The URL can be used to link to this page

2017-01-11 Planning Board Packet�1 o� NJI Agenda Edmonds Planning Board "" Ixyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 JANUARY 11, 2017, 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approval of PB Minutes of Dec. 14, 2016 3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Development Services Director Report 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Presentation on Planning for Five Corners 9. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA A. Review of Extended Agenda 10. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda January 11, 2017 Page 1 2.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 01/11/2017 Approval of PB Minutes of Dec. 14, 2016 Staff Lead: N/A Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Approve draft minutes Narrative Draft minutes are attached Attachments: PB161214d Packet Pg. 2 2.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 14, 2016 Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 — 5"b Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Philip Lovell, Chair Carreen Rubenkonig, Vice Chair Todd Cloutier Alicia Crank Nathan Monroe Daniel Robles Valerie Stewart Malia Clark, Student Representative BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Matthew Cheung (excused) STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Shane Hope, Development Services Director Sean Conrad, Associate Planner Jerry Bevington, Video Recorder Karin Noyes, Recorder PRESENTATION BY MAYOR EARLING Mayor Earling announced that Board Member Stewart was retiring from the Board at the end of the year, and this would be her last meeting. He thanked her for her many years of service and presented her with a gift. He particularly noted her exemplary work with the student group, Saving Salmon. Board Member Stewart said her time on the Board has been an incredible and fulfilling experience, and she will miss her fellow Board Members. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER CRANK MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 2016 BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER ROBLES SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment during this portion of the meeting. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Lovell referred the Board to the written report that was provided by the Development Services Director. There was no discussion relative to the report. T 0 N Packet Pg. 3 ELECTION OF OFFICERS BOARD MEMBER STEWART NOMINATED BOARD MEMBER RUBENKONIG TO SERVE AS CHAIR OF THE BOARD FOR 2017. BOARD MEMBER MONROE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BOARD MEMBER ROBLES NOMINATED BOARD MEMBER MONROE TO SERVE AS VICE CHAIR OF THE BOARD FOR 2017. BOARD MEMBER RUBENKONIG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Ms. Hope advised that the Edmonds portion of Highway 99 has been an important focus of the community for a long time. A lot of work has been done in the past, and these previous efforts were studied as part of the current planning process. She c reviewed that the subarea planning process started in 2015, and worked ramped up significantly in 2016 when the City hired N a consultant team, led by Fregonese Associates, to assist staff in developing the plan. The goal was to create a more detailed visionary plan for the future. She emphasized that the current document is a draft, but staff believes it is very close to what d the actual plan will be. The consultant and staff look forward to hearing from the public and the Planning Board so that the 4) document can be adjusted and moved forward to the City Council for consideration and final adoption. o Ms. Hope reviewed that public outreach for the project included briefings and discussions with the Planning Board and City w Council, meetings with key property owners, three public open houses, three mailings about the project to nearly 2,200 c addresses, press releases, news media articles, at least two sets of email announcements to people who signed up for emails, meetings with the technical advisory committee (including transportation agencies and nearby local governments), special m information on the City's website, and various communications with interested parties. - Ms. Hope introduced Alex Joyce, Fregonese Associates, who was present to review the highlights of the plan, listen to public o comments and answer questions of the Board. At the conclusion of the public hearing, she recommended the Board forward Q. the plan to the City Council with a recommendation of approval, with any technical changes identified by the Board. Staff C anticipates that adoption of the plan will be followed closely by implementation, which includes working with interested property owners who want to improve properties, working with housing agencies who want to help with affordable housing, working with neighboring jurisdictions on infrastructure and transportation improvements, and working with various government agencies to obtain grant funding. In addition, more detailed changes to the development codes and design v standards will be needed to implement the plan. N Alex Joyce, Principal, Fregonese Associates, advised that the public process was robust and allowed people to identify their r vision for Highway 99 in term of land use and transportation/infrastructure improvements. They received great feedback a during the public process, which identified the following community values: • Connectivity. Better connections and access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders to destinations and amenities c m E in the area. z � • Walkability. Create walkable neighborhoods and commercial centers where visitors can walk safely and comfortably at Q all hours of the day. • Safety. Safer connections for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders to destinations and amenities in the area. • Destinations. Enhance distinct districts in the area such as the Health District and the International District to create more vibrant destinations and an even better sense of place. • Healthy Businesses. Bring new businesses and jobs to the area, encourage existing businesses to thrive, and provide good quality retail and shopping amenities. • Affordable Housing. Encourage affordable housing options for a mix of income levels (low-income, workforce, and moderate -income). • Beautification. Create a more attractive place for residents and visitors through landscaping and urban design. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 2 11 Packet Pg. 4 2.A.a Mr. Joyce explained that there have been multiple attempts at planning for the Highway 99 area, and these were considered throughout the process. The proposed plan is a vision and action plan to enhance the Highway 99 area, support prolonged economic prosperity in the corridor area, and build a more attractive place for the Edmonds community to live, work and play. The document provides guidance for how the corridor should grow and change in the future and sets forth the opportunities and actions needed to address the challenges on Highway 99. The plan describes three alternative scenarios representing different intensities of investment and redevelopment in the short- and long-term future. It also identifies implementation strategies for investments, policy changes and short-, medium- and long-term actions needed to transform the Highway 99 area into a vibrant, mixed -use, transit -oriented corridor. Mr. Joyce advised that the vision goals contained in the draft plan represent the themes that surfaced throughout the community discussions with residents and stakeholders. They describe the qualities residents want to see in the Highway 99 Corridor as: • Economic Development. Stimulate the economy by attracting and encouraging new businesses, investment and redevelopment. c • Safety and Walkability. Create a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists to move along N and get across Highway 99. • Housing and Development. Encourage and incentivize mixed -use development, affordable housing, office/commercial and other types of development. p • Identity. Establish a distinct identity along the corridor that supports existing cultural destinations and amenities and p creates a welcoming and attractive environment for both visitors and residents. • Transportation. Create more efficient and accessible connections between districts, destinations and other transit 3 centers/stations. E Mr. Joyce described the corridor as an approximately 2-mile stretch of road that borders several jurisdictions: Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline and Unincorporated Snohomish County (Esperance). The plan identifies the following three subdistricts: International District (North). This area is a major cluster of Asian -owned businesses, with diverse restaurants, grocers and shops. It is already a regional destination, and there are opportunities to strengthen its identify and help it thrive in the long term. Gateway District (South). This area is the first introduction to Edmonds on Highway 99, and the community expressed a strong desire for a "gateway" and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds. The intent is to place a recognizable marker at the entry point. Health District (Center). This area is home to a variety of health care facilities and offices, including Swedish Hospital Edmonds Campus. Mr. Joyce advised that the Implementation Strategies were organized into sections: zoning and development, affordable housing, signage and wayfinding, and transit. He explained that the strategies proposed in this section are intended to strengthen the design standards that currently exist. As the plan moves into the implementation phase, there are certain conditions on the corridor that may need special design consideration. The proposed design standards are intended to apply throughout the corridor, but other, more detailed standards will need to be created later to address unique circumstances. He reviewed the recommended strategies as follows: Recommendation LL Replace the current Comprehensive Plan maps and text with updated materials that clearly identify the three distinct districts anchored around major transportation gateways and employment clusters, such as the hospital and international businesses. The intent is to simplify the zoning and make it more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Maps. Recommendation 2.1. Consolidate the existing CG and CG2 zones into a single CG zone with height limits at 75 feet. Most of the area is either zoned CG1 or CG2, and the difference between them is a minor height difference of 15 feet. Recommendation 3.1. Instead of having six or more zones, it is recommended that the new, consolidated CG zone be applied to most of the study area. Much of the current zoning was inherited when the area was annexed from Snohomish County. The patchwork of zones is outdated, and in some cases, inconsistent with parcel boundaries. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 3 11 Packet Pg. 5 2.A.a • Recommendation 4.1. On a primary frontage, a minimum of 50% of the street frontage should have buildings within 10 feet of the front property line. In addition, 50% of all other street frontages will have buildings, walls or hedges at least 4 feet in height, within 10 feet of the property line. The current standard requires that not more than 50% of a project's total parking spaces may be located between the building's front fagade and the primary street, and parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets. This standard can allow too much parking on street fronts, which impacts pedestrian activity and hinders a vibrant urban street. The intent is to encourage more parking in the rear of buildings by regulating the location of a percentage of the parking, but the amount of parking in front could still be very large. The plan suggests that regulating the percentage of the frontage that needs to be occupied by building instead of parking area is a better approach. • Recommendation 4.2. Parking areas may comprise 40% or less of street frontage. This will push parking towards the side and rear of buildings and bring buildings up to the street, allowing more space for pedestrian activity on primary streets and more visibility for businesses. • Recommendation 4.3. 50% of primary frontage building faVade within 10 feet lot line shall be made of transparent windows and doors. All other building frontage require 30% transparency. • Recommendation 4.4. Replace the 4-foot landscaped buffer with a required 10 foot pedestrian activity zone setback c on all primary frontages with ground floor retail. The current standard creates landscape barriers between pedestrian N and buildings rather than enhancing a safe and comfortable pedestrian zone. The proposed change would allow for a range of active uses like sidewalk cafes and amenities such as public art, street furniture, street trees, etc. d • Recommendation 4.5. Establish stepback and setback standards for apartments and mixed -use buildings adjacent to G single-family zones and include these standards in the zoning code. The current design standards do not ensure proper p transition of higher -density buildings adjacent to single-family neighborhoods. As the City contemplates expanding the m CG zone over a larger area, it is important that mixed -use development transitions nicely into the single-family 3 neighborhoods. The proposed design standards would ensure predictability by strengthening the requirements for stepbacks and setbacks. The plan proposes the following setbacks/stepbacks: • Ground Floor Setback. Frontages on Highway 99 would require a front setback of 10 feet to accommodate a a pedestrian activity zone. The setback for frontages not on Highway 99 would be reduced to 5 feet to encourage an p enhanced pedestrian realm. The current 15-foot setback and 10-foot landscaping requirement for lot line adjacency with single-family zones would be retained. p • Upper Floor Stepback. There would be zero stepback required for the portion of building up to 30 feet in height, as a 30 feet is the maximum height allowed in the RM-1.5 zone, which is the predominant zone surrounding the Q commercial zones on Highway 99. A 10-foot stepback would be required for the portion of building beyond 30 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to single-family zones. An 8-foot stepback beyond 30 feet in height would be required on all sides across the street from single-family zones. • Recommendation 5.1. Adopt transit -supportive parking standards. As proposed, the parking standard for the entire 'a residential portion of a development would be 0.75 per unit. The commercial parking standard would be 2 per 1,000 N square feet. The first 3,000 square feet of commercial within mixed -use buildings would be exempt if there is a shared parking plan. This exemption is intended to reduce the cost burden for small, local entrepreneurs. In addition, the plan m proposes that the City allow developers to present project -specific studies that reflect special situations. Through a interviews with people in the development community who do transit -supported development in the region, it was made clear that parking standards can be an impediment to mixed -use, transit -oriented projects. • Recommendation 6.1. Enact a Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) Program. The City should pass an ordinance to z define Highway 99 as a "target area" to allow MFTE projects. This would incentivize the construction of additional M housing and mixed -use projects by enabling qualifying projects to take advantage of a tax exemption on the residential Q portion of new buildings for 12 years in exchange for keeping 20% of the units affordable during that period. • Recommendation 7.1. Adopt a Fee Waiver Program for mixed -income projects. The City should adopt an ordinance that allows staff to waive permitting and impact fees for projects that include affordable units for 12 years. • Recommendation 8.1. Facilitate a mixed -use, mixed -income demonstration project. This could include identifying a site with a willing owner or purchasing or securing a transferrable option on a site, establishing a special fund targeted at affordability and/or redevelopment, actively recruiting developers of affordable housing, and cultivating a champion who can motivate the development community and advocate for more affordable housing projects. This project could be the pilot project for the newly adopted MFTE and fee waiver programs to ensure they function well and iron out any issues before broader adoption. The City could also consider adopting one or more special assessment districts and locating the pilot project within one of the districts. This will enable the City to make use of special funds to assist with development Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 4 11 Packet Pg. 6 2.A.a and infrastructure costs or other subsidies. The first project will likely require more assistance than other projects. Special staff could be assigned to the pilot project to ensure it remains a City priority and keeps moving forward. • Recommendation 9.1. Expand the use of financing tools. The City should actively seek to make use of local state and federal funds and funding mechanisms to expand the opportunities for affordable housing, redevelopment and economic development in the Highway 99 area. • Recommendation 10.1. Provide gateway signage at Highway 99/Highway 104 interchange. The public process identified the need to clearly establish the identity of Edmonds at the south end of the study area through gateway features such as signage and landscaping. This could be done in tandem with realignment of the on and off ramps of Highway 104, which is included in the proposed project list. • Recommendation 11.1. Identify the transit gateway at the intersection of Highway 99 and 22e Street. The Mountlake Terrace transit center is scheduled for completion in 2023, and the link from Edmonds to the new station is 228`h Street. It is important to identify this transit gateway and strengthen east/west connections for transit riders, bicyclists and commuters. • Recommendation 12.1. Improve wayfinding signage along the corridor. Many amenities and community destinations exist near Highway 99, but they can be difficult to find, particularly for visitors. Wayfinding signage, with a uniquely c Edmonds identity, should point out safe routes to the amenities. N • Recommendation 13.1. Develop a unique district design identity. The City should invest in signage, lighting and art to improve the vitality of the existing nodes, such as the Health District and International District. • Recommendation 14.1. Prohibit new pole signs. As the area transitions from an auto -oriented highway to a more G dynamic and mixed -use environment, new large pole signs designed to capture the attention of fast-moving traffic are no 0 longer compatible. The City should prohibit new pole signs within the study area. • Recommendation 15.1. Improve Transit Transfers. The area is well served by both local and regional transit, but concern was raised that the transfers, schedules and stops could be better coordinated. The City should work with transit partners to ensure regional and local bus stops are close together and schedules are aligned to ensure convenient and efficient transfers. As 228th Street is a future gateway to regional transit and light rail, the City should consider a opportunities to connect the corridor area in a more explicit way to the future rail station. 0 • Recommendation 16.1. Incentivize alternative transportation options. The transportation landscaping is shifting rapidly, and people's willingness to engage in various ways to get around is expanding. The City should think o proactively about incentives that invite people to engage in a variety of other transportation options. Incentives could a include on -site car share and bicycle parking, electric charging stations, etc. Q Next, Mr. Joyce reviewed the transportation infrastructure recommendations that are outlined in the plan. He noted that many of the recommendations came from existing plans and other were identified as part of the planning process. The improvements are intended to: • Improve pedestrian safety and access to/from the Highway 99 Corridor. • Improve bicycle circulation across and parallel to the Highway 99 Corridor. • Improve the pedestrian environment along the Highway 99 Corridor • Provide safe pedestrian crossing of Highway 99 and access to transit. • Improve transit mobility and transit stop environment. • Improve traffic flow and general safety with access management. Mr. Joyce provided maps to illustrate the transportation improvements proposed for the south, north and middle portions of the study area. He noted that a new traffic signal is proposed at the intersection of 234th Street, near where a mid -block pedestrian crossing has been proposed. The maps also identify the location of new bike route designations and new bicycle lanes, access management improvements, intersection improvements, pedestrian improvements and street improvements. He explained that the main pedestrian improvements will focus on where there are safe crossings now, as well as near the new crossing that will be provided at 234`h Street. The plan proposes a cost-effective redesign of the Highway 104 on/off ramp to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety. Mr. Joyce also provided pictures to illustrate the types of improvements that are proposed for enhancing the median and improving pedestrian access. He also provided pictures of what potential redevelopment might look like. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 5 11 Packet Pg. 7 2.A.a Mr. Joyce advised that following the Planning Board's recommendation, the plan will be presented to the City Council for review and another public hearing. It is anticipated that the plan will be adopted in early 2017. Chair Lovell asked that the PowerPoint presentation be made available on the City's website, and Ms. Hope agreed to have it posted. Chair Lovell reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing and then opened the hearing. He noted that the City received two written comments. The first was from John Owens of Makers, who recommended some tweaks to the plan regarding stepbacks and setbacks. The second was from Anne Wermus with respect to affordable housing, and her concerns are explicitly addressed in Section 6 of the proposed plan. Both comments will be entered into the record as part of the hearing. No other written comments were received. Jim Underhill, Edmonds, cautioned that it is important to come to a point of understanding as to where the projects should start. The projects will take a long time and consume a tremendous amount of energy, and this is an important decision to make early in the implementation process. Mr. Underhill also pointed out that several of the banners in the International District have been blown down and were never replaced. The same is true for some banners in the Health District. He suggested that these banners be replaced, and that the City have backup banners for future replacement. He said he heard that c a developer is interested in constructing a hotel on the Value Village site, which would be fine as long as it isn't at skyscraper N height. He noted that there are many busses running along the corridor and to and from the corridor throughout the day, and the transit agencies have a good handle on how to make the system work well for Edmonds. He said he likes the idea of d having a "Welcome to Edmonds" sign at the south end of the corridor, and he would like the City to consider placing a 4) similar sign at the north end of the corridor. o Mr. Underhill referred to a parcel of land near 234th Street, which is currently developed with a small, white house. He said w he would like to see this property redeveloped at some point. To the north of this lot is a run-down property where people c_ come to play video games. This large section needs attention fairly soon and it might be a good place to start a pilot project. 00 Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked for more information about the banners Mr. Underhill referred to. Mr. Underhill said there are - large banners along the highway in the International District, and many of them are missing. There are also some missing banners in the Health District. The banners are intended to identify the two different districts, so it is important that they be o maintained properly. am a Q Bill Sunderland, Edmonds, commented that he lives on Pine Street and is very much in favor of the plan. He has a strong interest in incubator businesses moving into the area, particularly in the Gateway and International Districts. These types of businesses would result in more employment opportunities for the newer generation. He suggested that this be emphasized in the plan. v Mary Monroe, Edmonds, said she was present to represent the Citizens Economic Development Commission (CEDC), to make the Board aware that the CEDC is very interested in this topic and has formed a subcommittee to review the plan. The r CEDC would like to provide input relative to the plan, particularly in regard to economic development. a Robert Siew, Edmonds, said he owns a parcel of land on the south side of Highway 99, just north of the Highway 104 interchange. He said he has attended all of the public meetings pertaining to the plan, and he is very impressed with the work E that has been done by the City staff and consulting team. The plan contains a number of good recommendations. However, he is concerned about the proposed design standard that would require 50% of all buildings to be within 10 feet of the street front. He has had discussions with City staff and the consultant about how difficult this requirement would be for some Q property owners. If Highway 99 were truly an urban environment, with traffic speeds of 25 to 30 miles per hour and street parking on both sides, the requirement would be appropriate. However, Highway 99 is a high-speed corridor, with cars traveling in excess of 40 miles per hour. Requiring 50% of all buildings to be located within 10 feet of the corridor is a bit overstretching. He noted that there has been no redevelopment along this stretch of the corridor for a number of years, and it is currently developed with a mixture of uses. Applying a uniform standard would be difficult. Mr. Siew reminded the Board that the goal of the subarea plan is to encourage development, and he is definitely interested in redeveloping a portion of his 10.5-acre property. The site is developed with several buildings, including the Burlington Factory building. The restaurant space has been vacant for quite some time, and he is very interested in redeveloping that portion of the property as perhaps a pilot project for the new subarea plan, but the proposed development standard for Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 6 11 Packet Pg. 8 2.A.a setbacks would make redevelopment impossible for him. He explained that he currently has an agreement with Burlington Factory that any redevelopment on the site cannot be any further west than the main building. Burlington Factory does not want any development closer to the street because it would block their business. If the design standard is implemented, it would stop him from redeveloping the rest of the property, and he would have no option but to remodel and continue to use the existing development. Mr. Siew pointed out that there are only a handful of large parcels along the corridor. Aurora Market Place is a newer development, and he does not envision redevelopment in the near future. He does not foresee that the Ranch 99 property will be redeveloped in the near future, either. These two properties, in addition to his property, are the only large parcels available for retail development. His building is very old and obsolete, and he would like to redevelop the entire parcel at some point. There is three acres of available land behind the Burlington Factory building that he would also like to develop as mixed -use. While its location is not really suitable for retail uses, it would be a good location for incubator types of businesses on the ground floor and residential above. He encouraged the Board to carefully consider whether or not the proposed design standards would help or hurt property owners and developers and impede them from moving forward with redevelopment. He said he would continue to work with City staff and the consultant to address his concerns about the design standards. c N Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, said he is very excited to see the vision for Highway 99 that is laid out in the proposed plan. He recalled that he served on the Highway 99 Task Force for a number of years with Mr. Underhill. To finally see some of d their ideas come to fruition is very exciting. He said he is impressed with the short-term transportation components, G particularly the safe pedestrian crossings and access to transit. He said he is most familiar with the Gateway District on the o south end of the corridor because he lives in the Aurora Market Place neighborhood. The single-family residential w development in that area and other single-family residential neighborhoods in the area adjacent to the highway provide some of the most affordable housing in Edmonds. He encouraged the Board to pay attention to this fact as they consider c_ redevelopment options, not only along the corridor, but those properties that are adjacent to the corridor. 2 Mr. Witenberg said he likes the concept of transit -oriented development and access to bus rapid transit service is very important. However, it should not be more important that preserving the single-family residential neighborhoods. As the Board considers the plan, he urged them to reduce the parking requirement for the multi -family zones located adjacent to single-family residential zones even more than was has been proposed in the plan. The goal is to make sure that the multi- family residential developments are, in fact, occupied by people who are using public transportation. By the same token, they need to provide those new people that will live in the units with access to the public transportation by providing infrastructure, particularly sidewalks. There are few sidewalks in the areas around the Aurora Market Place, and he asked that the Board consider requiring developers to connect the sidewalks to the next available parcel that has a sidewalk rather than just putting a sidewalk in front of the redeveloped property. For residents behind the Safeway, there is no direct access from 84`h Street. People have to walk all the way around. He asked that some consideration be given to the large parcels on 84`h Street between 236th Street and 238`h Street of allowing some public access through the development to the Safeway. As someone who drives down Highway 99 through the City of Shoreline at least four times a week, Mr. Witenberg encouraged the Board to require different landscaping in the medians. The materials used in Shoreline's medians requires intense maintenance and it appears that they have to close off some lanes of the roadway on a weekly basis to do routine landscape maintenance. Mr. Witenberg suggested the Planning Board consider meeting jointly with the CEDC to develop a plan for attracting businesses that provide economic development along the corridor. The CEDC is working on this effort, and they have formed a subcommittee to study the issue further. If the two groups put their heads together, they will be able to come up with a great plan. Chair Lovell closed the public portion of the meeting. Board Member Cloutier recalled that the Board has considered the design standard of requiring buildings to be located close to the street in other plans, such as Westgate. However, it might not be completely practical on Highway 99. Having taller buildings could end up creating a tunnel effect along the corridor. He asked if it would be reasonable to have an alternative that requires the bulk of buildings to be adjacent to the activity zone and a landscape buffer that provides a sense of continuity without moving all of the buildings up to the street. Mr. Joyce commented that feedback at the public meetings Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 7 11 Packet Pg. 9 2.A.a identified a strong desire for a range of active uses and improvements to the pedestrian environment, and they considered policy mechanisms that the plan could offer to implement what they heard during the public process. Highway 99 is a major regional facility and the sidewalk areas are limited. The intent of the requirement is to provide additional space for pedestrians and to address how a portion of the frontage could be immediately accessible to the pedestrians. Right now, the standard setback is just four feet, but the buildings can still be located 50 feet away from the pedestrian space. Often landscaping prevents pedestrian access to the buildings, as well. Whether a 50% requirement is the right number is up for debate, but the intent was to bring active uses up to where pedestrians will be. The design standard that requires a portion of the building at the street front would help expand the pedestrian realm. Board Member Cloutier said he understands the concern, as well as the proposed method. However, he is concerned about how the requirement would impact owners of large properties that are already developed with multiple buildings. It could limit the ability to redevelop just a portion of the site. He does not want to put a requirement in place that would hamstring property owners who want to replace one or more buildings on a large lot. He likes the idea of having 10-foot wide sidewalks that provide a sense of place, and having the buildings located along the sidewalk would be desirable, as well. However, he would like the plan to include alternatives that would work for both pedestrians and landowners. Ms. Hope said c the big picture vision is definitely having more connection between pedestrians and buildings, and they do not want to N promote a tunnel affect. However, she also recognizes the need to provide flexibility for large parcels that are developed with multiple buildings. She noted that, as proposed, not all of the buildings would be required to be located close to the ci street front, and staff believes there is some room to refine the language in the draft plan, as well as the codes and standards G that follow, to provide sufficient flexibility. Board Member Cloutier suggested that an alternative might be to require a o connection between the sidewalk and the buildings without requiring the buildings to be moved closer to the street. w Board Member Cloutier recalled that, several years ago, the Board had a discussion about the City's fiber optic plan. He asked if this plan still exists, and Mr. Chave answered yes, but he could not provide any details. Board Member Cloutier noted that more band width will be needed in order to encourage high-tech businesses or start-ups along the corridor. He encouraged the staff and consultant to talk with the CEDC to figure out how to do a joint effort to provide higher band width connections along the corridor. Board Member Cloutier recalled public comments that indicated a desire for the plan to include certain elements it is not designed to include. He emphasized that the plan is intended to be a vision and should not call out how a specific lot should be redeveloped. The plan can encourage a mixture of uses and a certain type of development, but it cannot say there must be a particular type of business along the street. As someone who lives in an apartment along Highway 99, Board Member Crank commented that the proposed improvements at 236th Street speak to her personally. This is a high -traffic area and it is currently unsafe for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Based on the maps provided in the plan, one of the areas of study will be site distance, visibility, etc., and she appreciates projects that improve visibility. Board Member Crank asked if rezoning the properties at the corner of 236th Street and Highway 99 would negatively impact any of the residential development that is there now. Mr. Joyce pointed out that the CG zone allows for a range of uses, including residential. Therefore, there would be no negative impact to this property. Board Member Crank noted that part of the plan's vision called for improving lighting along the corridor, which is desperately needed. She asked if the medians would be lit, as well. She agreed with the public comments about how the landscaping in Shoreline's medians requires a lot of maintenance, and they have to block traffic while the work is performed. She hopes that lighting plans will impact the roads along Highway 99, as crossing the street is very difficult when it is dark. Board Member Crank voiced concern about reducing the parking requirement for residential development. While she thinks it is a good concept, there are still a lot of people moving into Edmonds from other places, and the current transit predictions for the next 10 years will not make the connectivity necessary for Highway 99 to be a truly transit -oriented community. Whatever decrease is approved should be slightly greater than what is recommended in the plan, but less than what it is now. Many people who live along the corridor cannot use public transportation in an efficient time to get to their place of work. This should be factored into the equation. Mr. Chave noted that the requirements are minimum and developers can definitely provide more parking. Staff s experience is that developers tend to put more parking along Highway 99 than what is needed. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 10 Board Member Crank asked if the City is allowed to require in -lieu -of fees as opposed to offering tax waivers for affordable housing. Ms. Hope said there are different options, and an in -lieu -of fee program would require separate authorization. However, the two types of fees identified in the implementation strategies are fairly easy to apply while the City continues to explore other options. She reminded the Board of the two options that are recommended in the plan. The Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) Program would allow a developer to exempt the residential portion of a building that is identified as "affordable" from property taxes for up to 12 years. This is a huge incentive that allows development to be done at a lower cost, and the savings can be passed on to the users. The Fee Waiver Program would come into play at the time of development and could lower the cost to the developer. The City has been working on this program since the study began, and the City Council just approved a waiver of up to 80% for multi -family development that meets the characteristics of "affordable." They are also looking at housing strategies in the next year or two that will consider all the different housing opportunities. Board Member Crank noted that other communities have successfully implemented in -lieu -of fee programs that allow developers to contribute into a fund that is available for City housing projects in lieu of developing affordable housing as part c of their projects. Mr. Chave noted that some of these programs have had mixed results. Board Member Crank concurred, but N noted that other communities have done well. If the City wants to go that route, it must do its homework on the communities that have implemented successful programs. d G Board Member Crank referred to the picture that was provided in the plan of the white house that is located across the street — from the new light that is proposed at the intersection of 234th Street. She pointed out that there is a bus stop on this side of w the street, but most people who get off the bus in this location have to cross the street to access the Community Health Clinic. In order to safely cross, a person must walk six blocks in either direction. She suggested that this is an important location for c a safe pedestrian crossing. m Board Member Monroe complimented Mr. Joyce on his presentation. He asked him to point to what part of the plan - encourages commercial development, such as big box stores and automobile sales. Mr. Joyce said feedback from the public meetings did not indicate a desire for big box stores, and the plan is intended to reflect the vision they heard at the c workshops, which is to strengthen the pedestrian environment and encourage economic activity, but not in a specific way that Q. involves big box retail. The comments were in the opposite direction. The public wants an environment along the corridor Q that respects and supports transit users and walkers. That being said, there are several large sites and none of the proposed design standards would preclude big box stores or automobile sales from developing along the corridor. Board Member Monroe observed that Highway 99 is the last remaining location in the City that can accommodate the type of v development that brings in substantial tax revenue. Mr. Joyce said it came down to a design decision. While they did not V want to discourage these activities, even if the uses are allowed, the desire is to improve the pedestrian experience. co Board Member Monroe asked if there are barriers that would discourage automobile dealers from locating in Edmonds. Mr. T ma Chave said it would probably be land assembly. Board Member Monroe asked if the plan promotes potential land assembly such as vacant streets. Mr. Chave cautioned that this would be difficult. He observed that automobile dealerships are looking at expanding upwards rather than out because land is difficult to acquire. The plan talks about accommodating these E uses and not precluding them, but there are limits on what properties are available. The intent of the plan is to remove obstacles for redevelopment. When considering big box retail, he recalled the 2004 Economic Development Study that indicated that other big box stores were already located within close proximity to this stretch of Highway 99. It was felt that Q these existing stores have captured the market so it is highly unlikely that big box retail will be proposed within the subarea boundaries. In addition, the national trend for big box stores is downsizing and providing smaller stores in urban areas, which would definitely be a possibility in the subarea. The plan tries to take advantage of changes in the retail environment and urban development. Mr. Joyce added that the economic consultant made the observation that, from a retail perspective, the distinct advantage of this stretch of the corridor is not necessarily large retail, but it is cultivating and strengthening the unique international related businesses that have already collocated. These could become a very big regional draw. Board Member Monroe asked what could be added to the plan to promote this concept. Would the City hire a facilitator to cultivate the concept of incubator business or work with groups to lay out a specific plan to identify and provide a cohesive sense of place to the area? Mr. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 9 Packet Pg. 11 2.A.a Chave said a key will be working on the public infrastructure that is needed to accommodate future development. The connections and physical improvements along the corridor and connections to the neighborhoods will result in more people using the services. They have solidified that the International District is still a goal for this stretch of Highway 99, and the specific recommendation is to look at unique and distinctive improvements that can be made within the right-of-way. Board Member Robles said he likes the idea of addressing the things that are wrong now before encouraging redevelopment. He agreed that the plan cannot define what is built on a piece of property, but it can facilitate different types of businesses. Lighting and broadband are current deficiencies that need to be addressed before the City gets into stylized adaptations. The plans should be contingent upon who moves in. Once they identify the anticipated mix of uses, they can put the crossing at the appropriate point to serve the development. He commented that there are models for incubator development, communal work spaces, etc., and the City should consider these models as implementation moves forward. Board Member Robles commented that providing access across large properties is an interesting idea that could mitigate some of the issues about putting buildings next to the street. If the buildings are set back more with access east/west, it would provide the same effect. He recalled that issues were raised as part of the Westgate Plan discussions about putting c buildings too close to the roadway given the speed that vehicles travel. There will be pressure waves, etc. that will be felt N from quite a distance. The plan should be flexible enough to address these concerns. Vice Chair Rubenkonig said she is interested in hearing about the economic drivers of what Highway 99 can become. She ci 4) would also like the consultant to comment regarding Mr. Siew's concern about the need for businesses to have visibility. — One economic driver that is built into the plan is that buildings are proposed to be closer to the street with transparency to w increase exposure for the businesses. It is likely that rent for buildings with good exposure will be much higher than those that sit back further from the street. The proposed document is a plan for future possibilities. It identifies things the City can c_ encourage, guide and restrain. The nuts and bolts needed for implementation will come later. 2 m Mr. Joyce said the International District is a key economic driver. It is a distinct set of businesses that, if cultivated, can grow - into an even bigger economic draw and destination for a variety of services. The Health District is another regional draw in terms of its associated office, research, accommodations, etc. A wide range of uses can orbit around the health -related o drivers. The philosophy, in terms of design, is rooted in supporting many ways to get through the corridor to connect the Q. economic engines, but allow residents to access these areas, as well. Development that has more transparency is supportive Q of the pedestrian environment and feels more safe and inviting. These tend to have a lot more economic vitality because they are so accessible to people who drive, walk, bike or ride the bus. He expressed his belief that the plan, and the policies that ti will come after, will support the economic vitality through design. Vice Chair Rubenkonig observed that there were no visual examples in the plan to illustrate what the Gateway District might V become. However, when developing large parcels, locating buildings closer to the street would result in higher market rates in terms of rental value. She commented that Burlington Factory is a regional business, as there are no other similar T_ r businesses close by. If the site is redeveloped at some point in the future, it is likely that Burlington Factory would prefer to a have its building closer to the street because it would give higher visibility. Mr. Joyce agreed that the plan needs to respect the fact that not all properties along the corridor are uniform and have the c E same conditions. The intent of the plan is to transfer the community's aspirations into high-level recommendations. As they transfer the plan into implementation, their role will be to help the City identify areas and consider how they reach the intent, but in a unique way that encourages economic development. Q Vice Chair Rubenkonig recalled that the Board discussed the concept of parking reductions at length as part of the Westgate Plan. They also talked about requirements for bicycle parking spaces, electric car charging stations, etc. With the Highway 99 Subarea Plan, they are talking about less parking space and more use of alternative forms of transportation. In conjunction with this, the plan should address such things as loading zones, bicycle parking, charging stations, car share parking, etc. Mr. Joyce agreed that these concepts need to be worked in as the plan is implemented. Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked if the Westgate Plan could be used as a model for Highway 99 development. Mr. Chave said they may consider the plan, but it is important to recognize that the two areas are very different. The City's research will include what other jurisdictions with similar development might have done. For example, the parking recommendation is Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 12 based on experience from other jurisdictions. Mr. Joyce explained that, early in the process, they initiated a focus group and interviewed a range of developers that do transit -oriented, mixed -use development in the region. They generally landed around .75 parking spaces per unit for developments that are well served by transit. They also ran a series of proforma to test the assumption to figure out an economically -defensible standard for parking, and it ended up being around .75 spaces per unit, as well. Whether the City lands on .75 spaces or lower or higher, the standard tends to be in the range of .5 to 1, depending on the location of the development. Board Member Stewart said she looks forward to seeing the plan evolve. She asked the consultant to respond to the comment letter the City received from Makers. She felt the request sounded reasonable, but she found it difficult to compare and identify the differences between the requested language and the proposed language. Mr. Joyce agreed to do a detailed comparison of the two. He explained that the letter recommends a more complicated formula for determining setbacks. The City's general philosophy is to keep the plan as simple as possible for administrative purposes, but they may end up proposing additional language that will provide guidance to City staff. G Board Member Stewart said she supports the idea of consolidating zoning and felt it would make it easier for developers. c Mr. Chave advised that there are some parcels on the east side of Highway 99 that are zoned multi -family, and that is what N the Makers letter may have been referring to. These properties are surrounded by single-family residential, and staff was reticent to recommend a zoning change to CG. Specific questions about zoning will come later as part of the implementation ci phase. He noted that Makers also voiced concern about some of the activity zone requirements, such as expanding sidewalks. G While he is not sure that is something the City Council would be receptive to, it could be considered as a potential option. o w Board Member Stewart said she was recently at Crossroads Mall and noticed that Bed Bath and Beyond was not visible from the right-of-way, but she could see the sign from the street and was able to locate the store. She understands that the goal is c to eventually have consistency with respect to buildings being located adjacent to the right-of-way, but they also must allow flexibility to address unique situations. She agreed that continuity is appealing, and perhaps it would be helpful if the plan m provided pictures to illustrate what might be possible. - Board Member Stewart said she knows how forward thinking Fregonese Associates is, and she was surprised that no mention o was made in the plan about sustainability. One of the City's goals is to encourage green buildings, and she understands that Q. more details will be provided during the implementation phase. However, she felt the plan should at least encourage C sustainable design and/or green building to show that the community is forward thinking. M ti Chair Lovell recalled that, several years ago, they went through a similar planning process for Firdale Village, which was a mixed -use commercial property under single ownership. A lot of ideas were put forward by the public and the Planning Board, but the end result of the plan was so restrictive that no one has developed the property. He voiced concern that the IV same might happen with Highway 99, which is one of the last large parcels available in Edmonds for significant cm redevelopment. Flexibility is needed in order to encourage redevelopment in the near future. r m Chair Lovell observed that Highway 99 is a state highway with high speed traffic. Although a lot of development has a occurred on the Shoreline portion of the highway, their design guidelines do not seem to be effective since it still appears to be a hodgepodge. It is important to have a clear understanding of the right-of-way width along the highway when E considering the appropriate setback for buildings. Even if they establish a 14-foot setback from the right-of-way as a guideline, he is not sure that he would feel safe walking along the sidewalk with high-speed traffic going by. He voiced concern about jumping ahead with predictions about what redevelopment will be before the infrastructure improvements have Q been nailed down. Chair Lovell voiced support for Ms. Monroe's earlier suggestion that the Planning Board and CEDC meet together to discuss the plan. They need more flexibly to work with individual property owners, and work needs to be done with the individual property owns in order to refine what can clearly be done on a given property. He questioned whether the City would have the ability to require a develop to connect a sidewalk to the next available sidewalk. Mr. Chave explained that the Firdale Village Master Plan was interesting because it was a privately -sponsored zoning/master plan change. It is not anything like the Highway 99 Subarea Plan process. The Firdale Master Plan was initially a planning level idea that morphed into something that was onerous. He also explained that there are significant differences between the Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 13 2.A.a Shoreline and Edmonds portions of Highway 99. Much of the right-of-way in Edmonds was developed years ago by WSDOT, and the rights -of -way are mapped out. He doubts the City would do what Shoreline did, which is to purchase large amounts of right-of-way. The intent is to work with the existing right-of-way and expand the pedestrian area to improve the overall right-of-way and how works. Chair Lovell asked if the proposed subarea plan provides enough guidelines and flexibility for the staff and consultant to work with property owners to plan specific redevelopment. Mr. Chave answered yes. Many of the elements of the plan are couched as recommendations that are not conditions. Perhaps they could emphasize the fact that transition properties are very important and flexibility is needed to address unique situations. For example, they could find a way to accommodate Mr. Siew's needs but still keep with the overall vision in the plan. He summarized his belief that the plan offers the flexibility necessary for the different unique properties. More detailed flexibility will be addressed in the next phase of implementation, as well. Mr. Chave pointed out that Shoreline's improvement plan is not very old, and they are finally starting to see things happen. It takes time for the plan to come to fruition, and it will be interesting to see how fast it does occur. He advised that there is a c fair amount of interest in the development community and they are starting to see multi -story projects pop up along the N corridor. Mr. Joyce said the consultant is committed to working with staff and concerned property owners to make sure they are not doing anything in the plan that would preclude development that is supportive of the overall plan goals. They need to ci have a plan in place, but also a flexible framework that allows them to move towards the vision. The plan sets the stage for 4) the detailed work that will come in the next phase. o Chair Lovell asked if staff intends to present the plan to the City Council in its present form. Mr. Chave answered w affirmatively, but added that if the City Council has concerns, there would still be an opportunity to work them out before c_ final adoption. Chair Lovell said he supports the plan and is sensitive to specific comments made by the public. In order to 2 make the plan fly, it will need a fairly substantial element of flexibility to work with individual property owners to end up a with development that is consistent with the long-term vision in the plan. — Chair Lovell inquired if the Board is ready to move the plan forward to the City Council with a recommendation, or if they o want one more opportunity to review the plan after it has been updated to include their comments. Ms. Hope explained that Q. the Board could recommend approval of the plan now with some clarification about flexibility, etc. They could also decide C to come back at a January meeting with some minor changes to address the concerns that were raised before forwarding a recommendation to the City Council. The Board felt that the consultant and staff had a clear understanding of their concerns ti and how to address them in the plan. CHAIR LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS REVISED TO REFLECT THE DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY THE BOARD IS CONCERNED ABOUT WITH REGARD TO IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN T_ ON INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES. BOARD MEMBER ROBLES SECONDED THE MOTION. T a Board Member Monroe said he would like the plan to include a recommendation relative to economic development. Mr. Joyce pointed out that the plan does include language relative to the economic success of the Health District and International E District. Board Member Monroe said he is more concerned about including language in the plan about the need to encourage the types of businesses that result in more tax revenue for the City. Also, if Highway 99 is intended to become a "tech" corridor, it should be identified as a recommendation or strategy. Q Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked if the Planning Board is interested in meeting with the CEDC prior to forwarding a recommendation to the City Council. Ms. Hope advised that one goal is to attract businesses, not just through the plan, but through the next phase of implementation. While the CEDC has requested an opportunity to be involved early on, they may be more interested in where the plan goes from here. It would definitely be worthwhile to include them in discussions related to implementation of the plan. Board Member Crank pointed out that the CEDC will also have an opportunity to review the plan and submit feedback to the Board. While she supports the concept of highlighting economic development as something of interest, it does not need to be specific at this point. More detailed strategies for economic development can come forward during the implementation phase, which can involve discussions with the CEDC. Ms. Hope agreed that the CEDC could provide comments directly to the City Council. The Board could forward their recommendation to the City Council, as well, Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 14 2.A.a recognizing that more about economic development would be incorporated into the plan during the next phase. The Board and the CEDC could then work together to develop codes and standards to implement the plan. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Lovell reviewed that the December 28"h meeting was cancelled, and the Board's next meeting will be January 1 ltn PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Lovell thanked Board Member Stewart for her excellent work on the Board. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS T 0 Board Member Stewart said it would please her if the Board would keep the concept of green building and sustainability N alive in future discussions, where appropriate. The Board Members all thanked Board Member Stewart for her service. ADJOURNMENT The Board meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Planning Board Minutes December 14, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 15 5.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 01/11/2017 Development Services Director Report Staff Lead: Shane Hope, Director Department: Development Services Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and discuss Narrative Report is attached Attachments: Director. R e p o rt.01.06.17 Packet Pg. 16 5.A.a �Q,+ V rJl MEMORANDUM Date: January 6, 2017 To: Planning Board Members From: Shane Hope, Development Services Director Subject: Director Report Happy New Year! Next Planning Board Meeting A review of previous work on planning for the Five Corners area is on the Planning Board's agenda for its January 11 meeting in the Council Chambers. REGIONAL NEWS Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) ❑ The PSRC Regional Staff Committee (which includes your Development Services Director) met December 15 on topics such as: o Transportation Futures Report o Transportation 2040 Work Plan o Housing Report (with regional data). ❑ The Regional Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Advisory Committee, which is organized by PSRC, last met December 16. The committee's mission is to advance the regional "Growing Transit Communities Strategy" (of which Edmonds is a signator). Revealed at the meeting was information on a new funding program, "REDI," which features a $21 million revolving loan fund to help boost development of affordable housing near public transit, subject to certain criteria. (Council member Tom Mesaros attended the meeting for Edmonds.) We will be learning more about the REDI fund and how it might work for future affordable housing projects in Edmonds. Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT) ❑ The SCT Planning Advisory Committee (composed primarily of department directors) meets next on January 12. Its agenda will include: 2016 Growth Monitoring Report, VISION 2040 allocation preparation, and PSRC Regional Centers Framework. ❑ The SCT Steering Committee (composed primarily of elected officials) meets next on January 25. Its agenda includes an update on the PSRC Regional Centers Framework. 1 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 17 5.A.a LOCAL NEWS Architectural Design Board The Architectural Design Board has no meetings scheduled for January. However, several projects are being scheduled for a February meeting on the design requirements that apply. Economic Development Commission The Economic Development Commission's next meeting will be on January 18. An agenda will be ready before then and posted online. Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner has no meetings scheduled for January. Several projects may be ready for consideration at a February meeting. Historic Preservation The Historic Preservation Commission's next meeting will be on January 12. Items for discussion are the Commissioner roles and to assess the current procedures. The HPC unfortunately was not able to complete a historic calendar for 2017 but will be beginning a calendar for 2018. Sustainable Communities Partnership The public is invited to attend a presentation from Western Washington University students who have been studying restoration efforts and issues at Edmonds Marsh as part of the 2016- 2017 Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) between the City of Edmonds, WWU and the Association of Washington Cities (AWC). Students from WWU's Restoration Ecology course will present their research on Friday, January 13t", from 2-4pm in the Brackett Room at City Hall. WWU students will present recommendations about both short and long term actions to address storm water entering the marsh and to manage the on -going spread of certain invasive plants in the marsh, as well as present a conceptual idea for a public boardwalk into the marsh that would improve access while protecting marsh habitat and wildlife. The Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) is a yearlong partnership between Western Washington University's Office of Sustainability, the Association of Washington Cities (AWC), and one partner city chosen through a competitive application process. For the inaugural year of the Partnership (2016/2017),the chosen partner city is Edmonds. The collaboration is designed to focus students' energy and ideas towards real -life challenges that address sustainability in our community. The SCP faculty and students work through a variety of studio and service learning courses, thus providing students with experience tackling the city's real - world projects. More information on the Sustainable Cities Partnership can be found on the City's website here: http://www.edmondswa.gov/sustainable-cities-partnership.html. 2 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 18 5.A.a Tree Board The Tree Board's last meeting was January 5. The agenda included: ❑ Event planning for 2017 ❑ Tree Board Officer elections ❑ Presentation to City Council in 2017. ❑ Urban Forestry Management Plan consultant selection process ❑ Tree City USA application update. City Council The City Council's January 3 meeting included the following planning -related items: ❑ Selection of Thomas Mesaros for Council President ❑ Selection of Mike Nelson for Council President Pro Tern ❑ Approval of Resolutions appointing Council Representatives to the Snoh. Health District Board & Alternate to Snoh. Co. Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation ❑ Dale Hoggins Proclamation ❑ Presentation of Parliamentary Procedure ❑ FAC Band shell Replacement Program Management Reserve The Council's January 10 meeting will include topics such as: ❑ Monthly Financial Management & Budget Report ❑ Confirmation of Planning Board Appointment ❑ Annual Report of the City Attorney ❑ Snohomish Health District Interlocal Agreement ❑ Fishing Pier Ownership ❑ Presentation of Hazard Mitigation Plan ❑ Review of Appointment Process in Chapter 10.95 ECC for Tree Board ❑ Designating Edmonds a Safe City COMMUNITY CALENDAR ❑ Jan. 13: WWU Students Present Recommendations on Edmonds Marsh restoration efforts at public meeting, Brackett Room, 2 — 4 pm ❑ Jan. 16 — Feb. 3: Historical Museum will be closed for winter cleaning ❑ Feb. 7: Starlight Beach Walk, Olympic Beach Visitor Station, 7 — 8:30 pm 3 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 19 8.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 01/11/2017 Presentation on Planning for Five Corners Staff Lead: Rob Chave / Brad Shipley Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Rob Chave Background/History The City worked with the University of Washington on developing a form -based approach to planning for Westgate and Five Corners beginning in the Fall of 2010. Presentations on the results of the initial planning work occurred in mid-2011, and the City proceeded to adopt the final plan and code for Westgate in 2015. Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative This is a background/informational presentation for the Planning Board. As the background/history indicates, the City embarked on planning for Westgate and Five Corners in 2010-2011. At the end of 2011 the City began project planning for the Five Corners Roundabout, and it was decided to focus on further developing the Westgate plan and development code; the Five Corners plan was put on hold until the roundabout could be completed. The roundabout was finished in 2014, and the Westgate plan and code were adopted in 2015. The Five Corners plan developed by the UW team is included in Attachment 2. Attachment 1 was a presentation to the Council on both the Westgate and Five Corners plans. The Five Corners plan shared many similarities in approach to Westgate, though the two plans differed in both scale and details. For example - especially with completion of the roundabout - Five Corners was recognized as having more potential as a pedestrian -friendly environment. It is important to recognize that while the UW developed the outlines of a plan and code approach, our experience with the similarly -constructed Westgate proposal indicates that substantial review and staff time is needed to further develop and integrate the UW plan into the City's codes. Completion of the Five Corners plan and code should continue to be a priority for the City, and needs to be prioritized within the Council's, Planning Board's, and staff's work programs. For example, this could be a discussion for the Council's retreat in 2017. Attachments: Attachment 1: City Council Presentation from June, 2011 Attachment 2: UW Five Corners Plan Packet Pg. 20 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Edmonds Special District Plan Presentation to �� k1Jlr City of Edmonds Edmonds City Council .n -qo Green Futures Lab, June 21, 2011 University of Washington G�'SCA�F Cascade Land Conservancy e yr �'ONS6R Packet Pg. 21 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Acknowledgements Team 1 — Fall Quarter Undergrad Class — Elizabeth Abrahamson, Cristina Haworth, Brad Shipley Team 2 — January -June Student Internships Betsy Jacobson —Masters in Urban Planning and Landsc Tom Jamieson — Masters in Landscape Architecture Julie Kreigh — PhD in Built Environment Jeanine Matthews — Masters in Landscape Architecture Eric Scharnhorst — Masters in Landscape Architecture — Brad Shipley —B.S Degree in Community, Environment and Planning Faculty: Jill Sterrett, FAICP - Urban Design and Planning aj — Nancy Rottle, ASLA - Landscape Architecture _ L a N CO ti r 0 N a Packet Pg. 22 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Agenda 1. Public Process 2. Connections and Green Features 3. Five Corners Plan 4. Westgate Plan 5. Overview of Form Based Code 6. Questions and Discussion a Packet Pg. 23 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Phase 1 Report Site Analysis Form -Based + Surveys Code Research I I I FALL 2010 WINTER 2011 NEXT STEPS - SHORT TERM 2010 NEXT STEPS - LONG TERM YOU ARE HERE VISIONING WORK5HOP PUBLIC EDC Selects Council Meetin MEETING Alternative LISTENING I Westgate + SESSION I Five Corners Public Special District Workshops Plans SPRING 2011 Initial Development of a Few Properties Other Properties Develop, Possibly up to 50% of the Neighborhood SUMMER 2011 Draft Plan and Form -Based Building Codes Planning Community Board Meeting Full Build Out 2015 2020 In the future, new developments will use form -based building codes FALL 2011 8.A.a 2030 0 M a N EO ti Packet Pg. 24 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Phase One: SiteAnaly sis and Online Surve ° L IL N 00 r- r • Prepared a citizen survey • Site surveys of land uses & amenities. • Parking counts • Walking distance & conditions • Mapping study results • Analysis of user friendliness Packet Pg. 25 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Phase One: Research on Exemplary Commercial Centers in the PNW The Three Cs: COMPLETE COMPACT wrr-', 1 Fir _ - rm. CONNECTED 8.A.a Y�•., Lns , Packet Pg. 26 M IL N EO ti 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Phase Two: .0 Listening Session and Audience Response Surveys L a N r Brown University • Listening sessions for each site • Audience response survey • Synthesis of survey results • Form -based code case studies Packet Pg. 27 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate r� h ase T h ree : Design Workshop and Draft Plans L IL N 00 r- r r • Public design workshop with C. local professionals E 0 L 0 • Review of what we had hear from the public L a c 0 • Draft site design: Life, Spac Buildings E • 6 teams Five Corners, 3 teams Westgate U Q Packet Pg. 28 ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Phase Three Five Corners' Design Workshop Green street features Parkway ��. Pedestrian path O Commercial Mixed use IIIIIIIIIED Open space I � Mixed use with O court- yard and -open spaces O + - Alley M Additional building height Amenities Existing building footprint Gateway Transit hub One storX artisb lofts withl open space at dorneip i I — Retail cluster with pocket park at cornery i Na Fcb: Five Corners Circle i� Retail surrounding public art 0 i i i —-_ i �E71 i Retail cluster �0 i interspersed with open space I 8.A.a Packet Pg. 29 u e, lRao _ L IL N 00 r- ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate uesign Workshop Westgate Plazas and open space throughout the site r \ 1 din ' r ate to t o ra by Acc t `cha stru 0 pa rkt Retain existing _% , businesses on south quadrant I' I I Opp - I N a I WG3: Westgate Create Continue to I add green I I I features nto existing Ferry Reservation Center at I , buildings I_ — — _ — -nQw "entrance to -Ea onds° Buildings along 5R-104 visually block site lines to su-faee�parking ' Oil I I s Alley — L — _ _ — — —I Green street features Parkway . Pedestrian path Commercial Mixed use — — I Open space M Additional building height Amenities Existing building footprint Gateway Transit hub 8.A.a �Hscaa• 3 v Packet Pg. 30 �u e, lRao M IL N EO ti REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Life Space Live Work Sell Five Corners .mr%,. Roof Top Restaurant "Garden" Icon Buildin Loft Apartments; Young Adults'Housing Affordable Housing FC1:Garden Gateway 8.A.a Packet Pg. 31 c L a N 00 r- r REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate public Sentiment Main Topics Five Corners Westgate Building Scale 2-3 stories w/ housing 3-4 stories w/ housing Increasing public space was the most popular recommendation for Public Space improvement (all ages). Examples suggested were plazas, sitting space, green space. Walking/Biking Improve walkability by creating safe environment for people of all ages. Roundabout has general public No prominent issues with Traffic support. Concerns about increased automobile traffic c congestion noted. Services Community desires better restaurants, street cafes, and a bakery. Business fronts should be at the sidewalk. Amenities Landscaping on sidewalks, street trees, and use of native plant species 8.A.a _ M _ a N EO 0 N N _ 7 E O O M _ L a c O U _ M a _ M a Packet Pg. 32 u e, 1R4 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate phase 4� Refining and Selecting Preferred Alternative - Five Corners 8.A.a L IL N 00 r- r O N u 0 • U U 4H5LA 1 �• Packet Pg. 33 .r a E a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Phase 4.m Refining and Selecting Preferred Alternative - Westgate fix. � i' 1;•- . ~ �`= • L'Aft 8.A.a 4HSLA . ' 1 �• Packet Pg. 34 L IL N 00 r- ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate 'edestrian Connections Five Corners 204th D w rn a o- 204th a 204th 203rd Edg—d 9aprst Chu rch r 0 ; Access °� i r Aaess ` 204th [ollege Place Elemenn- m5th L m� ♦ °` m 205th Edmonds � 206th / ccess A � Free Ridge Park � z05th �•♦ � '� N $ / AL-ss L ♦¢ 9c' 207th j 207[h 206th % fnllege Pl— Junior High School \ \ /207th I 207th \ •j Main�� / x � ` Access L \ 208th a 7 / '@ + — ! '�'+ •208th ♦ a ♦ m ZOgth \ \ 1 Z8 \ 20� /' is ♦ 1 ! • 209th , V s[M2mprial Park 210th a 211th { -216th r�z { S7e - 1 { { �waearT��'� 1r\ 212th t Park 1 She, {I / r 213th / r z14th 2141h 214th r Access 1 ♦ Edmoeaa waadwav rogn s�aael \ o � ♦ ♦ 215th 215th/ � r / 215th 215th ` rn ♦ �' L / / \ G—Church m 215th / .� 216th \ \♦ m r r �� se lake schoo€�^ —217th Steven's HpapgW. � � / 217th \\ 217th ♦ 4 217th °spltal ur" / F1 L rn 217th ♦ ♦ L x „ / V / 218th v ♦ � m � ry a / Ip — � I 218th o ♦ += as ' � � rn L L Olympic + A cuss BapEt y,u�h_ r r r r r r 219th 219th 220th 8.A.a �kVISIONING Five Corners Movement Opportunities: Sidewalks Potential: lifjy-,, Opportunity/Need for betterwalking conditions Existing: U r— a y Transit Stops O _ — Sidewalks V �i Alleys Wetlands C Streams `m >8%Slopes E a Parks LPublic Use - - -Walking Radius: N S + tO min. U V Q Feet 0 250 500 1,000 - Packet Pg. 35 ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Cycling Connections Westgate L� r. ❑ � Vrsel�Si.mrnwry Birch ~ _ o• Ai[zss • 13th I ♦ ♦ 731ii L i • 141h I P • % • 741h Ia ► I■ 14th t25rh •♦ 2261h t5th Ed—n& vrmrlo-un C—w ♦' �r r _ y ` ■ z .V--" 0.25:h 32Gih• 22613t ► ~ • ►► ■ � •Yr'�yEdmonds MemoAa' Cem� 22♦ 71h I • ♦ ► ♦ :llfh • t �r 8 ■ I r I t + I 228ch t WreApt. 0.06 F r l 1 0 r.—k V—Vak,,hed r 229'^ Sherwood E—.nu ■ t _ _ ; Io 1 I 1 luo sub $90.? ' 1 I f I 1 Fp, 1 1 ' ► ACcess I ! 1 1 t r o ► l 1 �Y ! 1'' 4� S 1 �p ► L ► 8 Access 231st ■ + �� ' ACCCSS p■ ! t 232nd i_ ■ + Robin fined �t0 t► •♦ Se Wth,-Chwcn � y a 'I n ♦ 1 q I • d ]33r � I w rz FN, % r�k ♦ 11 I ._ ►. 2341h __�� s 23a1n .I Nottingham 234Th �♦ ,:35 th 2351h A■ ti 235th ♦ + 236[h 235th■' a • 235th r I ;gym %• Z%th + _ Hickman pars • _ e u .. v + �- — Z37ry� a w°edxay E'emenlary Madrona School ti =371h Fa�l� Cn�nminT� Cwich 8.A.a L REVISION]NG Westgate00 a N Movement opportunities. N Cycling Connections o C O a+ C -- Bike Connections - Potential N L a C 3 O Existing: u Wetlands — Streams m a896 Slopes E E C Parks V LPublic use +M -a Y� C — — - Walking Radius. N S+1Dmin. E t V 0 250 500 1,000 Packet Pg. 36 ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Green Connections Five Corners r r M,nh a 703rd Ede -J Sn ut Qi.-J ~ zal:> r ~ � 2U/ten �e � Access ■ r r r . ■ 3091h �r o, � Access t-w.e►r an- Eleme�na-r ■�u� $a ► 2i15M v JAS[h ti Edmonds 2�aGth ■ a Access Fine KM¢e Pry �2Lvih�i x k I I� + Access za7m 206th I- a� Cnllc�rvi.r, o rlr-;s,— S r r +207th ,� 2❑nn � , aoath ` i q ■ * •Z08th � 1 Ar � � ,t 20lh +■ a a � ► � ► 207:h t 'ray Mr^,o•�ai Pa•� � � ! 210„ � � ►► �. ►ass[+, 1 t 2�on E E r �F 1 �var••,r I 'a llZ:ri r a l� 213th ! a a ►��o - '"din + r 114[h + r { { • 214[h a 214U, Umxdi W"Pw yXen 5, W6 Acces m a 21Sth + 215th■ I ''s•I• ► 6r8a1a7 y ■ 21 Sth jr 27G1h ' t �, s 7iFth sle•rm XwFlWI ► W cox Lk� sehoo = + 27 ith% p l 21 7th ?] 7lh � +• + 4;osPrta417ts'y a t N 218[h • 21 Xth r ��•+ c ' . Access Olympic BapEt Lh:�mr ■21 ■ 9th � 279[h z 2aath a 8.A.a 0 L REVISIQNING Five Corners a Green Connections N Opportunities E Potential: 0 Green Connections 0 O Movement Connections +' O C N N N aL V C 3 O U Existing: U r Wetlands 01 Streams a+ w >8% Slopos E E Parks c.i Use M LPublic C — — Walking Radius: N 5 + 10 min. E t v , t:�•g� Ftel ❑ 2So 5w u Packet Pg. 37 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Stormwater Management 0 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate GREEN FEATURES living walls bioswales/rain gardens green roofs permeable paving 8.A.a Packet Pg. 39 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate GREENstreet trees I green street edges I green roofs stormwater treatment I bioswales l rainwater harvesting FEATURES y rain gardens I permeable paving I pocket parks I courtyards a` N 00 r- r pocket parks courtyards I Packet Pg. 40 u e, 1R4 REVISIONII Illu itrative Plan Five Corners 4 a • 'y m .. , ell ! A 2 kEW �EiRIL aam: `-1 gSIACNIW � 119l1: ti... loan; 1 I — :. sta[s saoals: - I alll I ggll �i ]Rf510EaNE 3gs�mW /f z; r: »orals,. I gall 7 gSIWnW m SIOR16 I EnBn i �lil l� f 77pt6 8.A.a G�,scaa� •°t Iry Packet Pg. 41 N 00 r REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate 0 Buildings Five Corners (L 00 Packet Pg. REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Life Spac Five Corners a 2Lhr,7k�6, 0 4 %P/ SWAM Shags/ Serrku "' shop:lY . hlories/ Apoilmenrs � �� y ry a9�, [oaQere � * Famon Narkar 8.A.a m IL N EO ti v v '�r �Hscaa. i� Packet Pg. 43 �u e, rg90 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Illu itrative Plan Westgate 00 a N I 11A ❑ --, ❑ _- , l Li F� 1 ❑ o �� ❑ a `� ai E I oRE 4 C r9 cc Irp • �-s L .E. a w sxaya � � _ � • I I I � _ �� - — x�L' PUU Sub Sln[fon 0 / ® E o- .� N u • • Packet Pg. 44 232nd SMW — Sakmtutheren4hurd,.— ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Buildings Westgate 8.A.a 66 L IL N t 00 r TAT Packet Pg. 45 r ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Life Space Westgate 8.A.a . L ' -f Packet Pg. 46 8.A.a REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Contents of the Plan/Form-Based Code 1. Introduction Intent and Goals ti Summary of the Public Process r r O How to Use this Code cm 2. The Regulating Framework E 0 Understanding the Regulating Framework 4- 0 Street Types r Frontage Types L a Building Types Public Space and Green Feature Types 0 3. Building Standards 4. Civic Investment: Streetscape and Public Space Standards 5. Private Investment: Gathering Spaces and Green Features S r w 6. Administration and Implementation Standards a E Packet Pg. 47 u e, 1R4 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Building Types 1. Rowhouse - Townhome apartments or condominiums 2. Live Work - Townhome apartments or condominiums 3. Courtyard Residential - Apartment or condominium flats 4. Side Court - Office only, Retail Mixed Use with office or residential above, or Community Service Mixed Use with office or residential above 5. Commercial Block - Retail only, Office only, Retail Mixed Use with office or residential above, or Community Service Mixed Use with office or residential above 8.A.a Packet Pg. 48 u e, 1R4 ReVISIONING Five Corners &Westgate Residential Building Types Rowhouses Courtyard Residential Live/Work 8.A.a r- 0 L IL N 00 ti r r O N C 3 0 4- r- 0 r r N L IL 0 s REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Commercial Building Types Side Court e Commercial Block 8.A.a O L IL N 00 r REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Streetscape Standards Westgate ThoraughfareType! commerrialstreet with pedestrianenhanrements IGOth Ave. Mavement slaw FLO.W Width: 7Q' wl amenities 2-way cycle path Resign Speed: 25 mpn sta rmwater swa I e Landscape! west side - street trees planted no less than 30'. east side - swa le and planted buffer TrafftLanes_ 11: one each way; 11'o2nterturn lane Bike Lane! $'two-way cycle path Parki ng2 rkarke Pedestnan Crossing RIstame_ 33' Sidewalks! d' sethad sdewat ; supr trail Iranlarrt UE'NN SYlal! 0(1i "6uK6f ; sidejalk srt6a�k r 'T11'Tll'T 11'T 7' r' S'T8'T rck KUt6 S0 curb 33' I KaW 7Cr Section View: looking north from intersection of IOCth Ave. and proposed internal street 8.A.a O M N to d IL` N EO f` Packet Pg. 51 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Streetscape Standards Five Comers Main Street & baseline Thoroughfare Type: Movement R.O.W Width: Design Speed: Landscape: Traffic Lanes: Bike Lane: Parking: Pedestrian Crossing Distance: Sidewa I ks_ commercial street free 60' 30 mph street trees planted in bul Trouts between parki ng 11; one each way 4' both sides of street 8' parallel parking bath sides of street 46` l' eIe ke setback sidewalk parking lane !ravel travel ne parking sidewalk setback curb to curb p.D.W 60' 8.A.a ar my Section View: Main St.. looking northeast from proposed roundabout crosswalk7 ' 212th St. SW: looking east toward proposed rondabout Packet Pg. 52 u e. g90 O M a N rb ti REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate Next Steps Tonight: Summer: Fall: Year end: City Council Presentation Planning Board to review & refine Plan and FBC Public meeting City Council decision r- O L IL N 00 REVISIONING Five Corners & Westgate THANKS FOR PARTICIPATING! Q Packet Pg. 54 8.A.b Executive Summary ReVisioning Five Corners: A Special District Form -Based Code The University of Washington, Green Futures Lab (GFL) worked with the City of Edmonds to envision thefuture of the neighborhood business center at Five Corners The project goal was: • to partner with community members and leaders to assess wishes, needs and opportunities; • to develop and evaluate alternatives related to both use and form; and • to use the preferred alternative to inform new approaches to City code that will support economic development and help to shape the desired future of this center. The GFL team included graduate students in architecture, landscape architecture and urban planning led by faculty from the Department of Urban Design and Planning and the Department of Landscape Architecture. With direction from city staff, the team led an extensive public process, developed and presented distinct alternatives for review and comment, and created illustrative site plans for the preferred development pattern. The GFL team then produced this report, which documents that process and provides a draft form -based code to be refined and adopted by the City. The public involvement process included an on-line survey of Edmonds's residents, a listening session in January 2011 to assess local needs and issues, a half -day design workshop session with the public in March, and public review of alternatives in May. Regular briefings were held for the Economic Development Commission (EDC) throughout the process and more extensive work sessions were held for in-depth discussions of the alternatives and preferred plans on April 2or May 20, and June 15, 2011.The preferred alternative was presented to the City C o u ndI on June 21, which referred the project to the Planning Board for further review and refinement. The following Re Visioning Five Corners. A Special District Farm -Based Code document is the culmination of this year -long process of re5earchr analysis and pu blic input. For Five Corners, the plan envisions mixed use developments of two stories in height including a variety of residential units attractive to young singles and senior citizens alike_ Improvements in pedestrian and bicycling routes link various developments within the neighborhood center to larger systems of pedlbike routes through the city. The neighborhood center provides amenity spaces for outdoor gatherings and events and requires both landscaping and green development features to filter stormwater and to protect natural resources. A unique bonus system allows for developers to build 3-story projects fronting the proposed roundabout, provided that the development incorporates community benefits such as additional open space, green features, affordable housing, workforce housing, and alternative trans po rtatbn incentives_ T he anticipated development wilt be regulated by the city, using the Form -Based Code designed specifically for the Five Corners area. A form -based code is a method of regulating development to achieve a specific urban form and to create a prod Ictable public realm. In general: form -based codes are focused less on permitted uses ur densities than a traditional zanin9 code_ SO the Five Corners area, the form -based code will apply to the area currently zoned Neighborhood BusInos s (BN), using a process consistent with the city's adopted Development RBview PFOC_eS9. Following a process of review and revision by the Planning Advisory Board, the final document will be submitted to the City Council for consideration. if adopted, the Five Corners Special District Form -Based Code will be the re9ulatiFig document for new devOuprnient in the Five Corners area, replacing existing zoning. AdditiOnat infOrMat i0n about tine projec# and process Can be found on the City of Edmonds'website. http;11www_cl.edmonds_wa_usluwstud6es stm, and hit p-lledmonds_patrh_rmrn/articlesl5eCOTId=Five Corrlersfive-corners-meeting-announced Packet Pg. 55 8.A.b Acknowledgements ReVisioning Five Corners: A Special District Form -Based Code Project Leaders: Stephen Clifton, Director of Community Services and Economic Development Rob Chave, Edmonds Planning Director Jill Sterrett, FAICP, Sterrett Consulting, LLC; Lecturer, UW Department of Urban Design and Planning Nancy Rottle, RLA, ASLA, Associate Professor, UW Department of Landscape Architecture, Director UW Green Futures Lab Core Student Team: Julie Kriegh, AIA, LEE AP, Architect, PhD Candidate in the Built Environment Betsy Jacobson, LEED AP, MLAIMUP Candidate in Landscape Architecture/Urban Design and Planning Tom Jamieson, MLA, Landscape Architecture Jeanine Matthews, MLA Candidate in Landscape Architecture Eric Scharnhorst, MLA, Landscape Architecture Brad Shipley, CEP, Urban Design and Planning Cascade Land Conservancy Jeff Aken, Planner and Project Manager City Boards and Commissions City of Edmonds, Economic Development Commission City of Edmonds, Planning Board ReVis ion ing Five Corners!A Special District Form -Based Code Packet Pg. 56 8.A.b Table of Contents ReVisiolning Five Corners; A Special District Form -Based Code 1.0 i Intmduction 1.1 1 Intent and Goals 1.2 Summary of Background Research 1.3 Summary of Public Process 1.4 Five Corners Illustrative Site Plan 1.5 Organization of the Plan 2.0 iThe Regulating Framework 2.1 Purpose.Principles arrdIntent 2,2 I Core Concepts 2.3 Amenity Spaces and Green Feature Types 2,4 I Street Types and RcguWIng Building Lines 2.5 I BuildingTypes 2.61 Frontage Types 3.0 i Building Types 3.1 I Purpose, Principles and Iment 12 8uildingTypes 3.3 Frontage Types 3.4 I Green BuiIdiny Construction and Housi rig biveTsity Requnements 4.0 I Civic Investment: Streetscape and Public Space Standards 4.1 I laurpose, PTrnciples and Intent 4.2 Streels apeDesignStardards 4.3 Public Space Standards 4.4 Sikeway Standards 4.5 Stnrmwatr+r Standards 4.6 I Parking Standards 5.0 I Private Investment: Gat he ring Spares and Green feature Standards 5.1 Purpose, Principles and Intent 5.2 Green Factor Requirements and FuIlfiIIment 5.3 Open `pace Standards 5.4 Parking Standards 6.0 Administration and Implementation 6.1 1 Purpose, Principles and Intent 5.2 J Administrative Review 63 i Non -Conforming Uses and Smctures 5.4 Departures 6,5 Heoght Bonus T.0 Recommendations 7A I Purpose. Principle5and Intent 7,2 I Attracting Young Aduft as Residents 73 I Informal Uses for Vacant Buildings and Sites 7A I City Investments to Foster Development 7-S I Mwe-ment and Opportunities Appendix 1a Gehl Architects" 12-Quality Criteria Evaluation 1 bVisuaI Preference Survey 1c Design Workshop Conceptual Plans 1d Public Preference Cards 1e Survey of Comrrmon Themes 1f Fconomic Overview Sa Green Factor Components Sb Green Factor Plant List Explanation ofTermS Sources Page Packet Pg. 57 8.A.b 1.11 Intent and Goals for Five Corners The ReVisioning Five Corners. A Special District Form - Based Code (herein called "the plan") establishes a vision for new types of development in the Five Corners area, currently zoned Neighborhood Business. The plan proposes mixed -use development, including dwelling units, offices and retail spaces in a walkable community center with many amenity spaces.The intent of the plan is to establish a connection and "gateway"to the Edmonds area; create a desirable center for local residents, while being inviting to visitors; and unify Five Corners district with a distinctive character. The goals for the Five Corners Special District Form -Based Code include: 1. Creating mixed -use walkable, compact development that is economically viable, attractive and community -friendly, 2. Improving connectedness for pedestrian and bicycle users, 3. Prioritizing amenity spaces for informal and organized gatherings, 4. Emphasizing green building construction, storrnwater infiltration, i rnd a variety of green features, 5. E5tablishing a flexible regulating system that creates quality public spaces by regulating building placement and form, 6. Ensuring civic and private investments contribu to to increased Infrastructure capacity and benefit the SUrrOUnding neighborhoods and I he t 0HIMunity at large, and T. Encouraging the development of a variety of housinci choices available to residents of all economic and age segments, Recognizing the complexities associated with this neighborhood business site, the plan seeks a balance between open space, green features, commercial, retail and residential needs. The planning process addressed the Five Corners area in terms of Life, Space and Buildings, a process pioneered by Gehl Architects of Copenhagen_ The Gehl approach is summarized below; Life: a vision for public life begins with the people who live in the neighborhood. Including everyone's input helps paint a clear picture of neighborhood life. This 1.0 1Introduction understanding is the key to im- proving neighborhood vitality. 5paca:The next step is to envision public spaces that can best support the life of the neighborhood. What types of public spaces do people need for the life that was dis- cussed in the first step? A focus on the fine-gxained, human -scale of spaces is crucial. Buildings: Finally, planning should address the quality, height, massing, scale and functions of the buildings that will support neighborhood IWe and fit the spaces that were defined in the second step. For the Five Corne rs Special District, significant attributes of the Special District Form -Based Code were made visible through applying the Gehl approach. Specifrcaily, the plan features: Life; green, outdoor amenity spaces, pede5trian access; good internal Orcu[atian; shopping destination wl local attractions, especially bakeries, restaurants, and a gym; protecting the character of low Seale development; and retaining the sense of neighbor hood. For Five Corners, the understanding of this vision was derived from a series of public meetings, described in Section 1.3 below; • Space: safe crossings, green open space, defined plaza space; buildings to street edges; circulation on pedestrian corridors and internal streets, bike -friendly routes and dedicated bike lanes, water quality features. For Five Corners, our understanding of these public spaces was derived from both research ( described in Section 1.2) and the public process (described in Section 1.3); and • Buildings: buildings grouped and focused on the roundabout, ample open space; activated facades, green roofs and deck access; incentives and trade-offs for additional building height; tuck -under parking, parking structures, street parking and surface parking; and a sense of enclosure for residential and open areas. For Five Corners, the process of creating a concept for development (shown in the illustrative plan) began with a hands-on public workshop (described in Section 1.3) and evolved through many iterations of working with the initial products of the workshop, the plans developed by the GFL team, and the input of staff, the EEC and the Planning Board. Section 1.4 further describes the plan concept and attributes of the plan design. Packet Pg. 58 8.A.b 1.2 1 Summary of Background Research In Fall of 2010, an undergraduate student team from the University of Washington initiated the background research for the ReVisioning Five Corners project with a preliminary site analyses of the Five Corners area. The team mapped sidewalk conditions, measured the distance travelled within 5 and 10-minute walks of the main intersection, and collected parking counts to measure the current demand• The team used Gehl Architects' 12-quality criteria methodology to evaluate the project site on the basis of the site's current capac- ity to provide protection, comfort, and enjoyment for persons of all ages (fig. 1.2-1 ). See also Appendix 1 a. fig. 1.2-1 12 Quality Criteria for Good Public Space Key o i• a. .prlict �. �s.m.¢.a.ma a aror.rn� saama rt irAm.aa<daxn. a�ranaxx. u.q..r.n<sm.. D fF.dingds.f.ey� Exvxlmwa r •trrne Aeaenn C -f.y ytrMk •lord inl Uwd r emvmiacrn w«ee: I - rN,exa>;ne�t N- eiiypng ryn<mnr C a. ver>barci.. fer S-PoWWrcip' Wblrcin D 1mIRNG ST�NpNG/STAnNG SArTMG M F wm hr+rar�rg "57Nnr �d; dnfd sdrxN pnvdAeb • efvfa[e •Mdwsf«rb¢ T. ulWl¢I.sm i. fdlWM- A ulGl¢IH XEANNG ITAWXG FL4YIIMEDIGXGI •f..rry dnuxb ACTMiIg ArSr.M Irrl i A�.�1I +'IRAq Af+ !•alllMa.�111A �r*war iEYWiy IrFM.r�rar..lr 'FrW rr+xlNM Ax.i i,w •� wuG�ia •vw� The results indicated that opportunities to safely sit, stand, walk, and talk were found to be especially deficient at Westgate, while the site did provide interesting and unhindered views. Phase Two of the Pfojeet was initiated in January 11 by a team of graduate students from the UW Green Futures Lab (GFL)-T•his phase OfWork focused on researching case studies of other municipalities and their work with Form Based Codes. In particular, the team examined recently adopted form -rased codes from 8enecia, Ca., Faaners Branch, Tx., Ventura, Ca., Miami, F€.. One of the GFL team mere Wrs also met with city officials and residents in Miami to discuss the pubic process, challenges, and successes of develop ing the Miami2l farm -based code -The bliami2l city- wide plan was developed by Dlxany, Plater- yWrk & Company and was awarded the American Planning Association's (APA) 2011 Nat €onal Planning Excellence Award for Best Practice, Eking G€S (Geographic Informatlon Systean) data, the team wrapped property linesr steep slopesr identified the locations of mature trees, topography In a digital terrain model, identifGed sidewalk breaks, and recorded other existing conditions. With input from the public at public meetings, the GFL team identified existing biking/pedestrian connections{ green features, and movement corridors for wildlife habitat. The focus of Pha5eThree of the #ievisioning Five Comers project included the public involvement process Ihst is fufther described in Sedor1 1 .3. 12 Quality Criteria Applied to Fiwe Corners �!Evaluated by UW DesignTe" Phase Four breught together the results of all provious pub [it m3rkshops and ih0 ext4nSive research work of the GFL team. in a public open house setting, I he puhIit reviewed and re"ndod tc two draft alternat€vesrrepresenting alternative approaches to development at Westgate_ The public marked preference cards to €dentify site Features they found most desirable_ Through the duration of the project, the team worked with the Edmonds Economic Development Commis5€on (EDC) to offer local perTective, critique the findings of the GFL xea&s work, and offer guidance when needed. Regular briefings were held for the EDC throughout the project and more extensive work Sessions were Wd for in-depth d€scussions of the alternatives and preferred plans on April 20, May 20, and June 1 S. 2011. Packet Pg. 59 8.A.b 1.3 1 Summary of Publit: Pt•ocess The GFL team began the four phase public process in Fall 201 a. During the first phase, the team conducted an online survey to galn insight c4 how the public uses the site and to learn what improvements the public might desire. The survey was marketed by the City of Edmonds through a postcard masker seat to approximately 2,200 res idences within a 2000-ft radius of each center. The survey was open from November 9, 2010 through lurch 22, 2011 and received 36! individual responses_ The online survey found respondents, of all ages, considered more public spaces'as the best way to improve the sites (fig. 1.3-1 ), Many respondents also stated they desired better restaurants and safer streets, Fi7P CUntiis:Irnprotioanmtc by Age Gralir Aga e N Ages 25 - ii tq rmpordmN M W4)NVrenl fmj 1i A-1 PhaseTwo included a public meeting, termed a Listening Session, with about 25 people attending. Led by The Casca de La nd Conservancy (C LQ and t he GFL team, attendants of this session were presented with data from the Phase One online survey, shown ,examples of local built projects that reflected best practices for creating high quality piblic spaces, and given a brief Tutorial on greets infrastructure, The informational presentation} was followed by an instant polling audience -response, visual preference survey. Participants were issued digital "dickers'that allowed for real-time tabulations of their responses, which allowed each respondent to see the combined responses of the whole group. They were asked to respond to multiple-choice questions and select visual preferences to vadous. building configurations. and street treatments. Figure 1.3-2 provides are example question and the audience response. See Appendix 1 b for additional highlights from the visual preference survey. The participants overwhelmingly expressed the desire to bring building fronts to the street and to allow activities, such as outdoor cafe tables, on the sidewalks where appropriate. The city staff organized individual meetings with some of the property owners in the Five Corners area. From these meetings staff and the consultant team gained an understanding of the constraints and potentials for new development at Five Corners. Guided by what the team heard in the first two phases, the Phase Three public involvement effort focused on a half -day Saturday Design Workshop. At this workshop, residents and local business owners engaged with design professionals in a hands-on effort to create designs for Five Corners. The workshop began with summary of what the GFL team heard from the public during the Phase One and Two processes and a brief overview of green infrastructure. Approximately 40 citizens and members of the city s boards and City Council attended the workshop. The attendees were divided into nine srnall groups, separately addressing Five Corners or Westgate. Led by a design professional, each group designed a plan by first comiderinq the We (activities), they would like to be able to do on site. The teams then located plazas and open spaces needed to support these life activities on the site, Building Placement M She lawnrg warm pKWpants rmeisad le m"rw rW )i*IR9 is a pNestron Mpnw h.iM Sir!I*aW m mmIiderKw,.heV'Ao* ike m4 vrKt M-1*Wiinnwi' r1�Si4b,1�.Yl Er4 {i7r11 E.ew51 APR Ewx'Si hen:sm llrn �..m l.,rosn,r* Packet Pg. 60 8.A.b 1.3 1 Summary of Public Process Lastly, the teams used wooden blocks, scaled to represent building sizes, to place buildings on their plans to define the edges of the desired life -space, enhance the overall character, and activate the site. Figure 1. 3-3 shows an example conceptual plan repre- senting the results of one of the Five Corners teams at this workshop. The conceptual plans developed by the other teams are provided in Appendix 1 c. Phase Four brought together the results of all previous workshops and the extensive work of the GFL team. In a public open house setting, the public reviewed and responded to two draft alternatives, representing alternative approaches to development at Westgate. The public marked preference cards to identify site features they found most desirable (fig 1.3-4). See also Appendix 1 d. Through the duration of the project, the team worked with the Edmonds Economic Development Commission (EDC) to offer local perspective, critique the findings of the GFL team's work, and offer guidance when needed. Regular briefings were held for the EDC throughout the project and more extensive work sessions were held for in-depth discussions of the alternatives and preferred playas on April 20, May 20. and June 15_ A Summary of Common Themes heard at these public meetings is provides€ in Appendix 1 e_ Fog.1.3-4 rrn�rM�t4+krn -- +nn aaaaaaau F{ai.R nn LLiiw�Y..r9.y.�y,I I �cdM1rM1.nr r�#r~d.arr�wylM.� �{iy*M1 I.I�• � Ir.n.a Nib Y ,yYRp�ta�ll dT r ors ti l C r 4 l Aekad f RetaH � it+;tlsl+�r� ' Retail !� 1 FIP43ll'N) � Retail ! Farriers Outt OOF 1 Cafe N FC7: High Five Staying Alive fig- 1-3-3 FIVE CORNERs ALTERNA1 IVE:S '�` F .eeh iat mtfiffcNo0%dis AkFLafii i*at r,.Peil 10 VUMOR GAIINN GATEWAY I VILtJkdA Cf dlh �aR�nYlYlrQ h'.w.'GbrgR I�I an nl.v�►i.6!ul pima allo-n ` I trrl lch'Jrrtl�I.l�+lrwlr+41+'.#f'�+Iwrl ummi4i i. M11I1 lH wl IJflrilllml � '-'- I w.•Ynn Ird�En�..n .x5i r�lrrr boll #deMpa.Y�ma�l0.el 'e+.rdi.h irg bolo-:n.G.ay 34N.4mhIYra�IMWN 21i Yh �inu drmftmM ohIGWlriw Liihwi�lf. L�tw I a I' &mru&miPnispoYavIlr tYM1difI��rH4l@wYup}ri{w�i4WFhurltr.11.v^qhdm��Iv.td.Mt r.r U M.�anr1�Pn>.+k .r�rrrnTnQnnp�W�Irur4Y.owIdWn14p�ealkrrw M1O 1.s. '�41i.1r4il Jrri YNNaI Molly. 4r14 0.iVl�1R141Yh'1P. C'iw .wvii �n—d-4GwR hI IIM �MrL�r4l�t14 I --I l}..L�..a�uW IB Ly..u..R all 'ryG7YYi51YYr�l6rY P1/lffllil d .Rrc-Anpp55. luunlaln La.r"ki rllwa# nurdLhhl[i "Yrm W LJ dipYOnt*rm�xip.waidrpntfwitgn �rtmM ro J•w 11I t.VM"Y� biAm WSmK liuM1dan FvY&ut {omm�vr.r+a.'yraY'4:1 W �.wryr Nl�t.%Iwul IAaY ar8nn p d. Apw twaA.ba milgaEra El itk awpWprioQa1[liud} .Ca111l Llh �. tIM1 Ubb x rI h a5 C fr rnk '—` Gl47U"k+�.#�+�� +nEk ❑m6u lrlutkVSYPuLpm CJ Yntr tt iN.gAa tr tk*ti IJ m*m.icMNPam Iralwi En,Fjan L'J411M our U. I�I xOrcWAylallnn .Au4 nNlrnu�ni lww I�Fpintnl RwAin1��9�lxiwl Ii I a4mlk lt" al'vl 0%1l ljru4JXHLw.9wq [IISmi1uM iaf11W1 n"k-tin n 4l irkln ={f 91a L J4pI.xnlrrlaunl■anprvldehufkrbmven Irn- 4M1'r. � bukr 0 ism n94Pei11k4we1Rlll1allal bAw -+tr4rM CrMWNTS. Packet Pg. 61 8.A.b 1.4 I Five Corners Illustrative Site Plan The Five Corners Special District encompasses the area surrounding the intersection of Main Street, 212th Street, Bowdoin Street, and 84th Avenue in the north east portion of Edmonds. Currently, these streets meet in an awkward 5-way intersection that is controlled by stop signs. The City is currently studying this intersection and is looking to design and roundabout to provide for safer traffic flow. This area is designated as a Neighborhood Business district in the city's Comprehensive Plan and carries a "BN - Neighborhood Business" designation in the city's zoning code (Chapter 16.45). The City's comprehensive Plan currently allows for new develop- ment of 2 stories, or 25 feet in height throughout the area, although much of the existing development is one story in height, with some taller buildings at the Jeremiah Center and in adjacent residential uses. Five Corners has served the needs of the surrounding residential areas and the larger Edmonds community for many years with a variety of uses. Local residents participating in the public process for this study value the existing coffee shops and the gym, as neighbor- hood activity spaces. Current residents of the area actively support these uses and other businesses throughout the area. Current uses in the Five Corners Special District are summarizer[ in Table 1.4 1. Table 1.4-1 Summary of Land Use Characteris#ics I:iVrCoofore Acres Ixld , SP PCIA1 1,07 13.25G Scrvicc 1.67 17,y04 Office 2.37 19.010 Institution -Church 1.30 12.19 2 4ingId: FiliniIy Rc%idenli, I hi uIli 1aMily Rcsidcnlie 0.73 9.4G4 U nd4 v eloprd Toial 7.14 71,42G Sous. Ecommle Pomdel for" Cwrwi and NY* Comm Commtfdal Cerruwt� by Pmperty Cou nselors. F&Fuary 2411. The market/economic overview conducted in conjunction with the Special District planning process determined that the surrounding residential area include 16,000 residents within a vile rnile radius and over 64,000 residents within a three mile radius. See Appendix 1 f for a surn mary of the market/ economic overview. These residents provide the primary support for current and future retail and commercial uses in the Five Corners area; however, the retail uses are also supported by a substantial amount of pass -through traffic (over 9,000 vehicles per day) just along the busy Main Street connection between downtown Edmonds and SR 99. The economic study also notes that some redevelopment of the Five Corners area is possible within five to ten years, with further development thereafter, given the current economic climate and the nature of potential development for this area. As discussed in Section 1.3, local residents participating in the public process for this Special Dis- trict plan were strongly in favor of retaining the gym and coffee shop, while adding outdoor gathering spaces and uses such as bakeries, and more public uses. Many residents wanted to maintain the small scale of buildings in general and were concerned about potential height increases of 3 to 4-stories, although they also desired additional amenities. The additional features most desired were plazas and courtyards for socializing, amenities such as fountains and public art, and improved area walkability. The core concept for the Five Corners Special District is to focus new development around the round- about and lining the streets while retaining the basic character of the area. The intent is to protect the low scale neighborhood feel, while increasing walkability, activating the streets and sidewalks, and providing gathering spaces, such as plazas and open spaces. To support this concept, the Form -Based Code for Five Corners establishes a Required Building Line of 5 feet from the public right-of-way along major streets as well as maximum and minimum Required Building Lines for the roundabout, thus encouraging new development to line the streets and activate the sidewalks. The Concept Plan for Five Corners is described in Section 3.1.3 (See also, the Illustrative Site Plan in Section 3.1.3). Packet Pg. 62 8.A.b 1.4 1 Five Corners Illustrative Site Plan Figure 1.4-1 shows a 3-dimensional view of possible development in the Five Corners area under the form -based code. This view shows the building scale and types of uses of potential future development for the Five Corners area over the next 10 to 20 years. This vew illustrates how the area could develop, but is not intended to regulate the exact land use, size, location, or amenities of future development. In meetings to discuss alternative plans for the Five Corners area, the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board recognized the local resident's interests and also felt it is necessary to provide incentives to property owners to create amenity space and the desired small -unit housing. Thus, the Concept Plan for Five Corners allows for 3 story development around the roundabout where significant amenity space is required and 2-story throughout the remainder of the area. All parcels are also eligible for height bonuses that would allow one additional story, subject to the Development Review Process as defined in City Code and the bonus requirements (see Section 6.6). F ;- I A-1 Amenity Space; The variety of outdoor spaces required of all future development, which Includes lawns, plazas, squares, accessible rooftaps, and sidewalks. Packet Pg. 63 8.A.b 1.5 1 Organization of the Plan Re0sioning Five Corners -A Special Vis trict Form -13ased code establishes standards for new development in the Five Corners area .The plan is organized sc that the parrs interreiate and often must be reviewed together.'rhe sections in the Table of Contents shay the main topics and the overall organization of the plan. Each of the major se ctions is described below. Section 1- Introduction: This section lays out the goals and intent of the code. It also describes how the code was constructed relevant to background research and the public process. This section also explains how the code is structclred. Section 2 - The Regulating Framework: This section provides the key for the Farm -based Code. It provides an overview cf the irtiwmation relevant to the permitted development standards for each site and For the adjacent pubilc rights - of,way, Section 3 - Building Standardr,: This section provides detalled standards For huiWing types, including placement, height, and Frontage types, as well as greed bull ding comtrts<I i o r i an€i housing diversity requirements. Section 4 - Civic Investment: 5treetscape and Public Space Standdards: This soctlon sets the standard for sidewalks, street IreL-S,lpikeJanes,lands€Apirtg,and str tswith the intent to build coherent, safe transportation corridors Far all modes of trawl_ This section 1s also intended to assist developers in understanding haw a huifding size relates to the street. Section S -- Private I nvestment: Gathering Spaces and Green Feature Standards: This Section pFuvide5 informat.iOn € CI laUuv to fulirll Green Factor requirements. This section also sets the Standards for Fla7Aa Lr gathering spaces, and parking configurations, Section 6 - Administration and Implementation: This sect ion deb rites how O,e review of development proposals in the Five Corners area will be i�andfr+d under the Farm -Based Code, consistent with City procedures for other develop ment_ This section also ideritifies the bonus system which allows for added building height WhP.ra various randitians are met. Section T - Recommendations: This section provides information for the City Council, Boards and Commissions that describe actions the city can take to foster development Linder the Five Corne rs plan and to meet the goals of the plan, Packet Pg. 64 8.A.b 2.1 1 Purpose, Principles and Intent Purpose This section identifies the locations and sizes of open space, building form, and land use types allowed within the Five Corners Special District specifically in terms of Street Types, Required Building Lines, Frontage Types, Building Types, and Public Space and Green Feature Types. Principles and Intent A Core principle of the Five Corners Form Based Code is to provide spaces for the use and enjoyment of the public, green features which protect and enhance the environment, and multi -modal access to amenity spaces as well as to businesses. The Regulating Framework is the controlling document and principal tool for implementinq the Five Corners special District form -based codes. The Regulating Frarework provides standards for the development of each property or lot and illustrates how each relates to the adjacent properties and public right. of way. The Regulating Framework for the Five Corners Special District identifies the Core Concepts of the plan, Amenity Space and Green Featu re Ty pes, Street Types and Required Building Lines, SuildingTypes, and FrontageType5. .0 1 The Regulating Framework 2.2 1 Core Concepts I he core concept for the We Corners Special District is to crpate a vibrant mixed -use activity center that enhances the economic development of the city and provides housing as well as retail and office uses to meet the needs of a II age grow ps_ 1 he plan see ks to retain key features of the area, including protecting the overall neighborhood character of the area, while increasing walkability and gathering spaces, such as plazas and open spaces. To support this concept, the Forrn Based Code for Five Corners @stab]ishes a Required Building line of 5 feel from the public r ight -of -way along major struts as well as maximum and minimum Required Building Lines for the round- about, thus encouraging new development to line the streets and activate the sidewalks. Other important aspects of the Concept Plan for Five Corners include: • An emphasis on creating a lively pedestrian environment with wide sidewalks and requirements for buildings to be placed close to the sidewalk. • An emphasis on landscaping the plazas, open spaces, and parking areas with a requirement of 15% landscaped open space. • An emphasis on sustainable low -impact develop- ment with a requirement for bioswales, rain gardens, green roofs and other features to retain and infiltrate storm water on private property, in addition to the bioswales along the roadways. - An emphasis on providing for workforce housing and increasing residential uses with a requirement for 10%small-sized dwelling units and 10% affordable housing, meeting Snohomish County standards for affordability. - An emphasis on providing options for non - motorized transportation linking new bike lanes into the city's larger system of bike lanes and extending sidewalks and pedestrian paths into the surrounding residential areas. Packet Pg. 65 8.A.b 2.3 1 Amenity Space & Green Features Types As noted in the previous section, an irnportantcomponentofthe Five Corners Special bisttict Form -Based Code is the provision of ample amenity space anti encouragement of green featu res throughout the Special District I n addition to the requirements for :individual properties, the Five Corner; Special Distrtct plan includes some common areas that will provide amenity space and green features. Specifically, these Include: • Expanded setback areas surrounding the proposed roundabout to provide amenity spaces and landscaping to enhance the usabitity of the area and to reinforce the focus on the roundabout, • Landscape enh an cern ents at the proposed roundabout to create a clear identity and a distinct central point for the Fiore Corners Special District, • A public space in the SE sector of the site, providing shared anwnity space for residents in the area for use as a farrtter� market, activities, and special events, • Linkages frorn the 1-ive Corners Special District to surrounding residential areas to encourage walking and biking to the District, Bioswales along Sowdoin Way and 84th Avenue Figure 2.3-1 provides a map of potential develpment at Five corners and photos illustrating the character of the development that could Occur. Fig. 2.3-1 Packet Pg. 66 8.A.b .4 1 Street Types & Required Building Lines This section establishes the regulations for lhree Street Types and for the Required Building Lines which all buIIdings shalt be built -to associated with each street {wvithin the Five Corners Special District. The 51reetscape standards (such as street widths, placement of street trees, parking options, bike lanes, and othef amenities) associated with different street types are Shown in Section 4.2, The purpose of the streetscape standards is to ensure coherent streets and to assist developers and owners with understanding the relationship between the public spaces and individual buildings. The purpose of Required Building Lines is to establish a consistency between the building frontages along the street and a defined relationship of the buildings to the street and public right-of-way. 841h Avenue West {Streetscape Standards on p. 212th Street Sin ,jthwest & Main St. (Streetscape Standafels on p. _ ) Bowdoin Way {Streetscape Starsdards on p. itegukred Buildinq Lines shall be S' from Right of Way See Section 2.6 for maximum and rninirnum setbacks fox properties with frontage on the Roundabout. Cwawi ng rar rodmg pkiWses only. kK Packet Pg. 67 8.A.b 2.5 J Building Types Properties in the F!ve Corners Special INstrict are allowed buildings of 1 to 2 stories in height. Because of the additional open space requirements for properties fronting on the roundaboutr these properties are allowed up to 3 stories in height. AN properties within the Five Corners Special District are allowed an additional 1 story ]n height for development meedng the bonus criteria- 1. Rowhous Two or more attached two or three story townhorne apartments ar COFI(#ornlnitJrrlS- Z. Courtyard - A cluster of apartment or carrdorr4pniurn slats arranged to share one or more common courtyards. 3. Stacked Dwelling -The buiIding massing is predicated on horizonta€ repetition and vart1cal stacking of non-residential commercial uses on the Wound level With residential above. 4. Live -work- An 1nznrazed housing apartmenz or condominiurn and workincg space designed to actornmodate Joint residential and work activity uses. 5_ Loft Miixed- Use - eft M Ned -lase buWings are predicated on horizontal repethion and vertical stacking of units organized on lobby, corridor, and elevator access. Loft bu iIdings have greater height per floor to accornmodate the second floor loft area within a unit. & Side Caurt Mixed -Use- Retail mixi�-d-lase vvjth office or residential above, or community service mixed -use with office w residential above, 7. Commercial Block j Mixed -lase- Retail mixed -t.l-w or commu nity service mixed -use with residential above. Detail artily, nffire only of CarYrmunity servif mixed -use with office or retail above. Each BuiId!ng Type is allowed on]y with In specified locations within the Five Corners 5pecial Distr]ct, as shown in figures below, L Ftawtous* FI* 25:T S. Loit Mbkpuuw Fig. 2.S-S 7, Courtyard 4, Sid* Court Mixed -Use �sz %. 2.5-G 3. Stacked T. Comm#rdlel Mixed -Use ft 2.S-J 4. tLVe-wark Packet Pg. 68 8.A.b .6 1 Frontage Types This section establishes the reguiatlons for Frontage Types within the Five Corners Special District, The pu nose of the Fron tage Types is to ensure coherent streets and to assist developers and own ets with understanding the relationship between building fronts and public space. Building Frontage Types are carefully coordinated with Building Types, see Section 3.3 for regulations on which frontage types are aI1OWed for each Bu Ilding type. Key Maximum Setback 401 from roundabout • • • • Minimum Setback 2a from raundabaut Required Building Linn Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage Standards A minimum of 60% of the primary facado shal I be built to the Required HuiIding Line. Any section along the required Building Line that is not defined by a building must be defined by amenity or g reen space except to allow for Ih a mini rnum necessary openings for veh [culartrafli[, Awn ings,bay windo s,orotherbuildingdesign features can encroach over the Required Building line, but not the Property Line. Drawing for cockrng Gu4+oses only. Examples of possibie Building Configuration oriented to the roundabout Maxlmixedfrontagebuilt BuiIttothe MinI=mSet- wMlnimumSetbackand backand corners built zo Required Building Lines. the required Building Line. a Two bu i I di ngs can be Corners are built to Required used to improve internal Building Line. All Primary peclestrian circulation. Frontage is within the Maximum Setback - Ptibilic Pedestrian Right of Way _ Required Setback Optional Setback (must be Amenity Space or building space) Loading docks or other service entries are prohibited on street facing facades, Facades on retail fromtages shall be glazed with clear gla ss n o less tha n 70% of the sidewal k-level story, Any building facade facing a public street shall include changes in building farm, modulation, archways, entrances, porches, OF stoops for every 12'of frontage. Access through the building to rt=ar parking or amenity spaces is required at int,-rualc nn than every 15W of the facade facing a public street. Packet Pg. 69 8.A.b 3.11 Purpose. Principles and Intent Purpose This Section identifies the building types allowed within the Five Corners Special District, and provides design standards for each type, to ensure that proposed development is consistent with the City's and community's goals for building form and quality. Principles and Intent The intent of the Five Corners Special District Plan is to create a lively and pedestrian friendly environment by providing for a variety of mixed use buildings and spaces. Each proposed building shall be designed in compliance with the standards of this Section for the applicable building type and with the neighborhood character identity identified in Section 1.4. Allowable Building Types by Zone A lot may be developed only with a building type allowed by Section 3.2 in the zone applicable to the lot. There may be more than type allowed on a lot, Mixed Type Development The development regulations are structured by the definition of distinct building types of the Form Based Code that have been identified as specifically suitable for Five Corners special districts in scale and confiquration. On deep lots and aggregated lots, there is an opportu nity to mix these types within a single development project. Mixing building types within a project encou rages variety in the massing and organization of the buildingl,, open spaces on the lot, and on the frontages at a scale that is appropriate for Five Corners. Scale and Massing The scale and massing of buildings is to be calibrated to the existing urban context with the intent of breaking down large scale building masses and elements into"walkable neighborhood" elements and smaller scale building clusters. The contiguous lengths of building facades are regulated in the Frontage Types Section 3-3-The heights of buildings will be designated by area using stories as the measure rather than a prescribed height in feet_ Upper floors are encouraged to be stepped back from street to allow an accessible roof deck or green roof area_ 3.0 1 Bu11dingTypes Flve Corners may have 1 to 3 stories allowed on pamels frontjng can the roundabout meeting the pla.?a requirements and 1 to 2 stories allowed on all other parcels, with a bonus of T addit anal start' on any property meeting bonus criteria. See Section 6.5 for bonus provisions - Allowable Building Types 3.2. I Rowhouse -Two or rnore attached two or three-story town hame apartments or condOMiniums, .3.2.2 Courtyard - A cluster of apartment or condornini urn flats arranged to share one or rnor2 Common courtyards- 3.2.3 Stacked Dwelling -The building massing is predicated on horizontal repetition and vertical stacking of non-residential commercial uses on the ground level with residential above. 3.2.4 Live -work- An integrated housing apartment or condominium and working space designed to accommodate joint residential and work activity uses. 3.2.5 Loft Mixed --use- Loft Mixed -use buildings are predicated on horizontal repetition and vertical stacking of units organized on lobby, corridor, and elevator access. Loft buildings have greater height per floor to accommodate the second floor loft area within a unit. 3.2.6 Side Court Mixed -use- Retail mixed -use with office or residential above, or community service mixed- use with office or residential above. 3.2.7 Commercial Block I Mixed -Use- Retail mixed - use or community service mixed -use with residential above. Retail only, office only or community service mixed -use with office or retail above. Life Space Buildings and Illustrative Plans For reference, see Section 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 for examples of plans for the Five Corners special district depicting the design intent for the neighborhood center. -16 Packet Pg. 70 8.A.b 3.1.2 1 Life Space Buildings Plan i REV ISIONING Fire Corners LIFE SPACE BUILDINGS PLAN n&V,1-r.-ig� r , -1' pr i i.i r.i! rii-' Prmii j--ri np♦e Daildi nq roatprint Pub114 Uhr Rlaea Camen Space f11' n goof peln Garden lLs of lFeWW" N 36 20 Packet Pg. 71 8.A.b 3.1.3 1 Illustrative bite Plan REVISIONING Five Corners ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN W,1---w� r A' r.r!,,: Prrmi j--rrl nr♦r Mugd Irtq Faetprjn# ll� Plus Fkbt g11LU1 " Fs ffi "Umgfmy1 Open Spy■ IIIIII■ Wa1meF■aiun Frn 4 19 8! 174 L L O U a� ii L W IL I_ 0 0 to N L a N Go r- r Packet Pg. 72 8.A.b 3.2.1 1 Rowhouse _a r� Building Type Diagram Description Two or more attached two or three-story dwellings with zero side yard setbacks located on a qualifying lot in the Five Corners Special District as shown in the Allocated Locations diagram. Access The primary entrance to each dwelling shall be accessed directly From and face the external street If feasible.Where dwellings are accessed from internal streets, then the primary entrance to each dwelling Shall be accessed dire( t I y fronn and fang the internal street. Parking and services shall be accessed from an internal street or alley or tuck -under parking in a Minced Tyre Development. Parking entrances are allowed on an internal street if the garage entrance does not occupy more than one half the building frontage, Alluwecf Locbrlons Parking and Services Required parking shall be one space for each dvuellinr) that shall be in a garagr� or in a designatod surface parking zone. Corner lots shall not have garages that face the side strut if it is feasible to PTI;viIII* Fmrking cuff an alley or parking court at the rear of the building. Services, above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located on the alley or screened from the street view. Heat pumps and other noise polluting equipment shall be located to the rear of the building or on the alley. Amenity Space Front yards are defined by the street build -to line and frontage type requirements of the zone. One usable outdoor space shall be provided behind the rowhouse at no less than 15% of the lot area and of a regular geometry with a minimum dimension of 20 feet. Where buildings back up to steep topography, the open space is not required to be usable. Alterna- tively, 50% of the usable open space may be provided at the front of the lot. -19 Packet Pg. 73 8.A.b 3. .1 1 Rowhouse ittustraav4P#ioto Wbllklg Fd Landscape Landscape may be used to separate a front yard from the front yards on adjacent parcels. Front yard trees shall be of porch scale where adjacent to the porch (at maI06ty, no more than 1.5 times the height of the porch) except at the margins of the lot and as a part elf tItie frUnit iqe Iand. aping al the street sidewalk interface, where they may be of house scale Jno more than 1.5 times the height of tF1e house at the Maturity of the tree) At least one large tree shall be provided or an existing significant tree shall be maintained in each rear yard for shade and privacy. Where appropriate, connected tree canopy design is desirable to promote habitat corridors and shading. See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds MunicipaI Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter 20.13). especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.0m). Building Size and Massing Buildingis shall be c�nmposed of � and 1 or 3 story volumes in compliance with the applicable zone. Bull dings on lots fronting on the roundabout shall be designed with a main facade facing the roundabout and may have a secondary fa qa do to provide street frontage on both side st reets. Rmni" Photo; Taoomi In a 3 story building, a townhouse dwelling may be stacked over aground floor flat. In this case, the flat shall be accessed by its own from doors at the street and thin townhouse dwelling shall be accessed by a separate front door and an Internal stair, In a 2 story bullding, the ro house consists of a towrihousa dwelfing rhat is accessed frGm the strut and faces the street. Sustainable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used in the design of sustainable site features and low -impact stormwater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may include: pervious pavement, pervious pavers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections Frontage Types per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Provisions per Section 6.5 - 20 Packet Pg. 74 8.A.b 3.2.2 1 Courtyard Building Type Diagram Description A cluster of dwelling units arranged to share one or more common courtyards. The individual units are rowhouses or flats or stacked flats. The courtyard is private space that is adjacent to the public realm and may provide access to tuck -under parking. Courtyard building types may house ground floor commercial/ flex uses if commercial uses are ancillary to the re%identi81 use_ COUFtyard i:}uildiny5 Troy be located on a qualifying lot in the Fire Corners Special District, as shown in the Allocated Locations Diagram. Access . The main entry to each ground floor dwelling % I M I I be directly off common courtyard or directly fFi)M an 4XTOFn3l Street- Access to Ct}MFni� rciAI uses shall be directly from an external street. . Access to secorrd-story units sha11 be thFoijoh an open or open roofed stair. • Parking shall be accessed through an alley or interior street if present - Pa r k1i ng shall be accessed from the exterior street via a driveway if no alley is present. Parking and Services • Required parking shall be one space for each dwelling, that shall be in a garage or in a designated surface parking zDrie, • Required parking for commercial or office spaces is one stall per 500 SF. • Where an alley exists or is planned, they, parking, utilities and above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located on the alley. Akwred LIX&OOM • Where no alley exists or is planned, then above- ground equiPM'r nt, and trash containers shall be located at least 10 feet behind the buildingg facade and be f ul ly screened from the street view with landscaping or fencing, Amerrity Space Front Yards are defined by the street bulId-to line. Sites shall be designed to provide usable open space with a total area of 15% of the lot. A central courtyard and / or multiple separated or interconnected court- yards, roof decks, green roofs, plaza and courtyards may be included in the cumulative total area. In a project with multiple courtyards at least two of the courtyards shall conform to the patterns below: • Optimal court dimensions are 40 feet when the long axis of the court is oriented East/West and 30 feet when the court is oriented North/South. • In 40-foot wide courts, the frontages and archi- tectural projections allowed within the applicable zone are permitted on two sides of the court; they are permitted on one side of a 30-foot wide court. Private open space is allowed in side and rear yard, courtyards, balconies and roof decks. • Courtyards shall be connected to the public way and/or to each other. Connecting spaces shall be 10-15 feet wide. Packet Pg. 75 8.A.b 3. .2 1 Courtyard Landscape Landscape may not be used to separate a front yard from the front yards on adjacent parcels. Front yard trees shall be of porch scale where adjacent to the par[h (at treed maturity, no more than 1-5 times the height of the porch) except at the margins of the lot and as a park of the frontage Jan&cdping at the street sidewalk interface, where they may be of house scale (no more than 1-5 t i"s. the height of the house at the maturity of the tree). At least one large tree shall be provided or an existing significant tree shall be maintained in each rear yard for shade and privacy- See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds Municipal Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter 20.13), especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20-13.030)- Frontage • Entrance doors and living spaces (great room, d i n i ng, I ivi ng, fa m ily) shouIdbecrientedtoward the co rtyard and exterior street- Service rooms may be oriented toward the Ede -yard, rear yard or alley. •►voexteriorarcademay encroachinto the required minimum width of the courtyard. • Stoops up to 3 feet i n 11 eig ht may be placed above below grade parking- BUllding Size and Massing • Buildings shall be composed of flats and ro+n houses alone or in ca rnhi nation - Units may be repetitive or unique in design, Multrativecry:aaint t Buildings shall be composed of one. two, and three start' masxes, each de!"(J;'ed to house scale. The building is not required to appear to be one building. Sustainable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used in the design of sustainable site features and low -impact stormwater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may include. pervious pavement, pervious pavers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections Frontage Types per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Provisions per Section 6.5 2� Packet Pg. 76 8.A.b 3.2.3 1 Stacked Dwellings Building Type Diagram Description Stacked Dwellings are predicated on horizontal repetition and vertical stacking of units organized on lobby, corridor, and elevator access. These buildings may be used for ancillary non-residential commercial uses on the ground level only. These buildings are located on a qualifying lot in the Five Corners Special District, as shown in the Allocated Locations diagram. Access • The primary entrance to each dwelling shall be accessed be thf0Lrgh A street level lobby or through a combination of streetlporchiplatform level day accessible rrorn the street. • The entfy to each ground floor dwelling shall be directly from. the street_ Secondary access may be through an elevatoUstalr corridor, Interior Circulation to each unit shall be thrauoh a double or singe loaded corridor. Parking and Services Required parking shall be one space for each dwelling that shall be in a garage or in a designated surface parking zone. • Required parking for commercial l office spaces is one stall per 500 SF. • Units may have direct or indirect access to parking stalls. Where an alley exists or 15 planned, then parking, utilities and above ground equipment, and trash containers 5hala be located Qn the alley. • Where no alley exists or is planned, then above ground equiprnentr and trash containers shall be located at least 10 feet behind the building facade and be fully screened from the street view with landscaping or fencing. Allowed Lw&fim" Parking entrances to garages and/or driveways shall be located as close as possible to the side rar F*Ar Of Pd€1110L Amenity Space FFUnt Yards are definers by the Street build -to line - The primary shared open space is the rear yard which shall be designed as a courtyard. The rear yard may be designed for ground installation or for the lid of a below- grade parking garage or garage deck. Side yards are allowed for common use gardens. Sites shall be designed to provide usable open space with a total are of 15% of the lot. Central courtyards, roof decks, green roofs, plaza and courtyards may be included in the cumulative total area. In a project with multiple courts at least two of the courts shall conform to the patterns below: • Optimal court dimensions are 40 feet when the long axis of the court is oriented East/West and 30 feet when the court is oriented North/South. • In 40-foot wide courts, the frontages and archi- tectural projections allowed within the applicable zone are permitted on two sides of the court; they are permitted on one side of a 30-foot wide court. • Private open space is allowed in side and rear yard, courts, balconies and roof decks. • Courts shall not be less than 1:1 between width and height. • Private patios may be provided in side and rear yards. - 23 Packet Pg. 77 8.A.b 3.2.3 1 Stacked Dwellings Landscape Landscape may not be used to separate a front yard from the front yards on adjacent parcels. Trees may be placed in front yards and in side yards to create a sense of Place_ At Ieast one large tree !,halI be Provided or an existing significant tree shall be maintained In each rear yard for shade and privacy - Courtyards located over below grade garages shall be designed to avoid the sense of planters and hard scape landscaping. See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds MunicipaI Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter M13),especially GeneraI Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.030)- Frontage No arcade may encroach into the required minimu m width of the courtyard. Building Size and Massing Buildings shall be composed of flats, lofts, and rohouses alone or in co inbination. • Units may be repetitive or unique in design. Buildings shall be composed of one, two, and three AMy rnasses, each designed to house scale. The building is not required to appear to be one building_ Ill dmi1ve Photo, Ca piwl HiH Sustainable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used in the design of sustairsable site features and law- mpact stormater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may in€:lude' pervivus pavement, irervi€sus pagers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stvrmwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections FrontageTypes per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Rrovisions per Section 6.5 24 Packet Pg. 78 8.A.b 3.2.4 1 Live -Work 1� 1� 1� _a Building Type Diagram Description An integrated housing unit and working space, occupied an utilized by a single household in a structure, either a single family in clusters or a multi- family, that has been designed to accommodate joint residential and work activity uses. Work uses shall be at the ground floor. A live -work structure may be located on a qualifying lot in the Five Corners Special District, as shown in the Allocated Location diagram_ Access The primary entrance to each ground floorwork/flex space shall be accessed directly from and Face the external street if feasible. Where dwcllingsare accessed from interriA streets, then the primary entrance to each dwelling shall be accessed directly from and face the internal street The upstairs residential unit shall be accessed by a separate entry and internal stair that is also accessed from and faces the street. Access may also be provided by a shared lobby that provides separate access to the cpmmerciallflax and dwelling uses_ Parking and services shall be accessed from an alley or tuck -under parking. Parking entrances are allowed on an internal street or alley if the garage entrance does not occupy more than one half the building frontage. 1QkwiW d LDC&fions Parking and Services Required parking shall be one space for each dwellin1) 1hid t shall be in a garage or in a designated surface parking zone. Corner lots shall not have garages that face the side street if it is feasible to PTI;vide Fmrking cuff an alley or parkiing court at the rear of the building. Services, above ground equipment and trash containers shall be located on the alley or screened from the street view. Heat pumps and other noise polluting equipment shall be located to the rear of the building or on the alley. Amenity Space Front Yards are defined by the street build -to line and frontage type requirements of the zone. One usable outdoor space shall be provided behind the live -work at no less than 15% of the lot area and of a regular geometry with a minimum dimension of 20 feet. - 2s Packet Pg. 79 8.A.b 3. .4 1 Live -Work Iflusiratiwe Photo: captlol Hid Landscape Landscape shall net obscure the storefront of the ground floor flexlwork space_ At €east on lafgi� tree shall be prnvided ar an existing significant tree shall be maintained in each rear yard f n r shade Arid privacy. See Aso, sundards 4T1d ruGes of the Edmonds Municipal Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter 20.13), especially Gen Pral Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.030), Frontage • Commercial/+ orkMexspalceonthe9roundfEoors and I living areas on upper floors should be orlerrted toward the fronting street SeFviceroornsshould be oriented towards the side and rear yards. • Cornrnereial/wtirklfl:ex spaces shall conf€ rrrti to 51orefron t Type Standards, • Buildings on corner Jots may provide an appropri- ate frontage type on both the front street and a secondary frontage type on the side street facade. Building Size and Massing Buildings shall be composed of 2 and/or 3 -story volumes in compliance with the applicable zone. likWrMILV* Photo; CtpiUA HiH Sustainable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used in the design of Sustaioabfe site features and low- mpact stormater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may in€:lLille' pervivrs paverrTent, Fwrvi€sus pagers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on -site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections FrontageTypes per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Rrovisions per Section 6.5 2s Packet Pg. 80 8.A.b 3.2.5 1 Loft Mixed -Use Building Type Diagram Description Loft Mixed -use buildings are predicated on horizontal repetition and vertical stacking of units organized on lobby, corridor, and elevator access. Loft buildings have greater height per floor to accomodate the second floor loft area within a unit. These build- ings may be used for non-residential commercial uses. These buildings are located on a qualifying lot in the Five Corners SpedAl ()istrict, as shown in the Allocated Location diagram. Aemess • The primary entrance to each unit shall be accessed be through a street level lobby or through a combination of streetlporchlplatform level lobby accessible frorT1 the Street_ - The entry to each ground floor unit may be t hrough an elevatorlstair cor riidor_ • Interior circulation to each unit shall be through a double or single loaded corridor. • Access to u pper level loft areas via an internal stair Parking and Services - Required parking shall be otie space for each dwelling that shall be in a garage or in a designated su rface parking zone. • Required parking for commercial { office spaces is one stall per SOO SF. • Where an alley is existing, parking, utilities and above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located on the alley. - Where no alley exists, above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located at least 10 feet behind the building facade and be fully screened from the street view with landscaping orfencing. ,tug Lonfiom • Parking entrances to garages andlor driveways shaII be located as close as possible to the side or rear of each lot. Amenity Space front Yanks are defined by the street buikd-to line. The primary shared open space is the rear yard. The yard may be designed for ground installation or for the lid of a below grade parking garage or garage deck. Side yards are allowed for common use gardens. In a project with multiple courtyards at least two of the courtyards shall conform to the patterns below: • Optimal court dimensions are 40 feet when the long axis of the court is oriented East/West and 30 feet when the court is oriented North/South. • In 40-foot wide courts, the frontages and architectural projections allowed within the applicable zone are permitted on two sides of the court; they are permitted on one side of a 30-foot wide court. Private open space is allowed in side and rear yard, courtyards, balconies and roof decks. • Courtyards shall not be less than 1.1 between width and height. Private patios may be provided in side and rear yards. • The minimum courtyard shall be 15% of the lot area. Central courtyards, roof decks, green roofs, plaza and courtyards may be included in the cumulative total area. - Z7 Packet Pg. 81 8.A.b 3. .5 1 Laft Mixed -Use IlaustratiwoPhoto; Cipitol HIII LarndscaW Landscape may not be used to separate a front yard frorrl fFOT]t yard'S 01) adja[ent parcels. Try may be placed I n front ya rds a nd i n slide yards to create a sense of pCace_ Courtyards located over below grade garages ShAlI be designed to avoid the sense of planters and hardscape landscaping. At least one tree shall be provided in the rear yard directly in the ground or as apart of podium landscape design. See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds Municipal Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter 20.13), especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20_13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.030). Frontago No arcade may encroach Into the required minimum width of a courtyard. Building Size and Massing Buildingsshall be€arnris doflofts alone orabove comrnereial space on the ground level. Units may be - repetitive or unique in design_ F Bu 1dings shall be composed of one, two, and three story masses, each designed to loft scale. The building is required to appear to be one building. The main volume may be Flanked by a seCorldary volume. Illuatrisly Phamc rr*m ont Sustainable Site Design Green tractor Score requirements shall be used in the design of sustd'Inable site features and law- mpact stormwater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may in€ Lifle' pervious paverrtent, pervious pagers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections FrontageTypes per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Provisions per Section 6.5 23 Packet Pg. 82 8.A.b 3.2.6 1 Side Court Mixed -use r— ---------- Building Type Diagram Description A single or cluster of buildings containing dwelling units or office suites arranged to share one or more common courtyards. The individual units or suites are rowhouses, fiats or stacked flats. The side courtyard is a semi-public space that is adjacent to the public realm. Side courtyard types may house ground floor commercial spaces with office or dwelling units above. Side € ourl hu ildings may be located on a quOifyirlg Jul in the Five Corners Special Uistrictr as shown in the Allocated Location diagram. Access • The Ml kin entry to ea(h grOund floor d".IIing sha11 be directly off the common courtyard or directly [ pFi)M an 4 0errlal 5tF�F. .L A((eSr, to (orTirnerc..iA1 8F111 office uses shall be directly from an external street or side (:0 LIFtyard. • Access to second -story units or suites shall be through an open, open roofed, or internal stair. • Parking shall be accessed through an alley if present. • Parking shall be accessed from the exterior street via a driveway if no a11ey is present_ The drive shall be 7 to 10 feet W do and with 2 foot planters on each side. • Parking entrances to below grade garages and driveways should be Located as close as possible to the side or rear of each lot_ Akwad ucaGom Parlking and Services • Required parkIngshall beonespace for each dwelling that shall be in a garago or in A designated surfam parking zone. • Required parking Ftir eammertial or office spares Is one stall per 500 5F_ • Where Hn alley is exisliFIg, PHFkin9, utilities arnd above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located on the alley. • Where no alley exists, above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located at least 10 feet behind the building facade and befully screened from the street view with landscaping or fencing. Amenity Space Front Yards are defined by the street build -to line. Courtyard buildings shall be designed to provide a side courtyard and or multiple separated or interconnected courtyards with a minimum dimension of 20 feet and 15% of the lot area. In a project with multiple courtyards at least two of the courtyards shall conform to the patterns below: • Dwellings shall face an active side yard. • Major ground floor rooms shall be open to the active side yard with large windows and doors. • When located on an active side yard, a driveway shall be integrated into the design of the yard through the use of a reduced paved area, permeable paving materials for a landscaped area and usable outdoor space. • Rear yards are not required. - 29 Packet Pg. 83 8.A.b 3. .6 1 Side Court Mixed -use Landscape Landscape may not be used to separate a front yard from the front yards on adjacent parcels. Front yarn# trees shall be of porch scale where adjacent to the pOrr,h (at treed maturity, no more than 1.5 rimes the height of the porch) except at the margins of the lot and a$ a paT t of the frontage landSCdping at the st nw sidewalk interface, where they may be of house scale (no more than 1.5 times the height of the house at the maturity of the tree)_ At least one large tree shall be provided or an existing significant tree shall be maintained in each rear yard for shade and privacy. frees may also be placed inside yards for privacy. See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds Municipalode, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter M13), especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20_13 GZO), and Landscape types (Chapter 20_13.030). Frontage F Entrance doors and Iivinq spaces (great room, dining. living, family) should he oriented toward the co rtyard and/or exterior street. Service rooms may be oriented toward the side-yardr rear yard or alley. No exterior arcade may ericroach into the regkiired minimum width of the side courtyard. Building Size and Massing Buildings shall be composed as large single buildings of primarily two story volumes, and to the side yards as two -and thee -story masses where grades allow. Jitustrouva Photo, 6i inbridge The building elevation abutting an Inactive side yard Shall be d1 ,igned to provide at least one horizontal break of at least three feet and one vertical break. Buildings on corner lots shall be designed with two facades of equal arrhitc%au ral expression. LinIts wfthIn the buildings may be flats and/or townhouses, Sustainable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used in the design of sustainable site features and low -impact stormwater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may include: pervious pavement, pervious pavers and vegetated roofs. Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections Frontage Types per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Provisions per Section 6.5 30 Packet Pg. 84 8.A.b 3.2.7 1 Commercial Block- Mixed -use 6ui Idi ng Type Di ag ram Description Commercial block dwellings are designed for retail, service, and for office uses on the ground floor street frontage, with upper floors configured for dwelling units or commercial uses. The buildings are predicated on horizontal repetition and vertical stacking of units organized on lobby, corridor, and elevator access. These buildings shall be used for non-residential com- mercial uses on the ground level- These buildings are located on a qualifying lot in the Five Corners Spacial District, as shown in the Allocated Location diagram - Access • f he primary entrance to each building shaft be accessed be through a street level lobby or through a combination of streetfporchlplatforrn level lobby accessible from the street. • Interiorcirculationtoeach unitshallbethrough a double or single loaded corridor. • f he entry to ear ground floor commercial space shall be directly from and face the street. Parking and Services • Required parking shall be cane space for each dwelling that shall be in a garage or in a designated su rface parking zone, F Required parking for commercial or offiite spates is one sta[I per 500 SF. r Where an alley is existing, parking, utilities and above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located on the alley, • Where no alley exists, above ground equipment, and trash containers shall be located at least 10 feet behind the building facade and be fully screened from the street view with landscaping crfencing- AlkwiLd Luc&Loans • Parking entrances to garages and/or driveways small be lorati cd as tIese aS posSiblta to the side or rear of each lot. Arnen ity Space Front Yards are defined by the street build -to line and frontage tYPEr roquirArilents of the ,one - The primary shared open space is the rear yard. The yard may be designed for ground installation or for the lid of a below grade parking garage or garage deck. Side yards are allowed for common use gardens. In a project with multiple courtyards at least two of the courts shall conform to the patterns below: • Optimal court dimensions are 40 feet when the long axis of the court is oriented East/West and 30 feet when the court is oriented North/South. • In 40-foot wide courts, the frontages and architectural projections allowed within the applicable zone are permitted on two sides of the court; they are permitted on one side of a 30-foot wide court. • Private open space is allowed in side and rear yard, courts, balconies and roof decks. • Courts shall not be less than 1:1 between width and height. • Private patios may be provided in side and rear yards. • The minimum courtyard shall be 15% of the lot area. Central courtyards, roof decks, green roofs, plaza and courtyards may be included in the cumulative total area. -31 Packet Pg. 85 8.A.b 3.2.7 1 Commercial Block- Mixed -use 1Jluslrhtiva• Frh. to' Ff4�m4nT Landscape Private landscape is not required. Trees may be placed in front yards and in !We ya rds to crate a sense of place. Courtyards located over below -grade garages shall be designed to avoid tile sense of PIA?lIers and hArdscap* landscaping, At least one tree shall be provided in the rear yard directly iri the ground or a a part of p0diUrn landscape design - See also, standards and rules of the Edmonds Municipal Code, Landscapinq Requirements (Chapter 20.13), especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.030). Frontage No arcade may en croa c li 'I nto I lie required minimum width of a courtyard. Building Size and Massing Buildings shall be composed of office, retail, flats, rowhouses or lofts alone or above commercial space on the ground level. units may be repetitive or unique in design. • buildings shali be composed of one, two, and three story masses. The building is required to appear to be one building- • The main volume may be flanked by a secondary volume- • Large floor plate retail such as grocery stores, nurseryr and exercise gyms are allowed on the first or second floors of a mixed -use building. III Lis; rativa Photo, fremorn Sustaihable Site Design Green Factor Score requirements shall be used In the design of sUStainable site features and law -impact stormwater treatment systems. Pervious surfaces shall be used where possible and may in lode; peFViQUu Pave mFrtit, perVi sus PjWer5 and vegetated roofs, Capture and reuse strategies including the use of rainwater harvesting cisterns can be substituted for the effective area of pervious surface required. Runoff generated on —site shall be routed through a treatment system such as a structured stormwater planter, bioswale, rain garden, pervious pavement, or cisterns. Runoff leaving the site shall conform to City of Edmonds Stormwater Management Code Chapter 18.30 of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code. Related Sections Frontage Types per Section 3.3 Street Required Building Lines per Section 2.1 Green Building and Workforce Housing per Section 3.4 Green Factor Requirements per Section 5.2 Bonus Provisions per Section 6.5 3� Packet Pg. 86 8.A.b 3.3 1 Frontage Types Purpose This Section defines how the buildings within Five Corners relate to the public realm of the sidewalk and other common use areas. The purpose of defin- ing Frontage Types is to encourage the development of a variety of frontage types and to encourage each building to relate to the public realm in ways that are attractive, inviting, and accessible to all. Principles and Standards The frontage types for each proposed development shall be designed in compliance with the principles of the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Housing Element and in concert with the Building Types and standards presented in Section 3.8, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and Section 6.5, as well as the neighborhood character identity identified for the Special District of Five Corners. This section identifies five Frontage Types, as shown in Figure 3.3.1. Each of the five frontage types are described and depicted in a section view. For each Frontage Type, the description concludes by identifying those Building Types for which that Frontage Type is permitted. Primary Frontage: Frontage that faces the public space or areas of higher pedestrian importance. Fntrances aW fRgUGrQd. Secondary Frontage: Frontage that faces public space or areas of lesser pedestrian importance. Entrances to buildings are not required. s3 Packet Pg. 87 8.A.b 3.3 1 FrontageTpes hc} 3.3-1 Private IPA Public Frontage Frontage Required Building Line V i s i s i r 44 b! e I p `1 k d a.Torraeo or Elovatiad Entry: The main fa4ade is set back from the frontage line by an elevated terrace or entry. This type buffers residential use from sidewaIks.The elevated terracc is also suitable for outdoor cafes. Terrace or Elevated Entry frontage may Ew used on Rowhouse, Courtyard, Live -Work, Stacked Dwellings, Loft Mixed - Use bulldIng types, Side Court Office, or Commercial Black Mixed -Use building lypps. b.Forocaurt:The main fa4ade is at the required building line with a portion set back for a small court space. The court could be used to provide shopping or restaurant seatlrig In commercial zones, or as an entry court for residential zones. This type should be used sparingly. Forecourt frontage may be used on Courtyard, Stacked Dwellingsr and Live -Work building types- c. Stoop -The main facade is near the frontage line with the first story elevated to provide privacy. The stoop is appropriate for ground floor residential use (1). Stoop frontage may be used on Rowhouse, Courtyard, Live -Work, and Stacked Dwellings building types. d. Shopfront: The main fa4ade is aligned close to the frontage line with the building entrance at sidewalk r9rade. The covering shall extent far enough to provide pedestrians protection From the weather. This type is appropriate for retail or office use only. 5hopfront frontage may be used on Stacked Dwellings, Live -Work, Loft Mixed -Use, Side Court Office, or Commercial Block Mixed -Use building types where the building provides ground floor retail or office uses. ii. Gall wry. The main facade is set back from the frontage line with an attached cantilevered ccIonna6e overlapping the sidewalk.The entry should be at sidewalk grade. The gailery should be no less than 8'feet wide. This type is appropriate for retail or office use only. Gallery frontage may be used on Stacked Dwellings, Live - Work, Loft Mixed -Use, Side Court Office, or Commercial Block Mixed -Use building types where the building provides ground floor retail or office uses. (1) Stoop Lype frontage (type c) is rlol al Iowed on buildings oriented to the roundabout. 34 Packet Pg. 88 8.A.b 3.4 1 Green Building Construction and Housing Diversity Requirements Purpose The purpose of this Section is to encourage the development of a variety of housing choices available to residents of all economic segments and to encour- age sustainable development through the use of development standards, requirements and incentives. Principles and Standards Each proposed development shall be designed in compliance with the principles of the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. In addition, the standards of Section 3.8, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and Section 6.5 and with the neighborhood character iden- tity identified for the Special District of Five Corners. Community Resource Preservation Goals The City's Comprehensive Plan encourages the availability of basic community resources such as: open space, parks and other recreation facilities; preservation of light, privacy, views, open spaces, shorelines and other natural features; and freedom from air, water, noise and visual pollution. Land Use policies encourage strategic planning for development and redevelopment that achieve a balanced and coor- dinated approach toeconomic development, housing and cultural goals; and encourage a more active and vital setting for new business supported by nearby residents, downtown commercial acflvity and visi- tors_ Policies encourage significant public and private social areas, cultural facilities, and scenic areas; and the preservation of historical sites. Commercial Land Use policies encourage identification and reservation of sufficient Sites srti#ed for a variety of commercial uses_ Housing Goals I lousing goals are directed toward providing opportunities for all segments of the city's households; supporting existing neighborhoods and preserving housing stock; maintaining high quality residential environments; and providing assistance to housing development for a broad range of demographics including a diversity of age and economic levels. These (jowls are supporled by polio ies whi,-h in€:lude review of regulatory Impedirnents to control of housing costs and affirrriative measures to supp€art €.Onslrur�tiOrt Of housing for projected groups; encou raging expan- siMl or tyfxay of housin(j available, in( lading ac[:emary dwelling units, mixed use, and multi -family+ housing; flexiblo devek0F)mPnt standards; and FtWil5iOn of devel- opment regulations such as the Special Distrlct of Five Corners aFld the Form -based Code PFOViSiOn!9 herein. Innovative, Green Building and Site Design Goals The goals of this Special District Form -Based Code are: 1. To encourage innovative, green building, and site design in housing and mixed -use projects by: a. increasing the housing supply and the choice of housing styles available in the community, b. promoting workforce housing encouraging smaller and more varied home sizes and mixes of income levels, c. promoting affordable housing by creating diversity in housing affordability, and d. promoting high quality sustainable design. 2. To encourage the use of innovative site development practices and green building construction practices by encouraging the use of conservation design methods and principles such as; low impact development techniques, green building materials, water and energy conservation, and mitigation that offsets impacts to bi o d i ve rs it y. 3. To encourage innovative development projects by: a. identifying zoning code amendments, such as Form -Based Code Special Districts, that are necessary to support the development of innovative housing choices in the City of Edmonds, b. identifying effective incentives to encourage green building and low impact development standards, and c. building to LEED, Built Green, Evergreen, Passive House or other certifiable program standards. 4. Coupled with the goals of innovative housing and green building is an equally vital goal to provide hous- ing opportunities within Activity Centers consistent with land use, transportation and economic activities. a. provide for mixed -use development with Activity Centers, b. plan for housing that is located with easy access to transit and economic activities that provide jobs and shopping opportunities, and c. consider adjusting parking standards for housing within Activity Centers to provide incentives for lower -cost housing when justified by available transit service. Green Building, and Site Design Criteria All units shall meet Built Green or LEE Certified rating or equivalent as a requirement and shall meet a mini- mum Green Factor Score of 0.3 per Section 5.8. - 35 Packet Pg. 89 8.A.b 3.4 1 Green Building Construction and Housing Diversity Requirements Affordable Housing Criteria At least 10% of the units must meet the following affordable housing criteria as defined below. Affordable housing or affordable dwelling unit means a dwelling unit for use as a primary residence by a household in any of the income groups described below, which may be rented or purchased without spending more than 30 percent of monthly household income including utilities other than telephone and cable TV. Monthly household income is categorized into thefollowing five groups using the median household income for the region: Extremely low income <30% of median household income Very low income 31%-50% of median MIT•>�i fne KRi •• mum - Low income 51%-80% of median household income Moderate income 81%-95%ofmedian household income Middle income 95%n - 120%of median household income Median household income means the amount calculated and published by the United States Department and Urban Developrnerd {HUD} each year far the Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area IMSA) as the median household or family 1ncorne, adjusted by Hk iD for household size. The department of planning for the City of Edmonds shall CalcWate annually the maximum purchase prices and maximum rents appilcable to each of the Income groups described above - Workforce Housing Criteria To promote a balance in age demographics and encourage age diversity, the City of Edmonds Economic Development Commission Is actively 2neouraging a gfeater numi.,Qr of dwelling units targeting young professionals and young workers thr gh vuork OFIr t- housing pmvisinns_ At least 10% of the unity mosI meet the f011OWing workforce housing unit size criteria as defined bei ow. WorkFnre6+ htulsing is chararteri,,ed by smailer dwelling unit sizes ranging between 800 5F and 14600 SF. Work- furre housing provisions encou rago a mid of unit sites exclusive of garages, that provide for a broad mix of incorne levels ar;d fan1ily size and age groups.. The criteria for workforce housing is to provide a mix of unit sizes within a development that meet the following standards: Very small unit < 900 SF Small unit 900 SF - 1000 SF Moderate unit 1001 SF - 1200 SF Middle unit 1201 SF - 1400 SF Largest unit 1401 SF - 1600 SF Applicability This Section is applicable to all properties located within the Five Corners Special District. The Section applies to innovative housing projects that are multi- family, mixed -use multifamily developments. Since the purpose of this provision is to meet the underlying Comprehensive Plan Goals that support the inclusion of both green building construction, affordable dwelling units and workforce housing, the City will promote a variety of bonus incentives as described in Section 6.5.3. Permitted uses in the Five Corners Form -Based Code Special District shall comply with the standards established for permitted uses in the city's Neighborhood Business district.. Linkage to Code and Comprehensive Plan The City of Edmonds Community Development Code is intended to work with Section 3 Building Types of the Form Based Code. See Section 16 of the Municipal Code for allowed uses in the Five Corners Special District. Sources City of Bainbridge Island Municipal Code Section 18.38.090 HDDP Density Incentive Summary, 11.12.2009. Housing Within Reach: A Call to Action for Snohomish County Communities. June 2008. Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County. Westview Village, Vision & Form -Based Code, City of San Buenaventura, California. -36 Packet Pg. 90 8.A.b 4.0 1 Civic Investment: Streetscape & Public Space Standards 4.11 Purpose, Principles and Intent Purpose This section identifies the street, streetscape, and public space standards allowed within the Five Corners Special District (as indicated in the Regulating Frame- work) in order to ensure that proposed development is consistent with the City of Edmonds goals for character and quality of the public realm of the street. Principles and Intent The Five Corners Special District Plan calls for the maintenance of existing public road alignments but with enhancements and modifications to facilitate non -motorized movement. Design treatments have been established for proposed streets that are appropriate to the vehicular and pedestrian use of each street, as well as the adjacent land uses. The intent of the proposed system is not only to establish street types that serve regional, district, and local access needs, but also to integrate the Five Corners Special District with the surrounding neighborhoods, especially as they connect to downtown Edmonds, transit hubs, and public open space. A core principle of the Five Corners Special District Plan is that the public environment created by the streets is of great importance_ Local streets carry much of the life of a mixed -use urban district; encouraging residents cr As+tors to waIkr biker or drive to one's home, office, store, or park, Proposed Street Types A consistent Streetscape program i5 regoiirod to ensure that a unified streetscape is developed. Streetscape concepts have been developed to reinforce the several different street types within the Five Corners Special District, individual streets are classi fie d by movement type. Movement type describes the expected driver experience, as follows in Table 4.1-1- Street Name MovernentType 212th k a Main St. (;I) free $nwefnin Way (h) glow 841k Ayd-,-west M slryv Tal le4.t 1 4.2 1 Streetscape Design standards This section illustrates various the street types within the street network for the Five Corners Special District. The requirements set forth in this section work with the frontage standards and building standards described by the Regulating Framework to provide the irlformation with which to modify existing Streets. The following street Sections represent proposed design changes to each street type in the Five Cci ners Special District They do not represent approved cr final designs. Final design will be reviewed and approved by the City of Edrrivnds. (a) Free: Drivers can expect to travel generally with minimal delay at the design speed; street design supports safe pedestrian movement separated and protected from vehicle movement This movement type is appropriate for thoroughfares designed to traverse longer distances or connect to h ig her density locations. Design speed is 35mph. (b) Slnw: Drivers should expect to proceed carefully with an occasional stop to allow pedestrians to cross or another car to park. The character of the street should make drivers uncomfortable exceeding the design speed due to presence of pedestrian amenities, parked cars, enclosure, and other design elements. Design speed is 25mph. - 37 Packet Pg. 91 8.A.b 4.2 1 Streetscape Design Standards 212th Street Southwest & Main Proposed Approach The proposed aiterat ions maintain bath streets as major ea5tlwest connections but focus additionally on enhancing the pedestr[an experience and strengthening each street as via bie corrlmerclal space for rommunity resi&ents- Amenities include transparont sInrefronIs, Street trees, bike lanes, and pedustfiafi scaled streetlights. Fig.417 Section a - a' ; Main St; looki ng northeast from proposed roundabout crosswalk Section In - b� 2,12th St SW' looking east toward prup 3wd r mdabout rl Ino Kne fib 4.2 Thoroughfare Typo: hlovanene R GAW dth cesIgn spetd; I-andseape_ Tralfor Lmiz's Bike Lbrre: Parking: V4 r!4.-AFiarY C rOW1111 L]I5i"Cl�- Sidewalk€ Table +4,2 commercW sweet Iree Er1]' 9 mph stFee# Imes pWrik d do curb cuts between parking 41;One e1Klk w.tiy V butts sides of street TparaBel perking b%hsldesBIFstreet 4h, r ire. 7` T 5' i 11' lt'� far t Fl,o w b0' NOI I'0 SCALE - For illumatiru pxujjv%u5 uidy- Packet Pg. 92 8.A.b 4.2 1 Streetscape Design Standards Bowdoin Way Proposed Approach The proposed alterations maintaln the street's existing character while enhancing the quality of the pedestrian expereience. Increased setbacks provide more open space near the future roundabout. Existing topography enccurag es bimmale on north side of street- Parallel parking wiII slow traffic and increase pedestrian activity. Ffg- "SectlJot` a-aiai� tooklrgsa tWevtfrmprapasad t� u `�4�I�" Om�l� Y Thoroughfare Typc commercial slrei=l Mowarnenu slaw R.iaw mdth: 60' Msign Sped; 25 mph Landscape: south side - street trees pU nied rn bulb -outs lr•twl�r?rY tlLtl kuYrl; nprth ylrip l,ep}w.111� wide nyrrltrlwalirl-Ok-d ruYv.nd In1.M41.11PI4l11 nal Traffic Lanese south side IU. north side 14'w!sharrow lank Bike Lane: south side 5', north side shairow is ne Parking; S' parallel parking on wWh side of sheet t. YYrh In t Li rl.Y I }J'.r. Inl 1•' 4'{' Sidewalks: or TableA,3 NY Ud'.�I rNL'�AYYIldJ1 WIF .� YNi YF 51d�MYd � 1 1 — Y 5 lu li f IF d' 7¢----- — 1-ftftlu YlE - aT Ham 1. Setbacks wN wary for 1 ho5a parcel9 froriting the proposed roundabou t, 5" Ironlage requi rt�ments in $2egulati ng Framework NOTTO SCALE ' For illustrative purposes only, 39 L L O U a� ii L O W IL t- O c O O C a� N N L a N 00 r- r Packet Pg. 93 8.A.b 4.21 Streetscape Design Standards 84th Avenue West Proposed Approach The proposed alterations maintain existing right of way while bias al9s Increase the street's ecological function and bike lanes enhance connectivity along proposed cycling route. Fig $rmtlion ai -le: Idnkinq north from prop�rd raundebqut Seuion b - b: laoki ng south from proposed roundabout Street Type, cammerd&l Street mayor lEnt; MIDW R.Ow width! 150' oesw Speed: 2S mph Landscape bfoswaias S swan traes planted 3Cron cemer Traft UrwN 10: one LIOF h W.3y gikc•l,fW! f'kwi Fk}1d "; of Hit-ytrz�et Parking; none Curb to Cu!b distance_ 32' SKk-W.4Ck}- 7' Teblr 4A i wvl;Rk OdamA swala I& trawl trave3 - lame rtiwl! - JkkWjW snbV � rob ro curB J 32' Alq. 4.4 1 I Raw GO' NOT TO SCALE -For ilfustratixe purposes only. .K. Packet Pg. 94 8.A.b 4.3 1 Public Space Standards In the Five Corners Special District -and within the larger context of the City of Edmonds -there are multiple opportunities to enhance public space for recreational use, pedestrian activity, and ecological health. Future development of the Five Corners Special District shall capitalize on these opportunities to strengthen the overall character of the District's overall publicspace. Public Space Public space shall enhance and promote the environmental quality and the aesthetic character of the Five Corners Special District in the following ways: (a) the landscape shall define, unify and enhance the public realm; including streets, parks, plazas, and sidewalks; (b) the landscape shall be sensitive to its environmental context and utilize plant species that reduce the need for supplemental irrigation water; and (c) the landscape shall cleanse and detain storm water on site by utilizing a combination of biofiltration, permeable paving and subsurface detention methods. Additionally, The City of Edmonds has the opportunity 10 expand and enhari<e the Fiubli( space of the Fire Corners Special District by acquiring or leasing the FAr(:el irTimedial&Iy he- hind the lererttiiah erlt*r- Currently parcel is just outside the site boundaries of the Five Corners Sp -vial Di$trirt but if it ►4ferQ acquired by the city or integrated into future development F)iansr it could serve AS sFMMM for a farmer's rnArketr local event space, small park, or recreational activities, :end Ihpreforo bLi,<ormi valued PLINic %Faa€:e for I he community - Public Space: S ustain ab i I ity The goal for the overall landscape design of pu bIIc spaces is to create a unifredr harmoniousr socially vibrant, and aesthetically pleasing en0ronment that also integrates sustainable concepts and solutions that FOStvre natural fUnctlons Hnd FHMW� SAS -The public right of way and urbaMstreet runoff becomes an ekti rnsian of oxisting drainage pathways and the natural ecology+. Water efficient landscaping will be introduced to reduce irrigation requirements based on a soil/ climate analysis to determine the most appropriate indigenous/native-in-character, and drought tolerant plants. All planted areas, except for lawn and seeded groundcover, will receive a surface layer of specified recycled mulch to assist in the retention of moisture and reduce watering requirements, while minimizing weed growth and reducing the need for chemical herbicide treatments. Where irrigation is required, high efficiency irrigation technology with low-pressure applications such as drip, soaker hose, rain shut- off devices, and low volume spray will be used. The efficiency and uniformity of a low water flow rate reduces evaporation and runoff and encourages deep percolation. After the initial growth period of three to seven years, irrigation may be limited in accordance with City requirements then in place. The location and selection of all new tree planting will adhere to'green infrastructure' principles by visually expressing the underlying interconnectivity of the neighborhood. Species selection will be in character with the local and regional environment, and comprised of an appropriate mix of evergreen and deciduous trees. Trees will be used to define the landscape character of recreation and open space areas, identify entry points, and reinforce the legibility of the neighborhood by defining major and minor thoroughfares For pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles. Stormwater; Rain and snow melt that runs off of rooftops and paved 5u rfaces. Often picks up pollutants such as oil, pesticides and waste- Typi€.allyr storrnwater flaw% 4110 A �IWF ] drninr or directly into a water body, and has been identified as a primary cause of degradation to local streams, rivers and Pugets Sound, 41 Packet Pg. 95 8.A.b 4.4 1 Bikeway Standards Proposed development in the Five Corners Special District should provide bikeways for both short and long distance movement. A bikeway is defined as a continuously designated segment of the public right- of-way that provides exclusive, preferential, or equal priority for bicycle travel. It includes the riding surface and any curbs, markings, and protective barriers, and any plantings, lighting, and furniture that are specific only to the bikeway. The 2009 Edmonds Transportation Plan requires that the regional bikeway network should be well -integrated with the regional and local transit network and that bicycle parking facilities be provided. As the bikeway plan is an integral component of the Five Corners Special District, it is the intent of the plan that: (a) civic and institutional destinations shall adapt their facilities to accommodate bicyclists; (b) bicycling shall be recognized as an essential form of transportation and recreation within neighborhoods and throughout the region; and (c) new thoroughfares in urban contexts shall be designed to target Speeds that are safe for bi<yc:lists and provide appropriate markings for cyclist safety - The Streetscape Standards (Section 4_2) identify two types of bikeways as part of thie I'Ive COFners Special District plan: (a) bicycle [ane: as defined by Section 21.10.010 of the 2011 City of Edmonds Municipal Code a bicycle [ane is a lane reserved for bicycle travel designated by striping or curbs on an improved street right-of-way; and (b) sharrow: a lane that is shared by both bicycles and automobiles. The lanes have still arrow markings to alert cars to take caution and allow cyclists to travel in these lanes when striping is not possible. Design standards for the bicycle lane shall be derived from the City of Edmonds_ See Table 3-6 and H g u re 3-8 of the 2009 Edmonds Transportation Plan. 4.5 1 Stormwater Management As outlined in Chapter 18.30 of the 2011 City of Edmonds Municipal Code, the city has two broad goals regarding the management of stormwater: (a) to protect water resources and reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable to local receiving waters; and (b) to control storm water runoff generated by development, redevelopment, construction sites. Stormwater and hydrology components will be integrated into the Five Corners Special Districts to restore and maintain natural functions and processes, mitigate negative environmental impacts. Public rights -of -way, proposed open space and parking lots will filter and infiltrate stormwater to the maximum extent feasible to protect the natural stream systems and the receiving waters of Puget Sound. This ecological concept transcends the Five Corners Special District site to positively affect the surrounding neighborhoods, stream corridors, and the regional watershed. The two primary objectives of the proposed stormwater and hydrology components are: (a) to reduce volume and rate of runoff; and (b) to eliminate or minimize runoff pollutants through natural filtration. These objectives will be met, to the extent feasible, by: (a) maximizing pervious areas; (b) maximizing the use of trees; (c) controlling runoff into bioswales and biofiltration strips; (d) utilizing permeable paving surfaces where applicable and feasible; (e) utilizing portions of parks and recreational spaces as detention basin; and (f) removing sediments and dissolved pollutants from runoff. - 42 Packet Pg. 96 8.A.b 4.6 1 Civic Roles in Parking New development occurs in the Five Corners Special District, has the opportunity to utilize a lower standard for required parking than was previously permitted under City code (see Section 5.4). This suggests the City should take an active role in promoting various parking solutions. Appropriate parking solutions can have many implications for the District and for the City as a whole, including economic health, air quality, traffic congestion and safety issues. The City of Edmonds, therefore, has the opportunity to address the issue of parking proactively and from a civic improvement perspective, including the options listed below: • Retaining on -street parking wherever feasible, • Building parking structures -these may remain in public ownership or be reimbursed through development fees, • Creating an improvement district to fund shared parking facilities, and • Negotiating shared parking agreements between property owners. It is recommended that future development in the Five Corners Special District include above -grade parking structures and/or shared parking facilities for adjacent residences, businesses, and office spaces. [development and improvement of off-street parking facilities to be shared for the purpose of meeting the requirements, both public and private, is a desirable and feasible alternat ve and improves the safety and free flow of both pedestrians and vehicular traffic_ In addition. shared parking facilities are particularly appropriate for the Five Corners Special District because in a mixed -use development diverse activities have different peals demand times. For example, an office complex and restaurant could share parking, since the office peak will be during the workday and the restaurant demands will peak during evening hours_ As the City of Edmonds moves forward with its plans for the Five Corners Special 01W'c{, it should recognize that parking structures and shared parking facilities are catalyzing amenities for future development_ All parking facilities within the Five Corners Special (district small be regulated according to the City of Edmonds design standards for such facilities. Mixed -use, A combination of reta0, residential. Off to and �;ornrminity gerVi1�tz "CP% in nnQ. building or on one parcel. a Packet Pg. 97 8.A.b 5.01 Private Investment: Gathering Spaces & Green Features Standards 5.11 Purpose, Principles and Intent Purpose This section identifies the types of amenity spaces and green open space allowed within the Five Corners Special District, as indicated by the Regulating Framework, and provides design standards for each type, to ensure that proposed development is consistent with the City of Edmonds goals for character and quality of the places surrounding the buildings on private property within the Five Corners area. This section also describes the Green Factor requirements that apply to each development within Five Corners. Principles and Intent The intent of the proposed system is not only to establish amenity spaces that serve the community and local needs, but also to provide for the protection and enhancement of natural resources for the benefit of the greater community. Core principles of the Five Corners Special District plan are to promote: • an environment that encourages and facilitates pedestrian activity —"walkable" streets that are comfortable, efficient, Safe, and interesting; and • coherence of the public -right -of -war, serving to assist residents, building owners and managers with understanding the relationship between the public - right -of -way and their own properties; and • snstainab! lity by providing for trees and plants which contribute to privacy. the reduction of noise and air pollution, shade, maintenance of the natural habitat, conservation of water and rainwater management_ RegiAting Framework. The Fegulating Framework is the principal tool for implementing the Special District Form -Based e[fes_ it provides standards for the development of each property or lot and illustrates how each relates to the adjacent properties and street space. ,44 Packet Pg. 98 8.A.b 5.21 Green Factor Requirements and Fulfillment In this Special District Form -Based Code, Seattle's Green Factor is used to achieve ecological and livability functions.This code for Five Corners utilizes Seattle's Green Factor system. As a model for the City of Edmonds, the Seattle Green Factor serves as an ex- cellent precedent to use as a measure in future private development projects. The revitalization of the Five Corners neighborhood in Edmonds can be optimized when planning incorporates function for multiple systems. Including green, conservation, and habitat elements in development plans, benefit all users of the site. The Green Factor complements the future thinking of the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. An overview of Seattle's Green Factor is provided below. Overview Seattle's Green Factor is intended to improve livability and benefit ecological functions, increasing the quantity of landscape in private developments. It is constructed as a framework intended to allow flexibility within its implementation, with a point rating system. Projects are calculated for landscape elements, plantings, and certain built features. Landscape elements include depth of soil and biore- lenti6nfadlities.Creditsforplantingsare rr1Pd based upon quantity and size of trees, and shrubs_ BLAII features such as green roofs, vegetated walls and permeable paving add credits with specified instHllatiOrts_ Sonu!a inclusiam9 of Supplementary elements such as drought tolerant and native PIA rrts, rainwater irrigatiOFI, public visibility artd food cultivation, further add to credit totals. Scoring priorities (Ortte frIOrn livability (0nsideratiOns, an overall decrease in Impervious surfaces and climate change adaptation_ The functional benefits target H reduction in stormwater runoff, a decrease in building energy, a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and an increase in habitat space. The Green Factor for the Five Corners Special District uSeS for reference the Seattle Green Factor tools_ They Include the Green Factor Worksheet and Score Sheep, 9uideline5 for a required Landscape Marla gemerit Plan, and a Plant List; examples are Included in Alipwndices 5-,�i and 5-b_The <limateand geography of the City of Edmonds are similar to the applicable areils Of seattle'S Green FaMrr the 2010 Green Factor Plant List is very well suited for a recommended veageatatjan pa letie_ Standards Hrid Re[lLiiremerrt5 for the Seattle Green Factor are included in the Seattle par tment of Planning and Devi- lr7i1HIS rlt (DPD) Director's Rule 10-2011, clarifying Landscape Standards and Green Factor in Seattle's Land Use Code (Title 23). Application and Implementation The Five Corners Special District is currently zoned Neighborhood Business, BN (Chapter 16.45 of Edmonds Municipal Code), which corresponds with Seattle's Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial zoning designations relevant to the Seattle Green Factor. Each private development project shall achieve a minimum total of .30 Green Factor score. The score is a sum total (not a percentage) and is achieved by scores earned through implementation of a variety of green features. Values are assigned within the Green Factor scoresheet, and based upon lot size. Calculations for the score include required right-of- way improvements, though the square footage of the lot size calculation does not include this area. The target of .30 for Five Corners is based upon comparison with Seattle surrounding areas having similar zoning. Minimum scores are set for typical development and reasonable achievements for Green Factor application. Higher Green Factor scores can be used to achieve points for bonus stories. See Section 5.5 for bonus provisions.' Detailed explanation of the Green Factor features and scoring options can be found in Functional Landscapes: Assessing Elements of Seattle Green Factor: www.seattle.gov/dpd/cros/ g rou pslpa nl@panl...Iweb...Idpdp016505.pdf Upon scrutiny of Green Factor success in Seattle this approach is well -suited for application to Five Corners. Utilizing the Green Factor criteria for City of Edmonds redevelopment projects strengthens standards and rules of the Edmonds Municipal Code, Landscaping Requirements (Chapter 20.13), especially General Design Standards (Chapter 20.13.020), and Landscape Types (Chapter 20.13.030). Additionally, it is to be used with current and revised Land Use Plans and Policies (Title 15). Using Green Factor with Other Requirements While green features may count for both Green Factor calculations and percentages of Amenity Space, the requirements for each need to be met. Amenity Space is usable open space with dimensions; for recreational and passive leisure use. (See section 5.4 for additional Amenity Space description). In conjunction with the Green Factor requirements, the percentage of Amenity Space for Five Corners is 15% of lot size, to be addressed within each development project, - 45 Packet Pg. 99 8.A.b 5.21 Green Factor Requirements and Fulfillment or cooperatively aggregated between projects. The Amenity Space requirement is proposed to support, and be supported by, Open Space inZontions within the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, and replace Open Space refefences (Chapter 16,65) of the Edmonds MunidpaI Code. < < Is this true) > . Open space Alotments, green teaWres and amenity space within the Five Corners Special District are essential for visual appeal and variety in the pattern of developmem, As an element of the ReVision! ng document for the F= ve Corners Special District commercial center, a Greren Factor approach is included in this Special €7istri0 Form -Based Code, This is intended as a complement to, and to be utiiized in conjunctlorr with, the Edmonds Stormwater Management Code section (Chapter 18.30) of the Edrnonds MtrrticipaI Code, and Supplements to this Code, including Stormwater Management Requlremlents (Chapter 1S.30.0b0)-The Green Factor approach is also to be non- contradictory to stormwater management star, dards revised in response to the Western Washington Phase JI Municipal Stormwater Permit. The city of Edmonds fol lows "best ma nagement" prac tires and operates kinder this permit issued by state Department of Ecology - Green Factor Categories: Landscape Elements • Landscaped Areas (categories for soil depth over or under 24 inches) • Bio-retention Facilities • Plantings (mulch and ground cover) - Shrubs and Perennials • Tree CanopY (based on tree sizes) • Greezn Aacifs • Vegetated Walls • Approved Water Features - Permeable Paving • Structural Soil Systems • Bonuses for Drou g ht To lera nt Plants, f iarvested Rain Water, Food Cultivation, etC- For a complete description, see: Seattle DPD: Seattle Green Factor: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Permits/ GreenFactor/Overview/; and Functional Landscapes: Assessing Elements of Seattle Green Factor: www. seattle.gov/dpd/cms/groups/pan/@pan/.../wc-b.../ d pd p016505. pdf 1 Adopted for Seattle's commercialzones in 2006, the Department of Planning and Development's incentives and score sheet for the Green Factor are based upon precedents from Berlin, Germany, and Malmo, Sweden, in the 1990s. Seattle was the first city in the U.S. to implement this type of program. The Seattle version was initially part of the Neighborhood Business District Strategy, which revised city commercial zoning requirements. Currently, the landscape requirements apply to new development in commercial areas and neighborhoods outside of the downtown core. As a result, many of the conditions addressed by the Green Factor are quite similar to those of the Five Corners neighborhood. Sources 1. City of Seattle, Department of Planning & Development: Director's Rule 10-2011. Clarifying Landscapes, including the Seattle Green Factor. PDF file at: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Permits/ Green Factor/O ve r v i ewl 2. Edmonds City Code: http://www.mrsc.org/wa/ edmonds/index—dtSearch.html 3. Edmonds Comprehensive Plan: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/plan—ref.stm#CompPlan 4. Functional Landscapes: Assessing Elements of Seattle Green Factor: 2008 Internship Report, www. scattle.gov/dpd/cms/groups/pan/@pan/ ... /web...l d pd p016505. pdf 5. Seattle DPD: Seattle Green Factor: http:// www.seattle.gov/dpd/Pevmits/GreenFactor/Overview/ - 46 Packet Pg. 100 8.A.b 5.3 1 Open Space Standards The Five Corners Special District shall consist of two types of open space: Amenity Space and Green Open Space. Amenity Space Amenity space is designed to provide residents of all ages with a variety of outdoor experiences. Although the character of these amenity spaces will differ, they form the places that encourage residents and visitors alike to spend time in the company of others or to find solitude. All new development shall provide a minimum of 15% of parcel size to amenity space. Additional amenity space above the 15% base requirement is encouraged and can be part of the development's Green Factor plan outlined in Section 5.2. The types of Amenity Space include: (a) Lawns: An open space, available for unstructured recreation. A lawn may be spatially defined by land- scaping rather than building frontages. Its landscape shall consist of lawn and trees and shall provide a minimum of 60% planted pervious surface area (such as a turf, groundcoverr soil or mulch.) (b) Plazas: An open space, available for civic purposes and commercial activities. A plaza shall be spatially defined primarily by building facades, with strong connections to interior uses. Its landscape shall consist primarily of pavement. Trees are encouraged. Plazas shall be located between buildings and at the intersection of important streets. Plazas small provide a minimum of 20% planted pervious surface area (such as a rain €harden, bioswale, turf, grou ndcoverr soil or mulch), The remaining balance may be any paved surface with 3 maximum 30% impervious paved surface. (c) Squares: An open space ava€la We for unstructured recreation and curie purposes, A square i5 spatially defined by building facades with strong connections to interior uses. Its landscape 5haII consist of paths. lawns and trees with a rninirnum of 20% planted pervious surface area (such as a rain garden bioswale, turf, groundcover, soil or mulch). The remaining balance may be any paved surface with a maximum 30% impervious paved surface. (d) Accessible Green Rooftops, A€ ce-ssible gr*0n rooftops can confer significant added value to building's m<upant s tir to the general FRIhIif with benefits ranging from enhanced educational opportunities for schools,"roofparks", hortuculturaI therapy, and even food production. (e) Sidewalks: The purpose of sidewalks is to provide safe, convenient, and pleasant pedestrian circulation along all streets, access to shopfronts and businesses, and to improve the character and identity of commercial and residential areas consistent with the City of Edmonds vision. New development meeting the standards of this plan are allowed to use a portion of the sidewalk area within the public right-of-way for outdoor seating, temporary displays, or other uses provided that pedestrian movement is accommodated. Green Open Space The goal for the overall open space in the Five Corners Special District is to create a unified, harmonious, and aesthetically pleasing environment that also integrates sustainable concepts and solutions that restore natural functions and processes. In addition to amenity space, the Westgate Special District shall, therefore, be comprised of green open space, which includes: (a) Trees: The location and selection of all new tree planting will express the underlying interconnectivity of the neighborhood. Species selection will be in character with the local and regional environment, and comprised of an appropriate mix of evergreen and deciduous trees. Trees will be used to define the landscape character of recreation and amenity space areas, identify entry points, and reinforce the legibility of the neighborhood by defining major and minor thoroughfares for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles. • All new development shall preserve existing trees wherever feasible. • All new development shall plant new trees in accordance with the Edmonds Municipal Code Chapter 20.13. (b) Steep Slopes: New development shall retain all existing trees and vegetation on slopes exceeding 15%. (c) 5tormwater Management: Stormwater runoff from sidewalks shall be conveyed to planted parkways. ❑ver ]ow from parkways and runoff from the roadways will be directed into bioswales and/or pervious paving in parallel parking areas, located along the street edges, where it can infiltrate into the ground. Perforated curbs through which street stormwater runoff can flow to open vegetated swales can also be provided, wherever feasible. - 47 Packet Pg. 101 8.A.b 5.4 1 Parking Standards The Five Corners Special District parking standards are intended to reinforce that the area is pedestrian - oriented and intended to be equally accessible by people on foot, on bicycles, in wheelchairs, or travelling by motorized vehicles. These standards strive to: (a) maximize on -street parking; and (b) encourage the development of shared parking; and (c) promote density and diversity of the built environment. In addition to the parking requirements outlined by building type in Section 3.0, design standards for parking lots include the following: (a) All off-street surface parking lots shall be set back at least 10'from the Required Building Line of each lot. (b) No off-street surface parking lot shall occupy more than seventy percent (70%) of the total lot. (c) No parcel shall be used principally as a parking lot unless provided on the Regulating Framework. (d) The edge of any surface parking lot shall be planted with shrubs or street trees, planted at an average distance not to exceed thirty (30) teet on center and aligned three 0) to seven (/) feet behind the common lot litre, This requ irem ent may be reduced for parking lot edges abutting parking on adjacent IOtsr see item q,rb.low. (e) A miniMarn try canopy r coverAge of 50% in 10 years and and no less than 80% in 20 years. (f) Edges a[on g any (ommon tot line shA11 hAve A setback of at least (1) foot of the common lot line_ (g) Parking lot pathways are to be provided every four rows of parking and a maximum distance of 180 feet shall be maintained between paths. Pathways shall connect with major building entries or other sidewaIk5r pathway5r and d"inationsr and pntibt be univer5.ally accessible and meet ADA standards. (h) Landscaping in parking lots shall integrate with on -site pathways, include permeable pavements or bios wales where feasible, and minimize use of imperOou5 pavement (i) Where a parking lot is abutting another parking lot on an adjacent parcel, a connection between lots is strongly encouraged, to facilitate circulation within Five corners and to reduce the need for vehicles to return to the Areet when traveling between sites. -48 Packet Pg. 102 8.A.b 6.0 [ Administration and Implementation 6.11 Purpose, Principles and Intent Purpose This Section identifies the building types administrative procedures for proposed development within the Five Corners Special District, and provides for measures to implement the plan. Principles and Intent The intent of this section is to ensure that private development is consistent with the provisions of The ReVisioning Five Corners: A Special District Form Based Code standards related to street, frontage, building, and public space and green feature types. 6.2 1 Administrative Review A staff planner will be assigned to coordinate the technical review process for each new proposed development within the Five Corners Special District. Staff will first review the application and evaluate whether the project meets zoning ordinance, as well as general goats and objectives. During the design review and approval process, staff will ensure compliance following the requirements imposed by the Architecture Review Board (ARI3) or other designated authority, The staff planner wit1 coordinate the application process with other city departments, including Parks and Recreation, Engineering, Public Works, Polite and Fire departments. A trained staff memtoer will review the Green Factor application and assign a point value (see Section 5,2). SF�n de;e,r"�ral'o� hDB 1554,[S eldhl.sl,rc: pti;B„ tglSfidEr_ per,.I �FgLIInli�frtS� AIM Pi. O„ 7` 7*1* ring Pham tl 7P 7] Ap�pml } , Yes { , ti----- � Redtsi nfaptiorull ;�--� , , I �----------- - -- - - - - - -- iDeswappe-al HE of CC t?} Development. includes any Impravernent to property open to exterior view, such as buiWings., stFLu.luftis, f Xtures, lands€aP41g, like 5CFegnin9, signs, parking lots, Iighting, pedestrian facilities, street furniture, use of open areas; whether all or any are pUbGcly or privately spon5ored- 6. .1 1 Design Review District -based design review is applied to any ar4aa or district that has adopted design guidelines or design standards that apply specifically within that area or district_ The five Cprrier5 Special District meets the City's requirements for Design Review, in accord with Chapter 20.12 of the Edmonds Municipat Code. and development will folIaw the Design Review process (Fig_ 6.1). I his ensures multiple reviews by the Architecture Review Board (ARB) and pu b I i c hearing at two stages of design, 30-percent and plans required for building permit. The ARB is ultimately responsible to interpret the goals, Standards, and requirements established by the Plan and determine if the appplication is within compliance. 0M$fl ',may' ,1 tD Gt}' " FigL 66 1; D"Ign ReA&w ftw Ma* N46mc adapadfiamOrd 16M§3,2007 49 Packet Pg. 103 8.A.b 6.2.2 1 Design Review Applicability Design Review process is specifically required for any development project within the boundaries of Five Corners Special Distract falling into at least one of the following (ategories: - All proposed deVelnprrrents that requires a threshold determ inati r3 P f. nd0F the State EnvironmentaI Policy Act (5EPA), including any alterations to the huiId! ng footprint. - Any development seeking to use the height bonus provisions (see Section 6.5). - Alteration afany existing structure that affects 50-percent or more of the exteriorappearance of abuildingorFrOntagetypevisiblefrornapublicright-of- ay orpubiicopen space'. • Sits iMPFOVen' ent5 triggered Qnder Queen Factcr Review (see Seo ion 5,2)_ All other development roust adhere to existing code and not *W to further rtionWniflrrr,ance with the Five Corners plan, Such proposals may be approved by Administrative Review as a Type I dec)s Ion using the process set forth in Edmonds Municipal Code 20.i 2.030, Specific actions exempt from design reView within the Five Corners Special District are cued in the Edmonds Municipal Cade 20,10,020 8_ 6.3 1 Non -Conforming Uses and Structures It is the intent of this document to regulate nonconforming uses and structures because they have been found to be incompatible with the permitted: uses and dhrensional requirements set forth in Five Corners plan_ The purpose is to encourage the discontinuance of nonconforrning us@s and structures, including buildings that do not meet the Required Building Line, However, frothing herein contained shall be construed as prohibiting the change in tenancy, ownership, of management of a nonconforming lot. use, or strucUire, provided such change is othef wise lawful. 6.4 1 Departures In those circumstances where the applicant believes that, due to unique characteristics of the site or other special circumstances, a compliance with the Five Corners plan is not feasible or desirable and that deviation may be allow for equal or better results, the applicant may be granted a departure relative to the specific provisionls) in question. Where a design guideline allows for a departure, then a departure nay be granted und0r the following circumstances; • I he a pplicantmustdernonstratethattheintent and objectives of the design guidelines are Ding met; and, • The applicant must demonstrate that the project has Provided Other design elements that moors than mitigate the minor irnpa cts that could be caused by the departure. Staff may grant a design departure for guidelines using "shall" The design departure shall be processed as a Staff Decision, Notice Required- The APB mir y also grant a design departure for guidelines using "shall" The design departure shall be processed as Prodded In Edmonds Municipal Code <<20. 0??5>, K. Packet Pg. 104 8.A.b 6.5 1 Height Bonus 6.5.1 1 Height Bonus Development Agreement An applicant may participate in a Development Agreement with the City of Edmonds at the time of project permit application as cited in Ord.. 3817 § 7, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4. The purpose of the Development Agreement is to specify Affordable Housing, Housing Unit Size, Green Building Program, Sustainable Sites, Amenity Space, and Alternative Transportation required for extra floor height. The Agreement also clarifies how the project will be phased, the required timing of public improvements, the developer's contribution toward funding system -wide community improvements, and other conditions. A Development Agreement is a contract detailing the obligations of the developer and the City of Edmonds. This must be reviewed by the city attorney and subject to reviews by the Administrative Review, Design Review and public hearing. ReVis ion ing Five Corners!A Special Di stri ct Form -Based Code 6.5.2 1 Height Bonus Score sheet The Height Bonus Score Sheet is to be filled out by the applicant to illustrate the extra provision offered in exchange for the extra height bonus. The Height Bonus Score sheet becomes part of the Design Checklist established by the staff planner to be reviewed during the ARB. A total of eight points are required to receive one story of extra floor height. To ensure that the proposed development addresses the community's desire for more open space, at least one point must come from either the Green Factor or the Amenity Space category. Amenity Space: The variety of outdoor spaces required of all Nture development, which i€rcludes. lawns, plazas, squares, accessible rooftops, and sidewalks. Green Factor. A frameworks Intended to increase ecological and livability qua]ity of landscape in private developments, provides incentives for soils, biofetention facilities, planted arras, trees, permeable paving. etc_ Packet Pg. 105 6.5.31 Height Bonus Score Sheet Prereq Number of unit€, 10% Required CrL& I Number of units, 15% 1 Credit 2 N umber of units, 2(9% 2 Cn dlr 3 Number of units, 7 q% 3 Credit 4 Kumber of unl% Z 3r1E, 4 Prereq. Number of u nits < 900 sq. It., 10, 6 Required Prerec#. No unite 1 1,600 sq. It, Required Credk 1 N umber of units c 900 sq, f#. 20% 1 C+WU Number of units 940 1000 sq, ft. 10% 1 Credit 3 Number of units 1001-1200 sq. ft. 1046 1 CtMIS 4 Number of units 1201-1400 sq. It, 10% 1 Pieced, Built Green"f LEED* Cei#lfied R,itirig or equn'-jlent Required Crc•[,l 1 LEM)"Silver 24tin9 ff,lf#Grp@n-4-5/Evergreen Sustainable Deuelapment Standards 1 Credit 2 LOD" GW Raring 2 Credh 3 Passive House Standard f L€ED' PIa#lnum RM1n9 3 Cfedh4 LivJngBuild Ing, 4 ikeieq, Green Factor 5€ore 0.3 Requiied C+edit 1 Green Factor Scare PA 2 Cwdh Z Green Factor Scam US 3 Credit 3 Green Factor 5€ore 0.6 4 Credit 4 Green Factor Score 2t p;R 5ustaina ble Sites I nit iativc".ar cquW lem 5 Pram, Porcark"s of a me pity space of lot i I so 15W Required Credit l Parcantagaofamanityspace oflot iIso 20% 2 Credit 2 Percentage of amenity space of lot size 254h 3 Credit 3 Perce ntage of a me nity spare of lot s Ize 2 30% 4 New% Meet street stanclards. Including; blikeway and pedestrian 1k!#Works, and vt!MCIOPa1' ny RegUirod Credit 1 Car share patking, inirrimum 2 parking spots 1 Credit 2 Charging face CI ty for ete€1ri€ cars 2 Cred' 3 Indoarlaicyclestorageandchangingfacilities 1 Credit 4 PrlarJty parking for sub.compact {Smart Cara" and motorcycles} T Paintsin4eategorles,incIudingatIeastonewithin Green Far tor orAmen ity5pace Hrjtlljlwcl Packet Pg. 106 8.A.b 7.11 Purpose, Principles and Intent Purpose This Section identifies additional recommendations for city staff, boards and commissions involved with potential development within the Five Corners Special District, and provides measures to encourage development, enhance the Five Corners area, and to foster interim uses of vacant properties. Principles and Intent Redevelopment of a multi -faceted and complex site, such as Five Corners, does not happen quickly and, often, cannot be the product of private development acting alone. A core principle of the Five Corners plan is that the city can and should be actively involved in encouraging and supporting the type of development desired. In meeting with the community, working with the combined Economic Development Commission (EEC), Planning Board (PB), and researching the issues raised. the 11W Green futures Lab Team identified a number of recommendations that: we believe will assist the City in implementing the The ReVisioning Five Corners; A Special District Form Based Code. 7.2 1 Attracting Young Adults as Residents During the 2011 Edmonds Special District Community Workshops, there was a good discussion about the need to attract young people to the Five Corners Special District. Jn large part, the discussion focused arou nd praviding a substantial number of smaller sized dwelling units that might be attractive to the needs and budget of young singles or couples without children, The UW Green Futures Lab Team have also researched and discussed a Hst of possible uses that are attractivetothis demographic. Th ese i n c I ude: • thrift stores or consignment shops activities such as flea markets, craft fairs, farmer's markets coffee shops with internet access • new or used book stores 7.0 1 Recommendations • bike supplies and repair rnuvie theatres/ cinema • pizza places - bars and pubs • restaurants • community center • organic and freshllocal food shops and restaurants • public art While the Five Corners plan cannot specify individr1al uses for the area, city staff can work with developers to identify the desirable uses and provide administrative assistance - such as expedited permitting - for projects incorporating a healthy mix of smaller dwelling units and activities of intprest to young people, 7.31 Interim Uses for Vacant BuIldings and Sites In a few instances, there are vacant storefronts or offices currently existing within the Special District. These vacancies create a sense of dis-investment that detracts from the desirability of the area for new development. Additionally, they reduce the overall level of activity and discourage users from coming to the area to shop or dine. While specific uses and terms of the lease are elements generally left to the property owner to decide, the City might assist the owners by encouraging new temporary uses or, possibly, relaxing city code requirements for specific types of temporary uses. These temporary uses might include: • youth programs, after school day-care, teen centers • drop in child care facilities for shoppers • thrift stores or consignment shops - possibly church operated • used book exchange • artist studios incubator businesses • community space for informal and `pop-up' activities interim art installations • festivals and performances - 53 Packet Pg. 107 8.A.b 7.4 1 City Investments to Faster Development The City must recognize that redevelopment of the nature and extent envisioned for Five Corners will take many years to accomplish, especially in the current economic climate. There are a number of actions the City could take to encourage the desired redevelopment. The Five Corners Plan is intended to rely primarily on private investment, rather than on public investment, however, public investment can serve as a catalyst to encourage private investment. Suggestions for Five Corners include: Infrastructure and Open Space • Provide a new roundabout at Five Corners to im- prove traffic flow and enhance pedestrian safety. • Provide enhanced landscaping of the roundabout and adjacent public rights -of -way to increase the attractiveness of the area, enhance stormwater management and to signal the development community that the city is interested in new development activities at this location. • Provide an outdoor activity space and/or park - especially on the parcel located behind the Jeremiah Center -for use as a farmer's market, craft fair, civic events, etc. Improve the pedestrian connections between the Five Corners Special District and surrounding neighborhoods, connecting sidewalks and bike trails to the sLirrou nding networks. • Improve street rights of way to include the landscaping, bike lanes, and bioswales (Sections 4.4 and 4.5). Often municipal Investment in an area serves as a signal to developers that the City is welcoming of new development In that area and encourages &velzipers to get involved. • improve street rights -of -way, Including the landscaped areas dJang the StFOP[ edge, nvrMai ly required of the developer.These investments lower the casts for the private &&eloper and ensure that the City achieves a cons i n uity of design that may be difficult with individual developers. Financing • Apply for grants to fund some of the measu re above under a Sustainable Carnrnunities program sponsored by HUD, Washington Statc, the Puget Sound Regional Council, OF Snoh0FT,ish COUrtty. Marketing Sponsor a public art program. In addition to permanent pieces, there could be temporary/ interim art installations, perhaps with a combined merchant/city fur)ding. Also, the city could sponsor hnagL% YJ - A ImIDe lane ends and ramp allows €ANst to trajuiiean to yi(I[ �i)0lr �snsl a iMklp taa4rSg6S1 f i)ai side-olh Do stre('1G Whoo IAL leiw iesunes- 5mFt:e. keblke.lnro/dccumenGA Agpde3-and-roundahou sJ a call for artists to fill an outdoor space, the center of the new roundabout (when completedI or utilize vacant spaces around Five Corners. Roundabout Safety The roundA gout at Five CnrnerS offers a unique opportunity to Improve traffic flow For motor vehicles, As +Velk as bicycles and pedestrians, However, some modern roundabouts entail long crossing distances for pedestrians and cyclists. Iri areas with many ped- estrians and cyclists such as Flve Corners, the diameter of the roundabout should be as smAII as possible, ter, at the very lean, the approaches should be narrowed and the entry angle int read to reduce crossing distances and encourage drivers to slow down. Below are specific recommendations for allowing bicyclists to move safely through - if vehicle speed is reduced to 15 miles per hour, it Is safest for cyclists to take a lane and go through the roundabout like a vehicle, which keeps them out of matorists'bllnd spots, Cyclists that are not comfortable taking a Ieirie, may prefer to dismount andbecome a pedestrian. Some roundabouts are designed for cyclists to follow alongside the �Y- -- pedestrian route, on a marked Sbarrow between the roadway -M and the sidewalk ; .+� • with a crossing ',•'* ; perpendicular to each approach marked with stripes or paint. 54 Packet Pg. 108 8.A.b 7-5.1 1 Movement Opportunities I Green Connections By establishing green connections between destinations {such as schools and parks}, the neighborhood becomes mare walkgjble, as well as provides better Ctmnected habitat for uviIdlife. There is great opportvnity to connect existing parks, with new continuous greed spaces provWing significantly higher habitat value than isolated spaces -These greed improvements +Evil] provide the aesthetic featllrer, that will contribute tQ a r1 OFO livable residential environment surrounding Five Corners (stye Section +4)- Green connections and features can also help to re -duce the impacts of urbanization on the natural environment- Cufrently rainwater runoff flows from Edmonds roads, roofs and parking lots directly into the area's strearns and to Puget So+ nd. without 6 rst filterin g the petro leu rn and rnetatsthat vehicles generate. Streettrees, natural areas and sustainable storrnwater infra stir uctufe help to slow and fikzer this stormwater, to alleviate the pollution burden that city streets puts on local water bodies. Figure 7,1.1 shows some of the opportu n itics to increase green c*nnectiorls in the areas surraursr3ing the Five Corners Special Di stria �G9fFF � t ' ?Ghh - ?AGlh - I Ondi "h � r A9Li+tL n Nmr hA 01 rI' h171h � f S ' hkeeus 9 i5 N&h ff r o-•213HLIi r £ }'y i IL }oMb .1 1 ! � � S !f 1 w `K iM1 ci 1 c it i t� ;7Mh f� � 4S 7346h 'yrIn S r 1 31Stlr ?FSui i :is�h r f10Lh 1 - } 7+ x 3 7. PAP � x1AiF 711eh � t i i161h r. ~ � J 77+}9i Legend gmn con n+cllons - powntlal wavrmrnl r minor 1 ions. - p r Lr•rMal walk Irrq - . radi us! S - 10 mmuLes 71rVha r-17 Z!.X, rr.^:r- i A tpn iml 1131"rH Wrrm is V rl rMr Cbil1�4 - ; } I J+ C ' � E f f r ngrh ^glow �z op rret O 730 386 i3Oi56 Packet Pg. 109 8.A.b 7.5.2 1 Moverrtert Opportunities I Sidewalks By rnakin9 good pedestrian connection!9 to the F1veCUT riOFS $pedal District, pedestrian use or the District may Increase. This supports the Alan's reduction In on-skte parking requkrements and enhanced amenity space, sktc ar-tivities and green featurQS- Pigure- 7-5.2 shows, sidewalk Conditions in the vic[nily of the Five Corners pi!�trir.t and highlights areas where sidewalk Improvements are needed, lid qwymmbaLffio�h `-0 -gym i,.,nt7a � * A9Lna ■ nY�r.n c af1,r� �� r � ;Q f �i6Gnl u J h % FwMwxa.vw k*o Myth 4 � f n • .. a{grh i _ yw Wwn5'' e . ' �" * ' r kti JSiih ti asa�r� � p ,; s a . L 1� � 54 .II:Ii � �•1Ih + ti 5 �q�w�+! 5b47�M M� kMF * Lwi vrs _ 1 ei-,rh f fm ♦ ?4 JIB 3 LAFOW 0 F, Leg — eRd a aw xn ,,LK9 op "inityMmdforbmwvmlcJrG"rdltkm — — - vfAW WIN* S-141"Mum neV, �jj: r A'f'r!,": r'.I! �. tr.r� err....,- •�. Packet Pg. 110 8.A.b 7.5.31 Mo► e mertt Opp ortmnities I Cycling Making new bicydel <flnnections w H I enable people- to get to Five C.nrniprs 1 ithouI geIting in their (ars, and create safe ways to cycle between schools, parks and residential areas. Flgure 7.5.3 shows opportunitles to impraVP bycycling conne€liom, between the Five €vrrlBrS (>StriCt and the surrounding neighborhoods- r ��dc 7r'rSh -g! T '` ti P 1055r} i L t ti ond1 r � 7fJmh �* I op 1'Ork aa111 i t f{ ti . A +2091h 1 f' - iiih t r + 711'leh � f � �' 4 • 5 f ti 1 4 mNiVvWra[ ,f i rn 4 i Ff jim a L '��• 5 3 Qrc'y{ I S k rook f 3 4 � Y � 5 4 1 !'RrI S t � 2151.11 - N% �K.god. w ti jI SNS+ ti i � E }ifrh 4 !:'ih J7l4ii f � 'M Irh pp � ��M.ckw�l�'lls�rMh�- Legend �� h�tarrr€1fo�c=Pam walkfPkg radlw� S -10 minut�s � 1 ZIJEK " J I Jr+W1 ih+vMS`v4+V�a�Wd+ 40 • r ** f � 7151lr r J y � }1611e f } � r I -rY�w W — .."0. A Frrl 0 758 4m S,00p iT Packet Pg. 111 8.A.b 1 a Gehl Architects' 12-Quality Criteria Evaluation 1 b Visual Preference Survey 1 c Design Workshop Conceptual Plans 1 d Public Preference Card le Survey of Common Themes 1 f Economic Overview 5a Green Factor Components Green Factor Landscape Management Plan Green FactorScoresheet Green Factor Worksheet Green Factor Plant List 5b Green Factor Plant List ReVis ion ing Five Corners!A Special Di stri ct Form -Based Code Appendices -58 Packet Pg. 112 8.A.b Appendix I 1 a I Gehl Architects' 12-Quality Criteria Eva Iuation 12 Quality Criteria for Good Public Space Key P R T E C T I H C M F O R T E N 1 Q Y M E N 1 1. Protection against 2. Protection against 3. Protection against Traffic & Accidents C ri me & Viole nce U n plea s a nt Sense (feeling of safety) Experiences traffic accidents fear of traffic - lived in 1 used - wind 1 draft - other accidents - streetllte rain Isnow - streetwatchers cold 1 heat overlapping functions pollution in space and time - dust, glare, noise 4. Possibilitiesfor S. Possibilitiesfor b. Possibilitiesfor WALKING STANDING) STAYING SITTING -room For wa l king • attractive edg es •zonesforsitting - untieri ng layout of - edge effects - maximizing streets defined spots advantages primary Interesting facades fnrstaying and secondary sltting noobstacles supports for staying possibilities - good surfaces - benches forrwting 7. Possibilities to SEE & Possibi Iities for 9. Possibilities for HEARING) TALKING PLAY 1 UNFOLDING) • seeing distances ACTIVITIES - unhindered views -low no se level - interesting views - ben[h arrangements - invitation to physical lighting (when dark) ' alkscapes" activities, play, unfold I ng & enterta In ment - day & nlghtand summer & winter 10. Scale 11. Possibilitiesfor 12.Aesthetic quality) enloying NWive paaltive serf se- .Affwrsl of aspects04;lirFw" experlencrs huIIBop€&spauesln 0WOMnC401jit ` sum isNy* goMCeslgr.5 irrporlant hvrnan •xurmlFlcmineu nwd,:eta ry'l dim"s.,ani relii to `bi molventllatbri -,W w 'vucas senses, marei •'r4iiC6 plar' h wa'Cf 5i2e & LeI1AyIi.M Courtesy Gehl Arehri RESULTS MM M - sum of (+), bath survey groups_ 0 1 2 3 e5tigate Illage Five Corners f 4 5 6 7 K 9 Downtown Edmonds I* ^ 91000000 0001000000 000001000 000 000 09^ 59 Packet Pg. 113 8.A.b Appendix 11b I Visu II Prefeire rice Survey Current Services, most utilized (242. respondents) Q. Please tell us why you stop at the Five Corners shopping area? Restaura Cofftajl G' Convenience R4 Veterndfl dry dean K Visit w{ friends and far? Computer ft C HeIr Eyeglass Ste Doctors off Jeremiah Cenl Suggestions for Improvements (271 respondents) Q Hew can the Five Corners shopping area be improved? Please identify Ynur top :i choices_ More public spaces (outdoor cafe seating, plazas, etc.) Stores for services (shoe repair, haircuts, eke.) Bakery More drrt2rrtties (fpurrtair1S, Sculptures, waxing aFWf,) More public uses (library. past office, etc_) Improved area wilkability Mon landscaping AcxivW*s f) r children Hardware stare Movie Theatre CEothlrng start Increase housing units close to amenities Qviality Restavrariti Roundabout Traffic Managemern Do nothinE G rocery stprp Better Architectural De:ign/Aesthetici More Retail I Packet Pg. 114 8.A.b Appendix 11 b I Visual Preference Survey Suggestions for Improvements, categorized by age Ages < 24 (9 respondents) More public spaces (outdoor caM seating. More amenities (fountains, sculptures. seating areasa Bakery More pkjbllc uses;Elbrary, post of CH, etc.) Stares for services (shoe repair, haircuts, etc.) More landscaping Increase housing units close to amenidec M/ 2 2 2'Na 2 a 70% na GG% ROIA Ages45-64 (137 respondents) More public spaces Ioutdoor cafe seating, Storrs for services I shoe repair, haircuts, etc.) Bakery More public uses (library, past office, etc_) Mare amenities (fountains, sculptures, seating areas) improved area walkability More landscaping 471 0% 20% 40% 60% 8096 Ages 25 - 44 (94 respondents) More public spaces (autdaar cafA& seating, Activities for children More amenities (fountains, sculptures, seating areas) Stores for services (shoe repair, haircuts, etc,) Bakery Improved area walkability More public uses (library, post cw fire, etc,) 70% 417In 60% % Ages 65+ (85 respondents} More public spaces {outdoor cafe` seating. Stares for services (shoe repair, haircuts, etC ) More public uses library, post office, etc.) Improved area walkabRity Bakery More amenities (fountains, sculptures, seating a rea6) More landscaping 0% 20% 40% a% W% dl N C O U a� LL L O w 0 C C cc d C O C O c a� N N L a N Co Packet Pg. 115 8.A.b Appendix I 1 b I Visual Preference Survey Mlode of Travel to Five Comers (281 respondents) Q; When stopping at Five Corners shopping area, how often, on average, do you use one of the methods below? 200 ISO iso Im 120 * SO 60 40 20 0 Never lass than one@ less than once One to three Four to six Seven of more a month a week times per week times per week times per week Averngm trips perwmek Packet Pg. 116 8.A.b Appendix I I b f Visual Preference Survey 5treetTrees Landscaping and Activities Bioswales, Storm- waterTreatment Art Efi2mi2nts Streetscape Preferences (48 respondents) Q: If we were to make changes to FI ve Come rsr which of these stremcapc treatments do you think are most appropriate? 40 - 35 30 25 20 a we 25 10 5 a 5treettmes Lartdscapingand Rioswales, Art Elements Adivitles Stormwater trr+asment Arnenitles Preferences (50 respondents) Q, It we were to make changes to Five Corners, which type of gathering space coo you think is the most appropriate? $0 � 25 Water activities Benches for kids v� 20 '4 rFL 15 4 Water feature * 10 1q Plaza 5 a Ardri is 5eafanq }i nr.hes Water Mina AHAC Water feature for Seating Feature kids L 0 U a� ii O w C c cc d C O C O C a� N N L a N Go r• r Packet Pg. 117 8.A.b Appendix I I b f Visual Preference Survey Building Scale (52 respondents) Q=Which builldilng scale do you feel is most appropriate for Five Comm? One to Two 'atoriP-. Three to Four Stories Five Stories as 35 30 25 20 15 ID 5 0 Orie to two stcrhn Three to four Stories FFwe Stories Building Placement Preferences (52 respondents) At the Five Corners listening session, pa rti cipan is were asked to i mag ine th ernselves a s a pedestda n approaching the sites and to consider how they would like to connect to the businesses. 45 Parking leads ku 40 businessfronts 35 Busi6m Fronts on Street Business fronts on street with business activity 3D 25 20 15 f0 5 0 Parkingleadsto business fronts on business fronts on business fronts street street with acwty Packet Pg. 118 8.A.b Appendix 11 b I Visual Preference Survey Housing (52 respondents) Residents attending the Five Corners listening session were asked their opinion of what type of housing, if any, would he most appropriate for Five Comers, Respondents were allowed to choose tip to two. No Additional Housing Apartments over RataiI Live f Work Units , "st lofts Condom IMurns over RetaII Affordable Studio Apartments Senior Housing Single FarnllyHones Condominiums No Change 8 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Total votes for additional housing = 44 Total votes against additional housing = 19 Packet Pg. 119 Appends 11cIDesign Workshop Conceptual Plans &M � _ � 40& � VI � � m. iz LM to z 0 E %J 41 � w w � 0 � � k 2 3 } [�} $a22 Lai |@ � O V f O *0 'p, - E \� f &b . , ■G2 $ \ y � .. | $ � �� ■ , � 1 w� - _ e _ Ln 06 � � � � � CL 0 � � 0 � � � � � � 0 m 0 0 � � 0 .0 � � .7 z � � � � 0 Q 7 LL 12 : a. § § / � a 2 r m Packet Pg. 120 Appendix 11c I Design Workshop Conceptual Plans M CT v4 0 #� W 1= f � C 1 a� G 1 .. I I = I 1 1 r x 3 M o CL 0 0 4 z c Packet Pg. 121 Appendix IIcIDesign Workshop Conceptual Plans w 40& � � VI � � wt � & � 0 � m � � � z E 0 � w 0 400 � � Q# � rML 0 � � mm W � 0 > Packet Pg. 122 Appendix I I I Design Workshop Conceptual Plans z } m m VI wt L L z E 0 W w CL 0 mc IA I %PV1+otsy4I+r -A t{ rr41 r71Rri-I Fwm.?Lnrd(-o* C a 0.2 i z 0 3 17, �1 LL i L 0 U a� ii L W a. r- 0 r- 0 2 to L a N 00 r- Packet Pg. 123 8.A.b Appendix 11c I Design Workshop Conceptual Plans to CT VI wt L qj V z E 0 W Ir a 0 s 0 u Sm i i �JN a6PItI aklId al 0 3 0) m Ln 2 z U. Packet Pg. 124 8.A.b Appendix I id I Public Preference Cards F111E CORNERs ALTERNATIVES;�� porn-adPalternatiw- esic� hi!4-kthednkattrresdwn�o dial R GARIDZU GATIEWAY buildings oriented toward roundahouk ate ❑On west ofhwntw dabtprimelocaLlorn for-ICorefiu jd+rr5 anr.orrnunry r.ttir�,harlrorxl kkndgy as garden center ❑34sroryheotlimit, huWarkR hMhtsincrease wf proximity to roundabout site re-deweloperi in support neighborhood ❑center services sure+ as grooe+y store. small shops. A entertainment opimns like a nrovie theater ❑hioher bulldkrgs support ra�rali an 4rourvd ilaor w reStaorant;, iO({-„ Ix horyuvr al K3w• water quality, apes space, & gmenllandsrape ❑fey re, caul gaped fn rain gar(lwm plazas, decks A #otlntaZ kkME'd in center of romdaboutas otdlpoint ❑no large rc loll all sh%ping & services communk&Le-k"'#eel Elrdesrcian Irrpravamantsaantentrasrdalon-y sonar. R otlu'r klu•y �tiigy,iye(Ir roundakaat. prdesrrlan Nt*WP1nt Fudge Pmk USurface&tuck-under parking ❑ talk on eA5" mass transit pm[existingvagerartonvdid&aptin-rizingnew b"Ilding wentlal ac ,5[ryy bated Irr plazas surta�urrAI'Fg rswrndibout ❑8ron NLaYn St, landsct+piaig providles 4uHer betrreerl people & cars, temporwy farmers warket rn soulbrost r egiw of site ❑ buffer eff-slu NHIdenrlN wf vtgemdan buffer GENERAL COMMENTS. VILLAGE CUNT i buftnW oriamed (award internal drcu'9`eM1t+lan ❑ W1%wrr ANIC11lrrl rrui M-11 S�igr-rff I(J4Ju awlsxrk w asubllsh nebgliborhood identlty ❑ 7-3 stork height hm it distributed throughout Site ❑enrphasizepublic pLwe-explaration&expcsieme ofVillayeCenter FE! andmouranupngroundkwelw!housing a ofTices abnrve E,u$fashv€hue & Iarrds€ape Features such as piWwale5nearrmr-dabolt43rpemwal l pavers for plaza spaces erxoufage walking rather ran dnvdiwj ISr(ejr0.jd S 'iIYVICLe (kilt rryitl01 Y e4fIf 4{�( iminnedlem ntrighborhood ❑intemal pRdestridn dre�Iatipn rruklggaateS 11azards of wehirc n. r 1a 11 ro pro4liie safe &quseterperienf2 ilm A ages 71 surface parking & street parking 71 rely on existing mass transit protect existing vegetation activity located throughout site, landscaping & green infrastrucure provide buffer between people & cars R rnlrC ME E TINO MAY 3, 2011 -71 Packet Pg. 125 Appendix I I e I Summary of Common Themes n. 0 2 rL § \ k _ -c § \ IV \§ / \ ■ (D , { e , C= c c 0- r 0. a 0.£ 2 L r / Cc 0 0 0 0 0 $ g o 0 0 0 0 2 u o o 0 _ . - . . _ . . . e = ' & / ; ƒ § ; > > 4-0 > [ 0-0� \ } $ / / / / $ k > cr ) / { j / k ) k \ j j) IV cn tn 0 k r 13 3 r] a r 5 c c CD_ _,(D _ ,_� = c c ® 2 k§% g f= k ®� 2 2 i$ 0 IV IV IV 7 7? IV< ❑ _ _ � in = -A = < 2 c ❑ 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ < § § 2 in qj § \k 2 ) EL cn b , 2 } 2 k } [k§ } ° ] \ k ` _ ° § ) ! § -am k \ 0 ; $ ) 7 Y E Co 2 k k- 7 Q - \§ k - § ) k 12 f » k k ) I ` ® ( ]} / 2 [ G - a a g $ § I § ) al c -0 b _ R E _ » / k k \ ] § ) } r ) } 2 ƒ / / ) A } \ 2 f j ] j } } \ \ � 2 � d / / a � 2 = M z J ; k < -s � k Q 7 M 12 : a. § § / � a 2 r- Packet Pg 126 8.A.b Appendix I If I Economic Overview Summary of Market Study Westgate & Five Corners Neighborhood Commercial Centers March 12, 2011 Growth Trends • Modest growth in population and stronger growth in multifamily residential development (annual rate of .5% over the last decade). • Continued steady growth in retail demand for goods and services (other than autos), purchased close to home, from $165 million in 2004 to $209 million in 2009. • Employment in Edmonds increased at an average annual rate of .5% between 2000 and 2009. • Modest demand for IocaI serving office uses. Summary. of Land Use Characteristics Average Daily Traffic Volumes — 2004 ADT Direction Five Corners Main Street 9,076 Bowdoin 4,184 212th 5,628 westbound Sot h Westgate Edmonds Way Vvest of 100th Cast of 100th 7,194 eastbound 6,224 10,666 eastbound 11,298 westbound 12,390 westbound 11,202 eastbound 100th North of Edmonds Way 6,750 northbound 4,700 southbound South of Edmonds Way 6,899 northbound 6,871 southbound Source: City of Edmonds Comparison of Retail Commercial Centers Convenience Neighborhood Community Anchors Convenience grocery, drug stare Supermarket and drug store Junior dept store or discount Number of Stores 3-20 stores 10-40 stores 25-80 stores Total Retail Spam 10,000— 30,000 sf 30,000—100,000 sf 100,000—450,000 sf - 73 Packet Pg. 127 8.A.b Appendix I If I Economic Overview Site Area 1-3 acres 3 — 10 acres 10 — 30 acres Market Area Pop. Under 20,000 people 10,000 — 30,000 people 30,000 — 750,000 people Market Area Radius Under 2 miles 1-3 miles 3 — 8 miles Sources: Urban Laird Institute, Dollars and Certs of Shopping Centers, and Property Counselors Current Conditions Data for Westgate & 5 Corners 5 Corners Westgate Anchors No convenience grocery, drugstore 2 Supermarkets and drug store Number of Stores 17 stores 32 stores Total Retail Space 10,000 — 30,000 sf 30,000—100,000 sf Site Area 1-3 acres 3 — 10 acres Market Area Pop. in 1/2 mile (walk) 4,096 residents 2,676 residents - In 1 mile radius 16,493 residents 20,030 residents - in 3 mile radius 61,810 residents 53,913 residents - in 5 mile radius 223,815 residents 212,891 residents Market Area Radius Under 2 miles 1-3 miles 5 Corners Short term redevelopment unlikely - but long term (beyond five to ten years) is feasible, Building types are likely to be 4 stories or less, with some surface parking and some under- huilding parking—vA[h potential For shared parking between uses. Uses are likely to be ground floor Convenience Retail with apartments above or service sector offices (in sijranCe, real estate, etc.) Westgate Good potential for some shoft term fcdevelopment with further redevelopment over the long term (beyond five to tern years) • 8uilding types afe likely to be mixed use and single purpose buildings. Mixed use buildings likely to be 4 s#erieS or less, with some stjrraCe and Some under -building parking— with potential for shared parking between uses_ • Retail uses would serve community sca le trade area with the potential for new restaurants, entertaln rent uses, garden shops, & electronics_ ■ Mixed use could support apartments and service sector offices (insurance, real estate, etc) above retail or in separate buildings on the site - 74 Packet Pg. 128 8.A.b Appendix 15a I Green Factor Components Attachment A Landscape Improvement Checklist I, , declare as follows: ❑ I am a landscape professional, as defined in Subsection C. l of Director's Rule 10-2011, responsible for the approved landscape plan for development located at , Seattle, WA, and developed pursuant to: Master Use Application Number Building Permit Number ❑ The approved landscape plan meets or exceeds minimum requirements for this property (including landscaped area or Green Factor score, as required by code). ❑ The landscape features from the approved landscaping plan for this property have been installed as approved and in a manner consistent with the standards of the Landscaping Director's Rule (10-2011). This includes soil condition as well as the number, size, and approximate location of plantings. ❑ I understand that any of the following changes to an approved landscape plan requires a plan revision and approval by the Department of Planning and Development: a) A reduction to the total number of trees or other plants b) Changes to llic location of plantings required for screening c.) Substilutirm of plant species If the substituted plant is smaller or less drought -tolerant d) Any changes that could decrease total planting area or lower the Green Factor score below code requirements, or otherwise fail to meet specific permit conditions. ❑ Any of the rcvWvns dcscribW above, if applicable, have been approved by DPD. Revised permit number ❑ A Street improvcmen.t Permit has been obtained from the Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) for any landscaping in the right-of-way, any changes have been approved by SDOT, and all planes in die right-of-way have been planted according to SDDT standards. ❑ A completed L.sndscape Management Plan has been submitted to the owner (required for Green Factor projects only). i dcclarc under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true: and coTTect_ Signsaure of landseape professional Date NOTE- If you provide false information in this document, you will subject yourself to criminal liability. You may also subject the property owner to a penalty of $1504500 per day for each day that the landscape features arc out of compliance with code requirements (SMC 23.90.018). - 75 Packet Pg. 129 8.A.b Appendix I Sa I Green Factor Components Atte1`nrimrlt H The lnteractivo 1 wel version nfthis score sheek is ;tw idatrle at wu-%v senttle nvtc ni�rl'CTt17u +i �reenl-aclnr GJe'I<'eu Factor Score Sheet 7-414'`{1 lilt'!£)1 y 0 11:;., of r1�* mrer nq fT A f parent Nuc�l r Ize ferrter ears wrue 19r21F ' 4 - J.and sap■ ElamenCa Toni from pF wOrkaherC Fmtwr T'... A Landscaped ofeoa I select w m vI Cho lollcwl ny (Or o1101 areal Id 1 Lonas€Mied oree' wslh n sad deP1h of Jnxs Omn 7z' row r ® 0 7 rm K4h I.ar1It c W w"s Htth a Sod UYp#t a ' or gr"W 0 Knew ■R A I SaLwkKU+lw rnnLlltYs 1 fj 8 PJantings IcnH AS for plants In landscapadl ams from SiKinon 14 n1�1 h 1 M4101. i *UW M, Of WNW PICa(tw. kXz, l yu1 Z VA S11 m010111p A7 1 /ail*f vy jaim9a MWIRe. r1r ISIY RMLnK 7. fit nlnrllnty 1j&1d11i1 KI n 11.9 41 1;1 s4tt per p4 nt "Vp"My PU1M4 no elo.W 1h7n 113' on eenWr) •111Yf +IIMII�.'CI lIl Y01f10 a True c wscvy ror'-:L"wA trees' rM uquivLOwit G 0.3 i ar"v spread V co 15'1- cWvAm od in rS so 11 Dix Tmo 11111�1 'lIYJ1.5N rJ r1.1'Ir\ a Tnae cnm3jN kv'smallhnerJiun hells' rx equreAwl © Ii 0 3 (CAS .%WnW Me 10 yer) , rer.wr Od m ISO ". n por rrao f�ITr .I a,1111, Ir 11+r1i* Tr" cufwpy ror 'modlc aUpge uses' w w wwWom 0 0.4 ScafwpY spirtx'ic! of;!V In 2W- cjWcuLa3t u at 1517 sq 11 par Iron c Tr" cu"YyWlarysvass &oquirrabmt 0 0.4 �WFKM WfUM al 2fr Io W0' €UkUlnCod uL 8£ut] Sq tl Pur MM �.le►+ ,I.y efts L�$rlr 7 Trm RimxKry rrr plW"%MrmX1C4Irwij"ttm&lmx_j hFwV& n I18 with uurk; B'* n drm leap . cvlculaLcd at 20 w R Par mch miomeLor t ,f Mr1 roofs 0" at mast I arKI full. Vw7 �r iA y1 Lredh I I wdiurn D u.4 OVOF of mast 4- al gr wm m dKirn 07 awvr n D vogot tod walls 0-7 E AppeoYedwsterfamurac 0.7 F Permeable Wlnq w.w n ' 1 WmgatAq P05.7nq cyor al IQa%t [: anc I�r-gy rhpn f4 or %oil .x £Irm%6 0.2 .rrlrel rt 7 PeimentAe pmwi!1 rrrer• nl leerst ?A' of sal or gmweil 0.5 W let n' G &tructural will syaloma (i =1 C.2 MI --Y n 0 4i p $OnuF## .1,r.-1 ,Ir r. + Dratghk.kAeranl mar, native plaril species � 0 1 - rnru xh r. Lunds€ixwd Lveas wh*ru at ku A 5&% al annul irrWLian ntMJs Ewe nwt 0 02 trrrrruph MO mOR CA rwye:,fra1 rfmywmer �Q r: A Lamhcupry vivd4u lv pincF rrvby fiwn waitmA 1) U 1 plJbbc ngt at Yyay or putll€ open as :Irl an r LHrK&cnjArKj In kcdl culrkniNurl 0 0 1 I}5v�� F,TSrY 11'Yllrhl.'1' - DO nor caunr pu 0 rq wa}+ Jn Aare s re cs u a - .. YOC+ may raunf far»#cape lmprpvomfnp !n ?YgMs-g0WOay CW+flpC74rrd wlrh t1r0 eta+- AD land9caprry an prlw i re arad p iMc prppyriy remise ComrPJY wyrh rho Lari0m?p14 $randardy 01rwCr4r'e ROO (OR &2009) Packet Pg. 130 8.A.b Appendix I Sa I Green Factor Components All kuIimunI C Tic ints:rus:tiv4 F", l vmion of tfvN workshu t is availabL al www.Ncaltic.ieuvldptUP�smils'Cir� nt saclsar, ReAsed 4fL%M Green Factor Worksheet* S TTL --gree factor Planting Area t 2 3 keep acokurm as needed TOTAL"' Al squ'?fe et Q sC�erBre fed[ A2 0 A3 square feet D B1 Sglrare fBa( of PlOWS B3 # of frees Bd 0 of trees B5 #o�(raees � RT # of tf$e$ 0 01 sgjare feel 0 2 square feet 0 square feed 0 E Sgasr8 foal F1 sgljare feet 0 F2 square Fee( U Squaw- feel 0 H1 square feet 4 H2 square Feet square feel H3 0 H4 sgr)RFL9 (L"' 4 See Greon Factor score Shoot for category definition " Eater totals an the Green Factor score sheet JT Packet Pg. 131 8.A.b Appendix I Sb I Green Factor Plant List Revised D-ember 2010 Seattle Careen Factor Plant List "IQ%$ * M pJari on Milo Ial we oroughF-Mward owe Lhoy are itilai i4 tlnlaa "mmima IndicMr otherwise. * 5Milo Oayariar T1Rraovlalrme RiVM-V Way Improveni hlanlsil raU6raMMhryhLlimits for non -street -tree plantings in rights -of -way. Maximum plant ngahl wdhn W W 0 an Ir+lii let mraEufed VwD lie cctnrr of 7w owv) a 24 W". Elsewhere in the rightof-way, plantings are allowed to be 30 inches tall. + -U- alenbpd 4mre-daiCntq v,herR PWtk GYn ;kpp Mgty 1}c us{d.M WMtfi Si such as swales and rain gardens. Zonal is the designation for plants kha! can be used in "he ne. toM3m,} QE pt glotlbon raCaoc4. IAfeIqrsEospV_"trWLPMWWI saturation or shallow inundation for long durations, while Zone 16 rerars la rAanb ihmi can Zor* �! I$ [he designation for plants hest used at the well -drained slopes of boralrnhon +acilrle� all o'her rpe"m am appropnite rqr panling al [he 10gs W L1r7Ff Don areas. F mr :� Mopf I FwMIVM I Shade I Sun I Native I up to 24" I 2,3'h[ I 6rarefer ion Zone Notes 'e M'Lf. is i4w Ali -n YniieryC'f•ii'f ••!L AI' i.e< Ati,• ",ij&*sre'M.r Latf' art -cs'.stta�] 1B h�eu in 4nRrh' �¢r Revised December 2010 �000�o� �000�o� Iw�r��ooao�� - 78 Packet Pg. 132 8.A.b Appendix I Sb C Green Factor Plant list &WIrFd 6e Uff NO .mot_ �•.�._� ��0�� 000� m�mra-1^,e- MOMME yr oo�■r�■�o�� .Fr.. ,:.. MMM!MMMaaa SOMEONE aMMMMMMMM=� Armed Dwmbor 2010 r■�s�a��s SC�nM17r 6V1 ?'n- r" -.- _ v{r S;hm* „x+Awdw 4016brrR Wet 'Ir eA. C'C' 3� .f IXI1I1ua Gl vfuIIY • a F 1'.r.n s. vAnn7 mn, a WAm& gwi d rart hvQU urF syehrneh rAFrM. - wxh Ora'4■ cw,IuF et4AWIJNe Rm nS d i f i IA Ilk 2 c 4irlWFiRd�F■ F 32! 3FLS�d� of MLftU MII.IFJiI A �I a h0(ad6YF IDsoula fk`1Jf5 _�{'fe il4 1$� � Rrannro agwruhm I W 1 treg,,n r,r�. I 1h I$_ km Packet Pg. 133 8.A.b Appendix I Sb green Factor Plant List Any d (*cumber 541d RiGRFTFN I UN TA FFYI r.-+ 1„ - ... rt*.�-ter... Il�a� �]rrtmt��r III IfI wlkE E €3RFAM RUQF PLayT9 j TnfoYvxnrepe I €3RFAM RUQF PLayT9 j TnfoYvxnrepe I j TnfoYvxnrepe I New 7aslnM'N1vIr. Clair j serm ` a f;drre%v'+Hamr• ,^.}]rY�G Nn.wr t,F4 Y'Tk-A —10I VWWwb f3:0i� .w Marrr 'r C4 Mdbs PrB. , I+ V FFqMm., Pn.. rd o dfw� Englah LiLW #yp� M rr8I slvei Ino' rrr. Wryr Olen[ ip6[4Y tllNi/�h0 f]x ISMp i�n14F 8} A „-• -Liiiw,t e. «c w6.V0YR WOW Rtyil; 4 DKtmW NID Packet Pg. 134 8.A.b Affordable Housing: Housing for which the occupant is paying no more than 30 percent of his or her income for gross housing costs, including utilities. (hud.gov) Amenity Space: The variety of outdoor spaces required of all future development, which includes lawns, plazas, squares, accessible rooftops, and sidewalks. Bioswale: A long narrow channel, planted with grasses, shrubs and trees. Intended to filter pollutants, and provide permeable surface area for stormwater runoff. Built Green: Owned and managed by the Built Green Society of Canada, the program's purpose is to encourage homebuilders to use technologies, products and practices that provide greater energy efficiency and reduce pollution. Building Massing: The height, with, and depth of a building that defines the overall proportions and mass of building. Cascade Land Conservancy (CLC): Washington's largest independent land conservation, stewardship and community building organization. (cas(:adeland.org) Development: Includes any improvement to property open to exterior view, such as buildings, structures, fixtu res, landscaping, site screening, signs, parking lots, lighting, pedestrian facilities, street furniture, use of open areas, whether all or any are publicly or privately sponsored. Evergreen: The Evergreen Sustainable Development Standard is required of all projects receiving fundsfrorn the HousingTrust Fund. Facade: The exterior fate of a building, which is the architectural, often with greater elaboration of architectural detail. (Illustrated Architecture Dictionary: buffaIoah_comfa/DC T NHY1flfa�ade_html). Form -Based Code (FBC): Uses physical Form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code. Regulatbns, no# guideIines, are adopted into city or county code. Form -based odes address the relationship between building facades and the public realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets, open spaces and blocks. (for mbased cod es.org) Explanation of Terms Gehl Criteria: Developed by Gehl Architects; Quality criteria important in designing successful urban spaces. Twelve key concepts, grouped in issues concerning protection, comfort and enjoyment, intended to ensure that public spaces become lively, popular and attractive. GIS (Geographic Information System) Mapping: Integrates hardware, software, and data for capturing, managing, analyzing, and displaying all forms of geographically referenced information. Used to view, understand, question, interpret, and visualize data in many ways that reveal relationships, patterns, and trends in the form of maps, globes, reports, and charts. (gis.com) Green Factor: Adopted for Seattle's commercial zones in 2006, a score sheet and incentives intended to increase ecological and livability quality of landscape in private developments. The Green Factor provides a framework calculating points for soils, bioretention facilities, planted areas, trees, permeable paving, etc. Green Futures Lab (GFL): Develops innovative approaches to the ecological planning and design of public space through interdisciplinary research, design and education. Works with the University of Washington, local communities and international partners to provide education and collaboration that promotes application and development of urban green infrastructure. (greenfutures.washington.edu) Green Roof: A layered system consisting of a waterproof membrane, a drainage mat, a root barrier, growing medium, and plants; covering all or part of a rooftop. Access can be restricted, private, or open as public amenity space. Benefits can include cooling, heat retention, stormwater control, roof longevity, habitat and usable space. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design): Green Building certification system, devel- oped by the USGBC. LEED provides building owners and operators with a framework for identifying and implementing practical and measurable green build- ing design, construction, operations and maintenance solutions. (usgbc.org) Life Space Buildings: The Life -Space -Buildings approach, developed by Gehl Architects, is a process for creating public spaces in urban areas. In this process, life —or desired human activity —comes first in neighborhood planning, and determines the quality -81 Packet Pg. 135 8.A.b and arrangement of the spaces that are then thought- fully framed by buildings. The process is designed to capture the vision and input of the community; then to envision public space that best supports life and function of the neighborhood; followed with planning to address qualities and scale of development. Living Building: The Cascadia Region Green Building Council (CRGBC)—the Pacific Northwest chapter of the USGBC—defines a living building as a structure that"generates all of its own energy with renewable nontoxic resources, captures and treats all of its water, and operates efficiently and for maximum beauty" Mixed -use: A combination of retail, residential office and community service spaces in one building or on one parcel. Multi -family Residential: Homes including apartment buildings, condominiums, town homes, row houses, duplexes and other configurations that offer more than one unit under a single roof. (housingpolicy.org) Passive House: The term Passive house (Passivhaus in German language) refers to the rigorous, voluntary, Passivhaus standard for energy efficiency in buildings, reducing its ecological footprint. It resuits in ultra -low energy buildings that requ ire little energy for space heating or cooling. Primary Frontage: Frontage that faces the public space or areas of higher pedestrian importance. Entrances to buildings are required. Regulating Framework:The Regulating Framework is the principal tool for implementing the Special Dist ri€ t filrrT1 based € €ides_ II Far€ vides vAridards for the development of each property or lot and illustrates hovy e:u h relates to the ridjHI ent prOpprties and street space_ Roundabout: A st reet ju nction at which traffic yields and streams circulalry around a central island. Se€ondary Frontage: FrOntagR that fates publi€: space or areas of lesser pedestrian importance. Fntranc+as tit bLI-1Idir gSAre riot re€iuired. Single family Residential: In comparison to multi- family housing; one unit of housing under a single roof. (housingpolicy.org) Explanation of Terms Site Analysis: Inventory of a specific site, completed in preparation for planning. This process takes into account existing conditions —built, geographic and surrounding area —with research and analysis. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA): Enacted in 1971, SEPA (Chapter 43.21C RCW) provides the framework for agencies to consider the environmental consequences of a proposal before taking action. It also gives agencies the ability to condition or deny a proposal due to identified likely significant adverse impacts. The Act is implemented through the SEPA Rules, Chapter 197-11 WAC. Stormwater: Rain and snow melt that runs off of rooftops and paved surfaces. Often picks up pollutants such as oil, pesticides, and waste. Typically, stormwater flows into a storm drain, or directly into water body, and has been identified as a primary cause of degradation to local streams, rivers and Puget Sound. Streetscape: Street widths, placement of street trees, parking options, bike lanes, and other amenities. Streetscape design aims to create coherent streets and to assist developers and owners with understand- ing the relationship between the public spaces and individual buildings. Walkability: A measure of the overall friendliness to pedestrian activity in a build environment. Workforce Housing; Affordable homes for those working in occupations needed in every community; teachers, nurses, police officers, firefighters, etc. (housingpolicy.org) USGBC (United States Green Building Council): Non-profit organization dedicated to sustainable building design and construction. Developers of the LEE❑ building rating system. (usgbc.org) UW (University of Washington): Located in Seattle; one of the oldest public universities on the West Coast. Also Tacoma and Bothell. (uw.edu) For additional explanation of terms, see Edmonds Municipal Code Definitions (Title 21). - 82 Packet Pg. 136 8.A.b Sources City of Bainbridge Island Municipal Code Section 18.38.090 HDDP Density Incentive Summary, 11.12.2009. City of Edmonds - City Code: http://www.mrsc.org/wa/edmonds/index_dtSearch.html. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/plan_ref.stm#CompPlan. City of Edmonds' website: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.usluwstudies.stm, and http://edmonds.patch.com/articles/second-Five Cornersfive-corners-meeting-announced City of Seattle, Department of Planning & Development: Director's Rule 10-2011. Clarifying Landscapes, including the Seattle Green Factor. PDF file at: http://www.scattle.gov/dpd/Permits/GreenFactor/Overview/. Form -Based Codes Institute: http://www.formbasedcodes.ovg Benecia, California Farmers Branch, Texas Ventura, California Miami, Florida Functional Landscapes. Assessing Elements of Seattle Green Factor. 2008 Internship Report. www.scattle.gov/dpd/ cros/groups/pan/@pan/.../web.../d pd p015505. pdf. Housing Within Reach: A Call to Action for Snohomish County Communities. June 2008. Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County. Seattle DPD. Scottie Green Factor hit p'//wuvw_SOat 1lf�.[jOv/4 pd/Per mi tS/GFeen Fa 0 a r/Giver view/. V*St"+ "r Village, ViSiOn & Farm -Based Code, City of Sari Buenaventura, California. - 83 Packet Pg. 137 9.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 01/11/2017 Review of Extended Agenda Staff Lead: N/A Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review Extended Agenda Narrative Extended Agenda is attached Attachments: 01-11-2017 PB Extended Agenda Packet Pg. 138 OV FDM FLAMM BOARD Extended Agenda January 11, 2017 Meeting Item JANUARY 2017 9.A.a Items and Dates are subject to change Jan. 11 1. Presentation on UW/Forterra plan for Five Corners Jan. 25 1. Sound Transit presentation on ST3 (with emphasis on Edmonds area) FEBRUARY 2017 Feb. 8 Feb. 22 1. Comprehensive Plan Performance Report MARCH 2O17 March 8 March 22 Pending 1. Community Development Code Re -Organization 2017 2. Neighborhood Center Plans and zoning implementation, including: ✓ Five Corners 3. Further Highway 99 Implementation, including: ✓ Potential for "urban center" or transit -oriented design/development strategies ✓ Parking standards 4. Exploration of incentive zoning and incentives for sustainable development Current Priorities 1. Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation. 2. Highway 99 Implementation. Q Packet Pg. 139 items ana liates are 9.A.a to change Recurring 1. Annual Adult Entertainment Report (January -February as necessary) Topics 2. Election of Officers (1" meeting in December) 3. Parks & Recreation Department Quarterly Report (January, April, July, October) 4. Quarterly report on wireless facilities code updates (as necessary) Packet Pg. 140