Design Review Board

Design Review Board Minutes City of Bellingham, Washington Tuesday 3:00 PM June 20, 2023 City Council Chambers Video Recorded https://meetings.cob.org RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD/HPC BOARD CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON TUESDAY GUIDANCE MEETING 3:00 P.M. June 20, 2023 In Person and Via Zoom www.cob.org CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Shannon Taysi ROLL CALL: Jan Hayes, Maggie Bates, Ryan Van Straten, Coby Jones and David (Recused) Staff Present: Lindsey Kershner, PCDD , Shannon Taysi, PCDD, Kathy Bell, PCDD Project Overview Development of a six-story, mixed-use building on a site that abuts N. State, Berry, N. Forest Streets, and the State Street Roundabout. The conceptual plans include commercial uses on the first floor along N. State St. and residential uses on floors two through six. The first floor would also include a parking garage with the entrance from N. Forest St. A surface parking lot is proposed on the southeast corner of the property abutting and taking access from both N. Forest and Berry Streets. The project proponent is requesting a departure from the surface parking urban village design standard, Section 20.25.070(B)(1)(a)(ii), Bellingham Municipal Code, to have surface parking at the corner of Berry and N. Forest Streets. Design Review is required because the project is in the Downtown urban village design review district Staff Overview Lindsay Kershner said this is a proposed 6-story mixed-use building at 820 North State Street. The site is located in the downtown Design Review district, necessitating the design review process. She said this meeting represents the applicant's third step in the city's urban village design review process. The initial pre-application conference involved the presentation of a 10% design, and the project's plans were further developed with the adoption of a new urban village design handbook. She continued stating the next step was the neighborhood meeting, where the public provided feedback and asked questions about the development. Now, during the early design guidance meeting, the Design Review Board will offer recommendations to the applicant and assess whether the 10 design intent statements from the design handbook have been met. She added they will also consider public input and review any proposed departures from design standards. The Board's guidance carries substantial weight when the application is reviewed by the Planning and Community Development Director. This current stage involves the applicant justifying how their proposal aligns with the design intent statements. The applicant has requested one design departure, which is included in the meeting packet. The board does not address code compliance matters like parking, stormwater, or utilities during this early design guidance meeting. As of the meeting, no written public comments have been received regarding the project. The subsequent steps in the process include the option for another pre-application meeting with city staff, followed by a formal design review application and a design response meeting. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Team: Jeff McLure, RMC Architects, Carrie Veldman, RJ Group, Robert Wright, PM Jeff McClue said the project is located at a prominent gateway and entrance to the downtown area. The team has focused on two corners of the building – one facing the roundabout as you enter town and the other facing south on State Street as a welcome statement. He emphasized designing the building for a dynamic perspective rather than just front-on elevations. The team considered zoning regulations, the urban trail connection, and the surrounding context while designing the building. He said they aimed to strike a balance between mid-century and modern elements to fit in with the existing area. The triangular site with an existing structure posed a design challenge, but they managed to incorporate underground parking to preserve green spaces and trees. The building design concept includes vertical massing, projecting elements, and a U-shaped configuration with an entry courtyard. The project will aim to reinforce community identity, create an inviting pedestrian environment, and provide visual interest. The team also focused on sustainability, energy efficiency, and reducing the overall environmental impact. The presentation included floor plans and 3D models showcasing the progression of the design. The team expressed interest in a future development on the right side of the site. They also discussed the intention to seek a departure for parking near an intersection and proposed a solution to screen the parking area with landscaping. Overall, the team is excited about the project and its potential contribution to the Bellingham community. Board Clarifying Questions: Ryan Van Straten asked for clarification on the decision to create the entry instead of having underground parking on Berry Street. The question is whether this decision was purely an architectural design choice or if there were technical obstacles encountered in placing the entrance in that location. Jeff McClure explained the decision-making process for accessing a building site from State Street. Initially, the thought was to access the site from North State Street via Berry and taking an immediate left. However, the team wanted the building to be more prominently visible from State Street, a one- way street, to create a better experience for those driving by. They decided to bring the access point around on Ivy Street, which allowed them to separate pedestrian and vehicular zones, providing more options for dealing with the entry courtyard. This decision was made after consulting with public works to ensure safety and adequate site distances. Ultimately, it was a design decision to improve the entry statement and accessibility of the building. Ryan asked why two entrances one off of Berry and one off Forest? Jeff McClure said was a pragmatic requirement due to the need to accommodate garbage trucks for waste pickup and recycling. Having two entrances allows the trucks to enter the site, unload garbage, and exit directly, without requiring a turnaround or extra space. This arrangement preserves more space for landscaping and circulation. Additionally, the design also considers the need for fire trucks and emergency vehicles to access the building safely, which is situated behind the Find the building. Public Comment Andrea, the Board President of Orchard Terrace Condos, expresses appreciation for the focus on people coming in and out of the building, especially for finding parking. However, she highlights the ongoing issue of insufficient parking for their residents and visitors. This lack of parking affects not only their condo community but also the entire downtown area, making it challenging to live and work there. She expresses concern about the increasing light pollution due to new projects like the lantern with the elevator. Light pollution may impact safety and security as car break-ins are already a problem for their residents. Andrea urges the city to consider the parking situation and the impact of new developments on the overall livability and safety of downtown. Kathleen Cruz, a resident of Orchard Terrace, has been living in towns and cities and appreciates the accessibility to various businesses. However, she notes that over the past seven years, many businesses have left the area, and there is a severe lack of parking spaces. This lack of parking causes inconveniences for her and her visitors. She emphasizes the safety issues caused by the parking arrangements, which are not designed for pedestrians or cyclists. Kathleen believes that addressing the traffic flow and parking problems is essential before increasing the population in the area. During a meeting, only one participant expressed interest in commenting on the matter. Ryan reminded the Commission and public this board does not review for parking. Lindsay Kershner responded to the comment stating this new project is planned to meet the minimum parking requirements. Some informal gravel street parking on Berry will be eliminated with street improvements and the addition of sidewalks, which should enhance pedestrian safety. The Public Works department conducts parking surveys to explore strategies for increasing street parking turnover. Comments about lighting and light pollution are appreciated and align with urban village design guidelines and the applicant's responses. These comments will be valuable for future downtown projects. Jeff McClure added, parking is a contentious issue, and it impacts everyone's daily life personally. The focus of the project has been to provide more parking on-site than what is required by the city's code, showing a commitment to address the parking needs adequately. The project aims to have enough parking spaces to accommodate visitors and has taken measures to ensure there is sufficient parking available on the site. Board Discussion Ryan Van Straten said the plan is to go through each intent one by one, allowing everyone to share concerns or comments. If there is a clear consensus on a response, they will summarize the feedback for the applicant and proceed to the next intent. In case of disagreement, they will discuss further if time permits but may move on to stay on schedule. Coby Jones asked about the soffits at the roof and if the colors were meant to match the four pop outs. The response was yes. Intent S1 - Preserve and use natural systems and features  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Maintaining tree, challenging site but feel the applicant has met this intent. Intent S2 - Contribute to the community identity and architectural character of the surrounding area Comment – Board member stated there was a lack of description and visual interest in the concrete panels that are breaking up the glass at the ground level. They suggest that some sort of visual texture or interesting design could be added to these panels. Jeff McClure said he agrees with this suggestion and mentions that they are considering using a ground face CMU or properly articulated concrete with roughs or chamfers to create texture and interest. He added they will ensure that the treatment is minimal but still thoughtful and well-designed.   Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Board likes the approach. Intent S3 - Organize the site to prioritize the public realm Board Comments - Unsure about the three different entrances for parking and express concerns about the location of these entrances. The applicant responded saying they have been working with Public Works to ensure it is meeting all requirements.  Achieved: Not agreed upon  Consensus: Yes, ensure entrance points to parking is clear. Intent P1 - Create an attractive, safe, lively, and inviting community-oriented pedestrian environment  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Yes. Only comments on lighting and being respectful to neighborhood. Intent P2 - Provide visual interest to and from buildings  Achieved: Too Early  Consensus: The main point conveyed is that the applicant should continue working diligently to follow the guidelines or requirements specified. Intent P3 - Create a network of safe, convenient and attractive off-street linkages for pedestrians   Achieved: N/A  Consensus: Like the way sidewalk is engaged. Landscaping will enhance this area Intent P4 - Enhance the overall visual cohesiveness of the surrounding area  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Yes *Board feels these are categories that duplicate and overlap and feel have answered this. Intent B1 - Express a clear architectural design concept appropriate for the proposed structures and contextually compatible with the surrounding area  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Yes Intent B2 - Create high-quality, durable and interesting buildings that have texture and depth  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Yes Intent B3 - Reduce the overall impact on the environment and human health during and after construction Comments – The Board feels the landscape plan for a building meets this. They also mention that the building will improve the area and its visual appeal. It was suggested more greenery on a rooftop deck. They also discuss the heating system of the building, which will be electric, and suggest considering other options such as heat pump air conditioning or on-site solar power. Building will be solar ready. There was an expanded discussion regarding mechanical systems, particularly heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) in multi-family buildings. It was discussed the importance of considering ventilation, especially in areas affected by poor air quality due to forest fires. They express concerns about health and safety when residents can't open windows during smoke events. The applicant mentioned cost is a significant factor in the decision-making process. To address cooling needs during extreme weather, some strategies are discussed, including cooling common areas and installing ports for portable units. Ryan Van Stratenemphasizes the importance of considering the relatively small percentage of HVAC costs in the overall project budget and advocates for prioritizing heat pump systems for environmental and resident benefits. He added that heat pump systems are worth the investment due to their environmental benefits and cost savings. Additional conversation wanting clarification on what the Boards reach should be regarding identifying internal heating/cooling/mechanical systems versus natural elements for this category.  Achieved: Yes  Consensus: Yes, incorporate some natural systems in some way to compensate for the decision to not include air conditioning or explore other ways to compensate for the mechanical system. Departure Request - Parking The Board agrees with the departure and have made comments prior as to why they support.