Design Review Board

Design Review Board Minutes City of Bellingham, Washington Tuesday 3:00 PM November 7, 2023 City Council Chambers Video Recorded https://meetings.cob.org ROLL CALL: Jan Hayes, Maggie Bates, Ryan Van Straten, Coby Jones and David Heck From HPC: David Christensen and Lexie Costic Staff Present: Emy Scherrer, PCDD (Item #1) Lindsay Kershner, PCDD (Item #2), Shannon Taysi, PCDD - Call to Order The Design Review Board meeting was called to order by the Chair at 3:00 PM. 2. Approval of Minutes Public Comment Period During this time, citizens may take up to three (3) minutes to address the members about any topic not on the agenda. Citizens wishing to speak during this time will be recognized by the Chair for comment. Agenda Items Public Meeting 1. Early Design Guidance Meeting for a Project located at 1126/1130 N Forest Street Development of 32,956 square foot (sf), four-story, 47-unit multifamily residential building on the corner of N Forest and Chestnut Streets. The ground floor is proposed with a main residential lobby and building amenities, five studios facing N Forest Street and covered parking off the rear. The five ground floor units are proposed to be elevated from N Forest Street for privacy. Floors two through four are proposed with 14 residential units with decks on the front and rear elevations. Stacked parking is proposed behind the building accessed from N Forest Street, which will be at grade with the first floor of the building. Upper-level surface parking is proposed atop the rear parking lot to be accessed from the Chestnut Street alley. The existing curb cut entrance from Chestnut Street is proposed to be closed. Design Review is required because the project is in the Downtown urban village design review district. Staff Overview Staff: Emmy Scherrer Emy Scherrer stated this is an early design guidance for a new multifamily building in a downtown national historic district and in the downtown urban village. The location is at the corner of North Forest and Chestnut. The building is in the residential transition zone, and the staff recommends following the Design Review Board (DRB) checklist. The applicant has sought guidance on specific aspects, as outlined in the introduction of her staff memo. One public comment suggests reducing parking, but the DRB doesn't review parking, and access-related suggestions conflict with public works regulations. The dialogue with the applicant is ongoing, and there's potential for further discussion on specific guidance points. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Team: Ali Taysi and Riley Marcus, AVT Consulting, Troy and Cynthia Bach, Owners and Sergio Ruiz, Architect Ali Taysi said this is the first meeting for a project under new rules, and they're navigating the learning curve. They've had previous experiences with projects that started before the rule changes. Despite conducting a neighborhood meeting for this project, no one attended. The presentation delves into the project's location, utilities, zoning, and site plan. The key areas seeking feedback are orientation to the street, interaction between private and public spaces, and integration of decks in historical context. He also mentions a rooftop patio plans to meet usable space requirements. HE continued stating the are interested in guidance on how detailed they should get on each design intent. Ali Taysi offered to go through each item and Ryan Van Straten said he would prefer it if they only identified those items needing guidance. They touch on similar themes across various intents, focusing on the character and historic fit of the building. Residential units along the street with a prominent corner entry are key considerations. They seek guidance on appropriate character, material themes, and how decks integrate into the overall design. The discussion on compliance is pending, with a focus on providing more details in the future. Intent S.1 and S.2 address the interface between public and private realms, seeking specific guidance on how ground-level residents interact with both their private space and the public domain. Board Clarifying Questions: David Heck started by asking a couple of quick questions. First off, the building's location. He is curious about the decision to position it—whether it's right on the property line or set back. He assumed it ties into those studio units not fully depicted in the drawings. Is it related to considerations like patios? He is interested in understanding the rationale behind the building's location in relation to North Forest Street. Sergio Ruiz responded by saying his primary motivation is to create a bit of separation for the residential units. Sergio Ruiz mentioned that they aimed to recess from the main sidewalk on North Forest to provide privacy to the studio units at street level. Additionally, there seems to be a consideration for 10-foot patios or similar features, along with landscaping, to enhance this privacy. As for entry points, it appears there might not be any directly from the street, but there's anticipation of accessing the residential units from elsewhere. David Heck said another point of consideration is the experience of the building along Chestnut. He said as you move up, he has concern is the view down, which will essentially be open parking. He asked about the plan for screening along this view. The question revolves around the thought given to this aspect, especially in terms of the public realm. The inquiry is about the experience while walking up the sidewalk, envisioning a wall and guardrail separating the observer from the parking below. The focus is on understanding how this experience has been taken into account. Ali Taysi said there's a fence and some screening in place. The building wall, when finalized, will feature finished material for the ground floor and possibly some glazing. However, as one moves back, the space becomes tighter, limiting options. In that section, screening seems to be the primary solution. By the time you reach the alley, the pedestrian is likely to be several feet below, approximately 8 or 10 feet, with limited flexibility in addressing this aspect. Ryan Van Straten asked how they see the corner studios along Chestnut interacting with the street. Ali Taysi said it will warrant looking at window placement. Coby Jones asked for clarification on areas in blue on the plans. It was clarified those would be lobby areas repeating on the second, third and fourth floors. Ali Taysi said looking for guidance on the private deck spaces and how they interface with the façade. David Christensen asked what direction are they thinking in regards to exterior materials. Sergio Ruiz said some brick material given in the historic area. David Christensen expanded and said he is interested in understanding the open space requirements and does this building need decks given the busy location. Can the roof open space suffice. Sergio Ruiz said the clients haven’t decided if they want to do the roof patio. If they do choose to go that route, they could reduce the exterior decks of those units facing Forest Street. There was a brief conversation about the possibility of retaining the existing building. Ali Taysi said that the owners decided not to keep the existing building. Public Comment Jamin Agosti commented on the parking and encourages the city give a parking waiver given its location. Staff said the project could apply for a 25% parking waiver. Ali Taysi said the parking will be up to the owners in regards of seeking a waiver or not. Board Discussion Ryan Van Straten asked if there was a specific intent a board member wanted to start with. Maggie Bates mentioned P1 but will discuss further when get to the that item. Ryan Van Straten said he will just go through those items the applicant has asked for guidance on. Intent S2 - Contribute to the community identity and architectural character of the surrounding area Applicant is requesting guidance on the corner module units as well as the private patio design. David Heck said as far as the patio designs, he recommends making it a softer approach through landscaping. There was a discussion regarding this approach and the Commission generally agreed native plantings to soften the edge should be considered. It was also mentioned to consider patios collecting clutter by residents and may want to consider the screening when designing. Summary: Along Forest the barrier needs to be softened not have just a long wall, maybe some planters mixed in. Potentially get rid of the little decks or patios in that location. The Board discussed the corner of the building. They agreed there needs to be more prominence to this corner given it is a very visible corner in that area of town. They need to achieve this through articulation and perhaps roofline changes. Also consider material changes. Summary: Consider plane change, material change and height change on the corner. Give a nod to historical elements in details on the building. David Christensen mentioned due to the location of the building to downtown, there is an opportunity to blend modern with historic. Intent P1 - Create an attractive, safe, lively, and inviting community-oriented pedestrian environment Maggie Bates said since this building doesn’t have any retail, she suggests some artistic detail be added for the pedestrian experience. She used the tile detail on the COOP  building as an example. The discussion continued with the suggestion to make the green strip more interesting by not making it linear, could be meandering. Summary: Have some uniqueness between the street and where the building starts for the pedestrian on both the Chestnut and Forest sides of the building. It was also suggested to provide visual interest to and from the building. There was a conversation regarding roof space and meeting the open space requirement. It was also mentioned to see if an open space could be met internally or at the corner. The Board said they would rather see the roof space be created versus decks but have to have decks, some sort of recess would be recommended. The applicant said this will be dependent on some other decisions. The Board agreed that recessing the decks versus tacked on would be their guidance if decks are installed. Intent B1 - Express a clear architectural design concept appropriate for the proposed structures and contextually compatible with the surrounding area Ryan Van Straten summarized other comments made earlier in regard to this topic already. Add planting, modulation seen in new buildings with a nod to historical elements through details. Intent B2 - Create high-quality, durable and interesting buildings that have texture and depth Ryan Van Straten summarized other comments made earlier in regard to this topic. Varying the landscaping, pay close attention to the building frontage on Chestnut and Forest and pay particular attention to the hard corner. 2. Design Response Meeting for 820 N. State Street Development of a six-story, 111-unit residential building, with 104,000 square feet of floor area on a site that abuts N. State, Berry, N. Forest Streets, and the State Street Roundabout. The first floor would also include a 50-stall parking garage with the entrance from N. Forest St. A 47-stall surface parking lot is proposed on the southeast corner of the property abutting and taking access from both N. Forest and Berry Streets. The applicant 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. Berry St. is proposed to be widened and improved with 10-foot sidewalks and street trees on the project side (west) of the street. The proposal also includes landscaping throughout the site. David Heck recused himself. Staff Overview Staff: Lindsay Kershner Lindsey Kershner said this is a design response meeting and are at last phase of this design process. Staff feels the applicant responded accurately to all elements of this project and are in support of the departures. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Team: Jeff McClure and Robert Wright – RMC Architects Jeff McClure said they made some adjustments to the site plan, such as removing a secondary access point due to public works restrictions and altering the parking layout. The ground floor has evolved too, transitioning from commercial to residential space along State Street to better fit market demands. He called out the departures. First being the screening of the parking behind the building on our triangular site. They have shifted the building to the front, added a 7- foot landscape buffer, and a height differential with a retaining wall to minimize the visual impact from North Forest Street. Secondly, the rain cover requirements for commercial frontage, since they have shifted to residential, the only thing left is the leasing office as the only quasi-commercial space. Departure number two revolves around the overhangs and cover at the entry point. The plan has been revised to remove a door in the upper left corner, designating the space for commercial use at an elevated level. The yellow on the plans, highlights show where overhangs are present—2 feet on the upper portion and 6 to 8 feet where people walk from the sidewalk to the front door. The departure request is based on the creation of an entry court that technically isn't in the right of way but enhances the overall entry experience. Departure number three deals with projections into the right of way, particularly bay windows along State Street. While the code allows a maximum projection of 4 feet, the design features bay windows projecting 2 feet 6 inches, maxing out at 12 feet wide. The building's length, over 200 feet, led to a design decision to maintain scale and reduce visual impact. The bay window, about 13 feet wide, slightly exceeds the code, but it quickly recesses to accommodate decks, staying true to the code's intent. The unique architectural addition connects the bay window with decks on the top and bottom, creating a visually cohesive element. The aim is to demonstrate compliance with the code while incorporating a design solution in harmony with the building's scale.  Public Comment There was no public comment. Board Discussion Ryan Van Straten said he will go straight into the departure discussion. Departure number one: No Board members had concern with granting this departure request. Departure number two: No Board members had concern with granting this departure request. Departure number three: No Board members had concern with granting this departure request. Other Business