tom Walker, Chair Brian Borofka Kemen Lien, Senior Planner Lauri Strauss, Vice Chair Joe Herr Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager Cary Guenther Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Lois Broadway Karin Noyes, Recorder Athene Tarrant ,�1]i�1 �I1`11yY11;1 BOARD MEMBER TARRANT MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1, 2017 BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. VICE CHAIR STRAUSS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF AGENDA VICE CHAIR STRAUSS MOVED THAT THE AGENDA BE ACCEPTED AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FA11 W 0 Lei W601011 Of I `Y�f. No one in the audience indicated a desire to address the Board during this portion of the meeting. MINOR PROJECTS: No minor projects were scheduled on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: WESTGATE VILLAGE MIXED -USE BUILDING AT 10032 EDMONDS WAY (FILE NUMBER PLN20160054) Chair Walker reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing. He explained the Appearance of Fairness Rules and invited members of the Board to disclose any conversations they might have had regarding the subject of the hearing outside of the public process. None were noted. He asked Board Members to identify any conflicts of interest that would render them unable to consider the application in a fair and objective manner. None were noted. He also if anyone in the audience objected to any of the Board Members participating as decision makers in the hearing, and no one stepped forward. Lastly, he asked that everyone who wanted to testify during the hearing stand and be sworn in. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 1 of 18 Mr. Lien presented the Staff Report. He explained that the applicant is proposing to construct a new mixed -use building with 91 multi -family residential units, 3,100 square feet of retail space, structured parking and a reconfigured surface parking area providing additional parking spaces. He reminded the Board that the application is a Type III-B decision, which means that the Architectural Design Board (ADB) conducts a public hearing and makes a decision, which is appealable to the City Council. In order to approve the project, the ADB must find that the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) requirements (ECDC 16.100 — Westgate Mixed Use Zone District, ECDC 22.110 — Design Standards for the Westgate Mixed Use District, ECDC 20.11— General Design Review, and ECDC 20.13 — Landscaping Requirements). Mr. Lien provided a site map and noted that the development is proposed for the southwest corner of the intersection of Edmonds Way and 100'h Avenue West. Other portions of the site were developed under PLN 200100170 and include a Bartell's Drug Store and another 6,000-square foot commercial building with multiple businesses. The site where the proposed building will be located is currently undeveloped, and a McDonalds Restaurant is located directly west of the subject property. Other surrounding uses include banks, a service station, two grocery stores, restaurants and numerous neighborhood commercial businesses. Above the protected slope to the south of the site is a single-family neighborhood with an RS-8 zoning classification. Mr. Lien referred to the Staff Report, which goes into detail about the staff s findings with regarding to the design guidelines and zoning standards. He highlighted that the subject site is located at 10032 Edmonds Way and is zoned Westgate Mixed Use (WMU). It consists of four parcels that are approximately 92,490 square feet. As part of the project, the applicant is proposing to reconfigure the property. The portion of the property that will encompass the project would contain 56,047 square feet following a lot line adjustment. This 56,047-square foot figure is the area that is being used in the analysis for compliance with open space and amenity space requirements. Staff understands that the property owner will be redeveloping the Westgate Village area in phases and there will be more opportunities to provide additional open space and amenity spaces with future phases. Given the configuration of the lots for the current development, staff wants to ensure that areas of the site that are left out of the open space and amenity space calculations for this development will be included in future development phases. Therefore, staff is proposing a condition that covenants must be recorded on Westgate Village properties confirming that areas not included for the open space and amenity space requirement must be included in future phases of development of the Westgate Village site. Another proposed condition is that the lot line adjustment be completed prior to permit issuance. Mr. Lien briefly reviewed the general site plan for the proposed project, noting that all required parking will be located within the project area, with some additional parking provided outside of the subject parcels. He also noted the location of the proposed main entrance, retail space, open space, etc. Mr. Lien said the City received several comments relative to parking for the proposed project, as well as the entire Westgate Village area. He reviewed that, as per the parking standards in ECDC 16.110.020.1), 1.2 parking space is required for all units that are less than 900 square feet. As all the units in the proposed project would be less than 900 square feet, a total of 110 parking spaces would be required for the residential portion of the development. Parking for the commercial area is one space per every 400 square feet of commercial floor area associated with the project, which equates to 8 commercial spaces. He summarized that a total of 118 parking spaces would be required for the project, and the applicant is proposing 121 spaces within the project area. The applicant also did a parking calculation for the entire Westgate Village, including Bartells and other commercial buildings. In total, 171 parking space would be required; and following the project, there would be 217 parking space provided. Mr. Lien advised that 28 of the parking spaces identified by the applicant are shared parking spaces, all of which would be located in the surface lot area and publicly accessible at all hours. These parking space are consistent with the criteria detailed in ECDC 20.30.030, but a parking agreement would be required. A proposed condition of approval requires that the parking agreement be recorded prior to building permit issuance. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 2 of 18 Mr. Lien noted that the parking figures provided in the Staff Report are different than those submitted by the applicant. He advised that the City's Recycling Coordinator reviewed the project and noted that the proposed trash collection area for the site (in the southeast corner) appears inadequate and more space is needed for the trucks to have access. A proposed condition of approval would eliminate the 5 parking spaces just north of the trash enclosure. This condition would reduce the number of parking spaces from 126 to 121. However, he summarized that as conditioned, the proposal is still consistent with all of the parking requirements. Mr. Lien advised that building heights in the WMU zone are described in terms of stories. However, the overall building height cannot exceed 25 feet for a two-story building, 35 feet for a three-story building, and 45 feet for a four-story building. He further advised that building height is normally established by measuring the average grade. However, in the WMU zone, height is established by the finished grade at the street front, which means that buildings may not use adjoining slopes to increase the average height of the building above the street front level. He provided a cross section of the site, noting that the finished grade at the street front is between 316 and 361 feet. The applicant is proposing a four- story building, and the subject property is eligible for a fourth -story height bonus if certain criteria can be met. However, the 4d' story must be set back at least 10 feet from a building fagade facing SR 104 or 100d' Avenue West. In addition, no 3rd or 4d' story may be located within 30 feet of the intersection of SR-104 and 10e Avenue West. Mr. Lien referred to the Height Bonus Score Sheet in ECDC 20.110.090, which requires that an applicant obtain 8 points, with points in at least four of the categories in order to obtain the height bonus. He explained that: • The WMU zone requires that development meet LEED or Green Standards, and the height bonus requires at least LEED Silver, which is what the applicant is proposing. • The WMU zone requires that development meet a Green Factor of 0.3, but a Green Factor of 0.4 is required for the height bonus. The applicant's proposal shows that that the project would meet the Green Factor 0.4 requirement. • The WMU zone requires that 15% of the total area be dedicated as amenity space, but 20% is required for the height bonus. The applicant is using the new project area to calculate the required amenity/open space. • The WMU requires that projects meet street standards, including bikeway and pedestrian networks. In addition, the applicant is proposing to provide a charging facility for electric cars, indoor/covered bicycle storage and indoor changing facilities, and public art will be integrated into public amenity space. Mr. Lien summarized that the proposal will result in 8 points, which makes it eligible for the height bonus. However, staff is proposing a number of other conditions. Two conditions are related to LEED Design and Green Factor, which would require third -party verification that the building is being designed to LEED Standards and Green Factor, and there will be inspections throughout development to make sure the project meets the standards. A condition was also added regarding the value of the artwork. Given that the art is being used for the height bonus, staff is proposing a condition that requires that the value of the art must be no less than 1% of the total building value as determined by the Guiding Valuation Data published by the International Code Council. The building is valued at about $9.5 million so the value of the art would have to be about $95,000. The condition also calls out that the art is subject to review and approval by the City's Arts Commission. Mr. Lien briefly reviewed how the amenity and open space requirement was calculated, noting that 20% of the project area is 11,209 square feet, and the applicant is proposing 11,245 square feet of amenity space. The amenity space must meet certain requirements related to pervious and impervious surfaces, vegetation, etc. He further noted that 15% of the project area is 8,407 square feet, and the applicant is proposing 8,419 square feet of open space. The protected slope behind the proposed new building would be set aside as open space for the project. While the amenity space must be accessible to the public, the open space does not. Staff is recommending a condition that would require the applicant to file a document with the Snohomish County Auditor's Office related to the amenity space to address issues such as maintenance, public access and hours of operation. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 3 of 18 Mr. Lien provided a map that identifies the protected slopes in the WMU zone and advised that no development is allowed within these sloped areas. He pointed out that the contour line for the protected slope on the subject property ranges between 332 and 322 feet. There is an existing retaining wall that would be extended behind the building. The top of the retaining wall would have a contour of between 324 and 326, which is below the protected slope area. The existing trees on the slope would be retained. Mr. Lien referred to the detailed Staff Report and summarized that staff finds the proposal is consistent with the criteria listed in ECDC 20.11.030 (General Design Review), the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance. He recommended approval of the application with the conditions outlined in the Staff Report. Board Member Tarrant said she understands the point system for determining a height bonus. However, she asked if the applicant could have a slightly higher retail ceiling height. Although it would not increase the square footage of the development, it might enhance the larger retail spaces. She is normally a big believer in keeping heights down, but given the slope, an additional few feet would not impede views. Mr. Lien answered that the slope was taken into consideration when the height limits were established for the WMU zone, and additional ground floor ceiling height is not part of the height bonus system. However, the Height Bonus Score Sheet also has a category for large format retail space, which applies to development that contains one or more retail spaces that are greater than 15,000 square feet. In the WMU zone, the ground floor ceiling height must be a minimum of 12 feet and the applicant is proposing a height of 13 feet. Board Member Tarrant asked if it would be possible to combine the trash pickup areas for the entire Westgate Village site. Mr. Lien answered that Bartell's already has a designated trash enclosure, and the trash enclosure for the other existing development would be expanded to cover a greater area and serve the new development, too. He suggested the applicant address this issue more in his presentation. Board Member Broadway referred to the parking matrix provided by Mr. Lien and asked if 43 refers to the retail parking spaces that are required or what is there already. Mr. Lien said it is the number of parking spaces required, and he did not count the number of existing spaces. Board Member Broadway asked if the 28 shared stalls are being counted as part of the parking that is required for the retail space. Mr. Lien answered that all of the parking required for the development would be located within the project area, and the shared parking spaces are beyond what is required for parking for the site. Chris Davidson, Project Manager, Studio Meng Strazzara, said his presentation would focus on the design and how it ties into the existing site. He advised that the design is intended to: • Create a contemporary northwest -style building that blends with the existing site and works with the existing, vibrant retail businesses. • Balance the public and private connection within the site with the plaza element and amenity spaces. • Benefit the overall neighborhood by providing additional parking space and amenity space for tenants and the public to use, as well as by providing an art installation. Mr. Davidson provided a diagram showing the layout of the proposed new development, particularly noting the locations of the ingress and egress. He explained that access for the new building would be from existing curb cuts, and no new curb cuts are proposed. He also provided a drawing to illustrate how the proposed new building would be situated on the site. He pointed out the location of the single-family residential properties behind the subject property, as well as the retail and office development on both sides. He provided several photos to illustrate the existing site conditions, as well as views of adjacent properties. Mr. Davidson provided drawings to illustrate the proposed floor plans, specifically noting the following: • The lower level would be reserved for approximately 35 parking spaces and additional storage for tenants. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 4 of 18 • The retail spaces are focused in areas where they will have the most impact, off of SR-104 and towards a centralized location near the proposed new plaza area. • The plaza area will not only provide an amenity to tenants, but pull in the neighborhood at large. It will be broken up with a lot of planting areas and activity. • There will be pedestrian connections from the parking areas to the new building, as well a connection from the street front to the main entrance via the existing pergola that will serve as a gateway into the plaza area. • All of the upper story residential units would have trash chutes that go into a trash room. Tenants will put their trash in the chutes and maintenance staff will roll the bins out into the collection zone. • The main entry into the lobby of the new building will come from the pedestrian pathway that leads from the existing pergola. The lobby area will include a leasing office, indoor covered bicycle storage, and other amenities. • The residential units will be a mixture of 1 and 2 bedroom and studio units, with about 30 units on each floor. The idea is to get the bulk of the units looking out over the plaza area and towards SR-104. Those on the back side will have a view of the protected slope buffer. • Tenant amenity space will be provided on the 0 floor where the building is required to be stepped back adjacent to SR-104 and 100th Avenue W. One will be more of a fitness space, and the other will be more of a lounge -type space. • A side view of the proposed development illustrates the height difference between the nearest residential neighbor and the subject property, which is about 50 feet. The green belt will be maintained because of the steep slope, and it will act as a buffer between the new project and the existing single-family homes. • The building will be setback from SR-104 by about 29 feet to meet the separation requirements of the code. This area will include a 16-foot amenity space, and 8-foot sidewalk, and a 5-foot landscaped strip. • The facade of the retail spaces will be activated with a significant amount of glass. There will be large amounts of glazing that is broken up by the structure and the concrete columns. • The large number of existing trees between the subject property and the existing McDonalds will be retained to provide a buffer, and the exposed portion of the parking lot will be screened with a fiber composite material. • Exterior materials will include a combination of hardy board siding and a new composite material that mimics cedar siding but is more durable. • Modulation is proposed to break up the facade into smaller pieces. The glazing on the retail space will wrap around the corner. • The retaining wall will be closer to 8 feet, which will help screen the cars from adjacent properties. • The building will be tucked into the existing area and nestled into the hillside. There will be a meandering pathway into and throughout the site. • The retail corner amenity space will offer opportunities for searing elements that will benefit the retail clients. • The concept of the plaza area is to create nodes and wayfinding throughout the pathway so it is inviting to all types of people. The existing gateway element (pergola) will be relocated and be used to transition into a quasi- private/public seating area for the retail component as well as people from the other retail buildings. The intent is to activate the area with streetlighting for safety and aesthetics. Art would be integrated into the site in the plaza area, and most of the pavement will be permeable and create a flow throughout the site. • The main residential entry from the sidewalk will be a different material, a metal panel, that will highlight the entry point, and there will be dense plantings around it. • The pathway to the new building will be demarcated with paving elements. Alexandra Zamba, Architect Designer, Studio Meng Strazzara, said they were looking to create a contemporary northwest style that integrates and matches the existing neutral tones that are used on other buildings on site, as well as matching with the protected slope. They are proposing a hardy board system on the facade with a variety of neutral tones to break down the scale of the building and accentuate the different parts. In addition, they propose to use an aluminum long board product, which mimics wood and is more durable, sustainable and recyclable. The building will have a concrete base. Wherever there is more concrete, they will consider a green screen, as well. The accent materials include a black metal panel and matching black vinyl windows, along with a black aluminum store front system. The Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 5 of 18 black trim works well to create the contemporary, clean design and will work well with the clear vision glass that will be employed at the retail levels. She concluded that accent panels will be used to accentuate the residential lobby area as separate from the retail canopies. Forrest Jammer, Landscape Architect, Thomas Rengstorf & Associates, explained that the project design is intended to enhance the character and color that already exists in the area. The building will be nestled back into the existing trees to help transition from the upper level down to the street. A lot of the proposed vegetation speaks to that concept, as well, adding some contrast. Mr. Jammer said one of the circulation pieces will include the existing pergola on SR-104, as well as a stamped asphalt pathway. Another existing pergola will be relocated to carry the theme throughout the project to connect with 100"' Avenue West. The intent was to retain and incorporate these elements into the new design. He explained that the stamped asphalt in a brick pattern is existing and will continue to one of the access points where it will reconnect the parking area to the retail space. The intent is to maintain consistency where it is already established on the site. Mr. Jammer advised that the public plaza was required to meet specific requirements to allow the water to permeate normally into the site, and he feels the proposed plan accomplishes this requirement. The Staff Report includes a breakdown of the pervious and impervious surfaces that will be used in amenity spaces. He noted that one amenity space will be about 3,315 square feet with less than 300 square feet of impervious surface. The rest will be pervious pavement and plantings. Another larger amenity space will be about 7,930 square feet with about 1,800 square feet of impervious surface. There will be impervious surface near the art installation and to transition into some of the entry points to provide a nice contrast to the permeable materials as well as reinforcing the planting spaces. The walkway in front of the building will be permeable pavement, as well. Permeable pavement will be used in the parking lot to assist in meeting the water infiltration, and a bio-retention area is planned on the west side of the property to collect stormwater from the back of the property and help to clean it before it is released. Mr. Jammer pointed out that there is a great stand of trees on the protected slope (primarily Douglas Fir, Western Red Cedar and Big Leaf Maple) that are all very healthy. The retaining wall associated with the project will have minimal impact on these trees and the majority will be retained. In order to meet the Green Factor requirement, the applicant is proposing to save 700 caliper inches of trees on the site, and most will be in the protected slope area. The trees between the subject property and the McDonald's site will also provide good screening. Mr. Jammer advised that there will be a 5-foot wide planting area along the street to provide separation between the sidewalk and the street. The sidewalk will be 8-feet wide, which is wide enough for two people to walk side -by -side and a third person to pass. The existing trees that flank the circulation pergola will all remain, as will the heavy plantings that exists in the shared parking area. Mr. Jammer they are looking at using a few different paving materials outside of concrete to create more texture and contrast and define spaces. It will be a subtle difference, more of a color band changing back to permeable concrete or pavers on the amenity space walkway in front and continue to the plaza space. The main entry and the entry from the retail space will both have contrasting impervious paving that will highlight the entries for pedestrians. The retail space in the southeast corner will have circulation graphics to help invite people into the area. A variety of planting material will be used throughout the site, including ornamental accent trees, approximately 15 feet tall and 15 feet wide, that will flower in the spring. They are looking at creating a green screen on the blank concrete space that is located at the front near the entry area, and specimen trees will be planted in circular planters to give a nice statement right away. Small fingers of landscaping will be provided to create separation for the trash enclosure, which is yet to be finalized. Board Member Tarrant asked if it would be possible to more clearly mark the entrance from SR-104 so it is more visible upon approach. Mr. Jammer answered that there is an existing marker at the entrance to the entire site, as well as the Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 6 of 18 visual cues provided by the existing pergola. There is also a power vault for two different utilities that limits the opportunities for providing a clearer entrance. However, he said he understands her concern, and perhaps there is an opportunity to provide additional direction via the pavement. Board Member Tarrant asked if the proposed plantings would provide a sense of containment and enclosure around the plaza area. Mr. Jammer answered that trees would be planted between the parking area and the plaza to provide separation, but more could be added if the Board deems it appropriate. Board Member Tarrant asked if lighting would be provided in the plaza area and other landscaped areas, and Mr. Jammer answered that there would be accent lighting, street lighting and ambient lighting throughout the site to address safety and comfort issues. Board Member Broadway commented that the bioswale proposed for the northwest corner seems small for the area it is intended to pick up. She asked if it would also pick up drainage from the retaining wall. Mr. Jammer said it is only intended to pick up surface water for a portion of the parking area. The bioswale will be about 1,000 square feet, which should be adequate to collect all of the moisture from the surrounding area. Board Member Broadway asked how deep the bioswale would be, and Mr. Jammer answered that it would be about 3 feet deep, with a 3:1 slope from the back of the curb. Vice Chair Strauss requested more information about the types of permeable surfaces that would be used for the project. Mr. Jammer answered that it would include a variety of permeable materials, such as permeable concrete, slabs or pavers. Board Member Tarrant commented that the project includes a lot of great elements for the location, and her dream would be for some of the buildings at the corner to disappear to make room for a roundabout to improve this very difficult intersection. She further commented that the applicant has worked hard to align the design with the City's design guidelines, and she likes the concept of residential units on top of retail space, which she believes is a good option for a City the scale of Edmonds. She thanked the design team for their careful planning that provides good pedestrian access through a difficult site. Board Member Broadway asked if the proposed project would be done in phasing, or if the phasing was in reference to redevelopment of other portions of the site. Mr. Davidson answered that the proposed project would be a stand-alone project known as Phase 1. Future phasing refers to redevelopment of the Bartell's and other retail locations. Board Member Broadway asked if staff is comfortable with the stability of the steep slope behind the proposed development. Mr. Lien answered that three geotechnical reports have been done for the site and found that the slope meets the requirements of the Critical Areas Ordinance. Although she recognized that it is outside of the Board's purview, Board Member Broadway noted that the project is fairly large. If it goes up as one phase, the construction staging and laydown area will dramatically affect the existing parking and retail spaces. She asked that the developer give serious consideration to the existing site circulation so as not to impact the businesses that are open. Mr. Davidson agreed that they would do their best. Vice Chair Strauss referred to Mr. Davidson's comment that the project was designed with a Pacific Northwest Style. She said she moved to Edmonds because she likes the seaside community feel. Many of the houses in the bowl area have a more Cape Cod or Craftsman design. She asked if the applicant considered other designs and/or materials. She said it seems like the design is popped in the middle of Edmonds and does not have anything to do with Edmonds. It is important to note that once you pass the corner, the view starts to open up, making the area a gateway to the City. Mr. Davidson responded that multiple design styles were considered before arriving at the proposal. The Cape Cod style would not work for a structure of this size. There are some restrictions as far as height so pitched roofs diminish the ability to get the fourth floor. He said he understands Board Member Strauss' concern, but they attempted to mix the Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 7 of 18 materials by going with a toned -down pallet and wood materials that have more of a residential scale. He felt the proposed design ties well with the newer projects that have come to Edmonds. Chair Walker asked Mr. Lien to share his perspective relative to traffic and mitigation. He noted this is already a busy street corner. Mr. Lien advised that a traffic analysis was submitted with the project as part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. The project, itself, did not raise the level of service at any of the corners below what is required by the City's Transportation Plan and no specific mitigation was triggered by the increased traffic associated with the project. A traffic study was also done for SR-104 that looks at development along the corridor in the fixture, and the staff has talked with the applicant about looking forward to future phases to make sure what is done now will not impact the ability for future development along the corridor. Again, he said no specific mitigation measures were required for this project. Chair Walker opened the public hearing. No one in the audience indicated a desire to participate in the public hearing, and the public portion of the hearing was closed. Board Member Tarrant commented that there is a burden upon future generations to deal with the problems at this intersection, but she acknowledged that her concern has nothing to do with the current application. Board Member Broadway said she has a contrary opinion to that expressed by Vice Chair Strauss. She would view a Cape Code or seaside design as out of place because the intersection is becoming very urban. However, she is concerned that the building sits back in a very dark corner. It faces north and there is very little sunlight. She is bothered that the proposed materials appear too dark. She asked that the applicant consider using a lighter material, particularly on the side that faces the slope, which will be in the shade all day. Vice Chair Strauss said she likes the pallet of colors proposed by the applicant, but agreed with Board Member Broadway's concern that the building may be too dark. On the other hand, she did not believe that yellow tones would be right in this location. Perhaps the building could be lightened by bringing the white color down one more floor. Board Member Broadway said it was not her intent to change the color to a yellow tone. The lighter colors on the pallet board would be sufficient to address her concern. She asked the applicant to consider using the lighter tones on a greater percentage of the building to lighten the fagade. Board Member Guenther pointed out that a Pacific Northwest design is typically more horizontal with deep overhangs, and these features are not present on the proposed design. However, the design is good for capturing the color pallet that is more suitable to Edmonds. While he likes the proposed colors, he agreed with Board Member Broadway that it could be brightened up a little. Board Member Tarrant agreed with Board Member Broadway about the more urban nature of the location, and she felt the proposed design is more attractive than the bits and pieces of development that is already there. She said it is rather difficult to find fault with the proposed design given the existing development. She said the proposed design is similar to other development in the area, and it will provide a wonderful gateway to the City. Chair Walker said he likes the proposed color pallet because it fits within the landscape. He said he does not like buildings that stand out too much. He likes them to blend into the landscape, particularly when talking about a four-story building. On the other hand, he would support Board Member Broadway's recommendation that a little more brightness should be added to the building colors. Board Member Broadway noted that the main entrance to the residential units is located at the apex of the building, but it is difficult to identify from the renderings provided in the Staff Report. She suggested that more should be done to draw attention to the front entrance feature. While the entryway design includes a variety of colors and modulation, it is still not highly visible and people are required to take their cues from the pavement patterns to find the entrance. Perhaps the entryway is an area where more lightness could be introduced. Vice Chair Strauss questioned if they really want to accentuate the entrance to the residential units since it could have an impact on privacy and security. Mr. Davidson reminded the Board that the residents would have access via the secure underground parking area, and the front entrance Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 8 of 18 would primarily be used by guests and people riding bicycles. A sliding gate will be located at the entry to the underground parking to provide security for residents and tenants. Vice Chair Strauss noted that there is a gap between the top of the retaining wall and the building. She asked if this would allow people to access the back of the building, creating safety concerns for the residents. Mr. Davidson agreed that would be possible, but he would be surprised if it became a problem. He reminded the Board of the steep slope behind the retaining wall. Board Member Broadway asked if there would be a covered awning over the entrance to the retail space, and Mr. Davidson answered affirmatively. Board Member Broadway noted that the awning along the front fagade would not be continuous, and Mr. Davidson agreed and pointed out that there are landscape buffers between the two. Mr. Lien asked if Board Member Broadway is suggesting that the application come back before the Board after the applicant has addressed the issue of color and accentuating the entrance. If not, the Board should give clear direction for staff as the project moves forward to the Building Permit stage to make sure the design is consistent with the Board's intent. Board Member Broadway advised that if the solution is a substantial change to the architecture and undulation of the roof at the entry, she would like to see the project again. But if it is simply color or a change in the entry for articulation without affecting the roof line, the Board does not need to see it again. The remainder of the Board concurred. Mr. Lien said he would prefer that the Board provide this direction as a condition of approval rather than relying solely on the minutes. Mr. Davidson suggested that a roofline change would not do a lot to emphasize the entryway. Any changes would probably be at the ground level in materials and color and less about what is going on above. He said he thinks the design team can do something to make that work without making wholesale changes in the structure, itself. Board Member Broadway said she likes the roof line as it is currently proposed. BOARD MEMBER BROADWAY MOVED THAT THE DESIGN, AS PRESENTED AND WITH THE COMMENTS, SO LONG AS THERE ARE NO ROOF LINE CHANGES, IS SUBJECT TO THE REMAINING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS. BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER MOVED THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ADOPT THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE STAFF REPORT; FIND THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, POLICIES OF ECDC 20.10.000, DESIGN CRITERIA OF ECDC 20.11.030, DESIGN CRITERIA OF ECDC 22.110 AND ZONING REGULATIONS; AND APPROVE THE PROPOSED WESTGATE MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT UNDER FILE NUMBER PLN20160054 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A PARKING AGREEMENT FOR SHARED PARKING WITHIN THE WESTGATE VILLAGE SITE SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY. SUCH AGREEMENT MUST BE RECORDED PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEING ISSUED FOR THE BUILDING. 2. LEED SILVER OR BUILT GREEN 4-5 RATING MUST BE CONFIRMED THROUGH THIRD -PARTY VERIFICATION AT THE APPLICANT'S EXPENSE. THE APPLICANT MUST ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WHO WILL SELECT THE CONSULTANT TO VERIFY THAT THE PROJECT IS DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO THE IDENTIFIED LEED OR BUILT GREEN STANDARD. 3. GREEN FACTOR CERTIFICATION MUST BE CONFIRMED THROUGH THIRD -PARTY VERIFICATION AT THE APPLICANT'S EXPENSE. THE APPLICANT MUST ENTER INTO A Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 9 of 18 CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WHO WILL SELECT THE CONSULTANT TO VERIFY THAT THE PROJECT IS DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO THE IDENTIFIED GREEN FACTOR SCORE. 4. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE, A COVENANT WITH AND IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT ANY AREA WITHIN PARCEL NUMBERS 00610700200600, 00610700200601, 00610700200701 AND 00610700200702 LEFT OUT OF CALCULATIONS FOR THE AMENITY AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL MUST ULTIMATELY BE INCLUDED IN CALCULATIONS FOR AMENITY AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS IN FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PHASES ON PARCELS 00160700200803 AND 00610700201001. 5. AN EASEMENT MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS FOR THE PORTION OF THE SIDEWALK LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT IS NECESSARY TO MEET THE EIGHT - FOOT SIDEWALK WIDTH REQUIREMENT. 6. A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MUST BE COMPLETED AND RECORDED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. THE AREA CONTAINING THE DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT SHALL BE USED IN DETERMINING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN SPACE AND AMENITY SPACE REQUIREMENTS OF ECDC 22.110. 7. THE GROUND LEVEL FACADES OF BUILDINGS THAT FACE A STREET FRONT SHALL HAVE TRANSPARENT WINDOWS COVERING A MINIMUM OF 40 PERCENT OF THE GROUND FLOOR FACADE THAT LIES BETWEEN AN AVERAGE OF TWO FEET AND 10 FEET ABOVE GRADE. TO QUALIFY AS TRANSPARENT, WINDOWS SHALL NOT BE MIRRORED OR CONSIST OF DARKLY TINTED GLASS OR PROHIBIT VISIBILITY BETWEEN THE STREET AND INTERIOR. 8. ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND OTHER UTILITY HARDWARE ON THE ROOF, GROUNDS OR BUILDINGS SHALL BE SCREENED TO MITIGATE VIEW IMPACTS FROM STREET LEVEL. SCREENING COULD INCLUDE THE USE OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, LANDSCAPING AND/OR FENCING. 9. THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SEEKING AND OBTAINING ALL OTHER REQUIERD LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS. 10. A DOCUMENT SUMMARIZING APPLICABLE CONDITIONS RELATED TO THE AMENITY SPACE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MAINTENANCE, PUBLIC ACCESS AND HOURS OF OPERATION, SHALL BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY, AND RECORDED WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. 11. THE APPLICANT SHALL PURCHASE ONE OR MORE ORIGINAL WORKS OF ART TO BE PERMANENTLY DISPLAYED IN A REASONABLY -ACCESSIBLE AREA OF THE EXTERIOR PUBLIC AMENITY SPACE. THE ART WORK SHALL HAVE A FAIR MARKET VALUE OF NO LESS THAN 1% OF TOTAL BUILDING VALUE AS DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING VALUATION DATA, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL ON FILE WITH THE CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL. FINAL SELECTION OF ART WORK SHALL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 10 of 18 12. THE FIVE PARKING SPACES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE TRASH ENCLOSURE SHALL BE ELIMINATED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE MANEUVERABILITY FOR SERVICE VEHICLES. 13. THE ENTRANCE TO THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE BUILDINGS SHOULD STAND OUT MORE AND THAT CAN HAPPEN PRIMARILY WITH COLOR OR MATERIAL CHANGES TO THE FACADE. IF THE CHANGES RESULT IN A STRUCTURAL CHANGE TO THE ROOF LINE, THE PROPOSAL WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD FOR APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER BROADWAY SECONDED THE MOTION. BOARD MEMBER BROADWAY MOVED TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO ADD ONE MORE CONDITION TO READ: 14. THE APPLICANT WILL RE-EVALUATE THE PROPOSED COLOR PALLET AND ADJUST SUCH THAT THERE ARE GREATER PROPORTIONS OF A LIGHTER PART OF THE PALLET USED IN THE PROJECT. VICE CHAIR STRAUSS SECONDED THE MOTION TO AMEND, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF 3-2, WITH BOARD MEMBERS TARRANT AND WALKER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The Board took a five-minute break at 8:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: PHASE 1 DISTRICT BASED DESIGN REVIEW FOR GRAPHITE ART STUDIOS AT 202 MAIN STREET (FILE NUMBER PLN2017001� Chair Walker reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing. He explained the Appearance of Fairness Rules and invited members of the Board to disclose any conversations they might have had regarding the subject of the hearing outside of the public process. None were noted. He asked Board Members to identify any conflicts of interest that would render them unable to consider the application in a fair and objective manner. None were noted. He also if anyone in the audience objected to any of the Board Members participating as decision makers in the hearing, and no one stepped forward. Lastly, he asked that everyone who wanted to testify during the hearing stand and be sworn in. Mr. Lien presented the Staff Report, advising that projects that require a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination are reviewed by the ADB in a two-phase public hearing process. The ADB's decision on such applications is a Type 111-B decision, which is appealable to the City Council. He explained that the purpose of Phase 1 design review is for the applicant to present conceptual designs to the Board and for the Board to give direction to the applicant based on the design review standards. They will not be making a decision tonight. Following public testimony and establishment of the Design Guidelines Checklist by the ADB, the public hearing will be continued to a date certain, not to exceed 120 days from the Phase 1 hearing date. The purpose of Phase 2 is to allow the applicant to redesign the initial conceptual design to address the input of the public and the ADB. Once this is done, the design will be submitted to staff, who will review the proposal and schedule the project for final review. Staff will provide a more detailed analysis of the proposal's compliance with the prioritized design guidelines as well as all applicable zoning standards in advance of the Phase 2 hearing. The Board will make a final decision on the design proposal at the conclusion of Phase 2 of the public hearing. Mr. Lien advised that the application is for a new mixed -use building at 202 Main Street within the Downtown Business (BD2) zone. The proposed two-story, 20,000 square foot building, referred to as the "Graphite," will contain art studios, Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 11 of 18 art gallery space, a caf6, three two -bedroom apartments and an additional 9,540 square feet of underground parking. The project site is 14,411 square feet and currently houses the Marvel Marble business, which would be demolished to make room for the new building. Mr. Lien reviewed that, in accordance with ECDC 15.43.030.E, at least 5% of the lot area of the project must be devoted to open space. With a lot area of 14,411 square feet, 720 square feet of open space is required. The proposal provides open space in the northeast corner in front of the cafe and the northwest corner with a patio that is accessible from the sidewalk. The total amount of open space currently proposed by the applicant is 1,400 square feet. Mr. Lien reminded the Board that the maximum allowed height in the BD2 zone is 30 feet, measured from the average grade. Measuring from the main floor elevation, which appears to be close to what the average grade would be, the building is 29'9" in height. While it appears that the proposed building will comply with the height restrictions, specific calculations should be provided with Phase 2 in order to verify the proposal is consistent. Mr. Lien explained that parking is not required for the commercial floor area of permitted uses located in the BD2 zone, and one parking stall is required per residential unit. The applicant has indicated that approximately 20 parking stalls would be provided in a parking garage within the building, which exceeds the required ratio of one stall for each of the three residential units. Mr. Lien reviewed that the BD2 zone requires that the minimum height of the ground floor must be 12 feet. The elevation views found in Attachment 3 indicate a ground floor height of 15 feet, but compliance with the requirement will be confirmed during future review of more detailed plans. Mr. Lien explained that, pursuant to ECDC 20.12.070.A, the ADB will use the Design Guidelines and Design Review Checklist applicable to the district -based design review process when conducting its review. The guidelines and checklist are included in Attachment 4. The intent is that the ADB will use the checklist to prioritize the design guidelines as they pertain to the proposal. He noted that the design standards applicable to the BD zones are found in ECDC 22.43 (Attachment 6). Mr. Lien reported that the City's Recycling Coordinator has advised that the space provided for trash collection on the proposed plan appears to be inadequate and will need to be expanded so that both containers can be rolled out independently and serviced in the alley with enough room for the drivers to access the space. Mr. Lien advised that the City received one comment letter prior to the hearing from Brian Mull, suggesting that the Marvel Marble Building be retained and refurbished. Mary Olsen, Property Owner and Applicant, Edmonds, said the building would be a very large art studio space with room for classes, workshops, and instruction. The ground floor space would be occupied by studios where artists can work and the public can watch. The gallery will allow artists to display their work, and the flexible area will be a nice space for artists to draw. The new building will also house a non-profit, art -education organization called Heartland Northwest, whose purpose is to get art education back into schools by teaching teachers how to teach art. Scott Miller, Architect, Scott G. Miller Design Services, reviewed the floor plan for each level of the proposed new building. He noted where the main entrance would be located and advised that the entrance would have a projected awning and street trees would be provided along the sidewalk. The ground floor will include public space for receptions and meetings, art studios with moveable walls, a center area with moveable tables for various projects, and large skylights above to bring in natural light to the lower part of the building. It will also include office space, a secondary entrance for artists and residents, gallery space, a cafe with a covered sidewalk for outdoor dining and landscape planters outside of the building. Space for deliveries, Americans with Disabilities (ADA) parking and restrooms will also be provided on site. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 12 of 18 Mr. Miller referred to the Recycling Coordinator's comments relative to the size of the trash enclosure and noted that it has already been relocated to a different area on the site and could be expanded to meet whatever size the City deems necessary. An additional trash container would be located in the parking garage below ground, along with bicycle storage space, utilities and a stormwater retention system. The parking garage would be accessed via the alley. Mr. Miller advised that the upper story would be served by both an elevator and stairs and would provide more art studios, flexible space, drawing space, an open area to the ground floor, restrooms, three residential units with decks, and storage units for the occupants. The underground parking will be for the residential tenants, as well as the more permanent artists who use the studios. The street parking would remain open for visitors of the new building, as well as the general community. While the parking garage is a rather costly element and is not required by code, it will relieve a lot of pressure related to parking. Mr. Miller reviewed that the building facade uses a variety of materials and architectural accents on the lower half of the building, accentuated by slate riles, landscape planters, distinct overhangs and fixed awnings on the entryways. The building has substantial exterior modulation on both sides facing Main Street and 2"d Avenue, as well as the alley to the south. The main entrance faces Main Street and a secondary entrance faces the alley to the south. All entryways are accessible from the street and have sloped awnings or overhangs that provide pedestrian protection and additional modulation of the fagade. Ground level details include projecting slate tile planters, sitting areas, large column bases, recessed building corners for greater visibility, natural wood soffits at awnings and large storefront windows for increased visual connection from the exterior to the interior spaces. Building signage will be located above the main entrance below the awning, and a sign will be placed above the cafe entrance, as well. Blade signs might also be used on the building. Two small areas of sloped roof are also included in the design for aesthetics. Due to the slope of the site, the Main Street fagade will be two feet below grade on one end and about four feet above grade on the other end. Mr. Miller advised that the proposed building would be a mixture of compatible uses that are complementary to each other and to the downtown. The proposed Corten steel material will be of a warm color and the natural wood beams and columns will provide modulation. The Corten steel material and wood beam design also wraps around to the alley sides, and there is a lot of modulation on the alley side, as well. Mr. Miller commented that, although the building would not be fully LEED certified, it will contain a number of LEED elements, including materials that are easy to recycle, natural lighting for ventilation and lighting, and the Corten steel is made out of 2/3 recycled steel. Board Member Tarrant asked if the wood beams would be a natural color, and Mr. Miller answered affirmatively. Board Member Tarrant asked why the applicant has chosen to use Corten material. She also asked the applicant's reasoning relative to the scale of the windows, noting that the windows on the two corners appear to be smaller panes than the larger panes in the middle of the building. Mr. Miller said the windows are actually the same size, but they look smaller in the drawing because they are on an angle and the elevation drawing is flat. Board Member Tarrant suggested that the applicant consider different, perhaps smaller windows for the residential units to set them apart from the windows that are provided for the studios and other artist spaces. Mr. Miller agreed that the windows for the residential units could be more residential in scale. Board Member Tarrant asked if the Corten material would be used around the entire building, and Mr. Miller answered affirmatively. He noted that the pieces would be fairly small and the attachment pieces would make it appear "claddish." They want a material that is both ecologically helpful as well as something that will last without a lot of maintenance. The Corten material also has more of a high-tech flavor. Board Member Broadway asked if the building height would be measured to the top of the flat roof. If so, could the applicant obtain a variance for the sloped roof pieces? Mr. Lien said the height would be measured to the peak of the sloped section of the roof. The maximum height of the roof structure could be no greater than 30 feet, but there are some height exceptions for elevator penthouses, stand pipes, etc. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 13 of 18 Vice Chair Strauss observed that the applicant is proposing 20 parking space on site when only three are required. While she gets the desire to provide parking space for the artists, she asked if the intent is to attract artists from outside of the area, as well. She noted that downtown Edmonds is very walkable, and she questioned the need to dig up the ground to put in 20 unneeded parking spaces. Mr. Miller said the underground parking would provide secure parking for both residents and artists who bring equipment and materials. Even though downtown Edmonds is walkable, it is often difficult to find street parking. Vice Chair Strauss asked if the applicant is required to provide ADA parking. Mr. Miller answered that it is not a requirement, but the applicant believes it would be appropriate to accommodate disabled artists, guests and tenants. Board Member Broadway asked if the surface ADA parking space would be designated as ADA only or if it would also be used for drop off parking. Mr. Miller said it is not intended to be a loading stall. Board Member Broadway asked if there would be access from ADA parking spaces to the building. Mr. Miller answered that there would be access from the surface parking space to the side entrance of the restaurant, but there would not be ADA access from the parking space to the main entrance. However, the ADA parking spaces located in the underground parking area would be accessible to the main portion of the building via elevators. He reminded the Board that the ADA spaces are not required. Board Member Guenther asked what structure type the applicant is anticipating for the new building. He also asked if the expression of wood and steel would be carried into the interior of the building, as well. Mr. Miller said he anticipate that the exposed wood beams will be used inside the structure, and there will be some Corten elements inside, as well. The basic framework for the new building will be wood construction, and the open areas will be beamed with columns. Vice Chair Strauss observed that downtown Edmonds is eclectic, with a lot of different designs. She said she likes the Marvel Marble building with its angled gables. Edmonds buildings are all unique, but also have common elements like parapets that go up with crenellation to define entries and pitched roofs to provide modulation. She does not see any of this in the proposed design. The roofs are more symmetrical without any parapets or awnings at the street level. While it is a nice design, she did not feel it fits downtown Edmonds. The metal siding is not used on any other building in downtown. She said she understands that the applicant is trying to bring in a new design that plays into the eclectic nature of Edmonds, but she feels it is too busy for the corner. Ms. Olsen said her intent was to reflect what is going on inside the building, which is artists and artwork. She looked at remodeling the Marvel Marble Building, but it would have been too difficult and costly. She felt that what is going on inside the building should be reflected in the exterior design. It needs to be different to catch your eye and attract people to come inside and see what is going on. Chair Walker opened the public hearing. Tam Axtell, Edmonds, said she is not an artist or a designer, but she has been a resident of Edmonds for 30 years and is very excited about the project. She is heartened that the ADB spends time considering what is built in Edmonds, but she likes the design and is excited about the new art facility. She is particularly glad that it will accommodate a non-profit organization that focuses on art education in public schools. Kim Fine, Edmonds, said she supports the proposed project and thinks the design represents an exciting building. With all due respect, she said she likes that it is different for Edmonds, but fits in with the Pacific Northwest feel. She loves the large windows and the multiple uses of the building, with the cafe, art studios and common space for events. She also really appreciates the idea of parking below ground. She summarized that the proposal is a unique and exciting design for Edmonds. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 14 of 18 Diane Ellis, Edmonds, said she is excited about the proposed new building on a number of levels. She commented that the Marvel Marble building has been an eyesore in the downtown for thirty years, yet it is the first thing you see while coming up SR-104 from the ferry. The proposed project will be cutting edge for what it will provide in opportunities for the community. It will be a nice anchor that will attract more businesses to an area that is not currently as popular as the downtown core. The project will be fun and exciting, and she likes the Corten material that has an urban village feel. It is a brilliant project that should be embraced by the City. Krystal Lanning, Edmonds, said she became a resident of Edmonds in the early 80s, and she loves the design of the proposed new building. She likes the lines, and having some extra parking, even if not required, is an awesome opportunity for both guests and tenants. Extra ADA parking is fabulous, as well. The opportunity for teachers to learn how to teach art is incredible. The people who will be involved in the new building are active in the community and artists themselves. Bringing people to a learning center and offering an opportunity for kids to experiment with art will broaden their horizons. She thanked Ms. Olsen for bringing the project forward Julie Green, Edmonds, said she would probably work in the new studios until she needs to use one of the ADA parking spaces. She thanked the applicant for going above the standard by providing the additional parking spaces. She likes that there will be secure parking when she works late into the evening. Deloris Hogland, Edmonds, said she is a local artist, and she supports the proposed project. Having a place for artists to park and unload their supplies is important and the atrium design is a dream that will attract good things to the City. She agreed with the other citizens who spoke in favor of the project. The Board reviewed the Design Review Checklist and made the following findings: A. Site Planning 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics Low Mr. Lien pointed out that this item refers to the Priority topography, environmental constraints, solar orientation, etc. 2. Reinforce existing streetscape characteristics High Board Member Broadway pointed out that there Priority are existing trees, and she would like them to remain. Mr. Lien advised that there would be street frontage improvements that include sidewalks and new street trees. Although the existing ones might not remain, new ones would be planted. 3. Entry clearly identifiable from the street High Board Member Broadway noted that members of Priority the public indicated the need to draw pedestrians from the ferry terminal to the new building, and accentuating the entryway would help with that. 4. Encourage human activity on street High Board Member Broadway commented that the Priority restaurant component is valuable and will draw people who are not artists through curiosity. Board Member Guenther pointed out that the outdoor dining space will also be consistent with the space that is available across the street. 5. Minimize intrusion into privacy on adjacent sites Low Priority 6. Use space between building and sidewalk to provide Low security, privacy and interaction (residential projects) Priority Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 15 of 18 7. Maximize open space opportunity on site (residential High Mr. Lien pointed out that 5% open space is projects) Priority required and the proposal provides significantly more than that via the outdoor dining space and the patio on the corner. 8. Minimize parking and auto impacts on pedestrians High It was noted that this is already a priority of the and adjoining property Priority applicant, who is proposing significantly more parking space than what is required by code. 9. Discourage parking in street front N/A Mr. Lien noted that the applicant is not proposing to add any parking in front of the building, and they are allowed to use the existing street parking. 10. Orient building to corner and parking away from High Vice Chair Strauss commented that this item is corner on public street fronts (corner lots) Priority important to attract people coming from the ferry. Board Member Broadway said she supports the proposal to provide access to the underground parking via the alley. B. Bulk and Scale 1. Reinforce existing site characteristics N/A Mr. Lien noted that all of the surrounding properties are zoned BD-2, as well. C. Architectural Elements and Materials 1. Complement positive existing character and/or High Vice Chair Strauss pointed out that the proposed respond to nearby historic structures Priority building is large compared to adjacent structures. While there is some vertical separation, perhaps they could bring that down to a smaller scale. 2. Unified architectural concept High Board Member Guenther pointed out that Priority drawings provided by the applicant are flat elevations, which make it difficult to see the modulation that is proposed. He agreed that he would like to see a rhythm or pattern for the windows rather than all being the same size. 3. Use human scale and human activity High Board Member Broadway commented that she Priority likes the materials, proportions and modulation of the building, and she appreciates that the ground floor public space is very visible and clear, but she would like to see more modulation in the upper floor private space. She would also like the windows on the residential portion to be a different scale. While it is important that the ground floor windows be transparent to draw people in, the residential windows should provide privacy. The applicant pointed out that there is only one set of residential windows on the front of the building. The remaining residential windows are on the sides facing the alleys. 4. Use durable, attractive and well -detailed finish High Chair Walker commented that he likes the Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 16 of 18 materials. Priority overall design, as well as the proposed materials. It is funky and has an artistic flavor to it. Vice Chair Strauss expressed her belief that a lot of the same materials are used, and the building seems really dark and heavy. Perhaps a lighter color or different material could be used on the upper floor. Board Member Broadway said she likes the Corten building materials, as well as the proposed color pallet. 5. Minimize garage entrances High The Board indicated support for the proposed Priority garage entry from the alley. D. Pedestrian Environment 1. Provide convenient, attractive and protected High pedestrian entry Priority 2. Avoid blank walls High Regarding the blank walls along the alley, Board Priority Member Broadway pointed out that the alleyways are narrow and nothing looks onto the wall from these locations. She felt that this is a good location for the restaurant function. Mr. Lien suggested there could be some variation in color and materials to provide definition. Chair Walker suggested that perhaps an art installation could be on that large, blank wall. 3. Minimize height of retaining walls N/A 4. Minimize visual and physical intrusion of parking N/A lots on pedestrian areas 5. Minimize visual impact of parking structures High It was pointed out that the applicant is already Priority addressing this requirement. 6. Screen dumpsters, utility and service areas High Priority 7. Consider personal safety High Priority E. Landscaping 1. Reinforce existing landscape character of High Mr. Lien reminded the Board that street trees neighborhood Priority would be required. 2. Landscape to enhance the building or site High Priority 3. Landscape to take advantage of special site N/A It was noted that there are no special site conditions conditions. Mr. Miller asked if the Board would prefer that he provide an actual model of the proposed development. The Board agreed that a computer -generated model that is available electronically would be helpful. The Board discussed potential dates for the Phase H hearing and tentatively scheduled it for June 21' at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Lien indicated that he would need all of the applicant's materials by May 29th in order to prepare for the continued hearing on June 21 st. He would prefer that the materials are submitted as early as May 22nd Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 17 of 18 BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER MOVED THAT THE HEARING BE CONTINUED TO A FUTURE DATE. BOARD MEMBER BROADWAY SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSOLIDATED PERMIT APPLICATIONS (No Public Participation): There were no consolidated permit applications. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS/ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: There were no administrative reports. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: There were no Board Member comments. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Architectural Design Board Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting May 3, 2017 Page 18 of 18