DESIGN COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

Transcription

1 DESIGN COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, May 10, 2017 Mercer Island City Hall CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 7:00 PM DESIGN COMMISSIONERS Colin Brandt, Vice Chair Richard Erwin, Chair Susanne Foster Anthony Perez Lara Sanderson Tami Szerlip Hui Tian APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes from April 19, 2017 REGULAR BUSINESS Agenda Item #1: DSR : Subway Sign Administrative design review and approval of a proposed sign for Subway. Staff Contact: Andrew Leon Agenda Item #2: DSR : Study Session for Hotel Mercer Study session to assist the Hotel Mercer in their design of public open space and the pedestrian through block connection. Staff Contact: Robin Proebsting PHONE: WEB: OTHER BUSINESS Staff Comments Planned Absences for Future Meetings Announcements & Communications Next Scheduled Meetings: May 24, 2017 at 7:00PM ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - MERCER ISLAND CITY HALL 9611 SE 36TH STREET; MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040

2 DESIGN COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 12, 2017 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Richard Erwin called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM in the Council Chambers, 9611 SE 36th Street, Mercer Island, Washington. ROLL CALL: Chair Richard Erwin, Commissioners Hui Tian, Suzanne Foster, Lara Sanderson, and Tami Szerlip. Commissioners Anthony Perez and Colin Brandt were absent. STAFF PRESENT: Evan Maxim, Planning Manager; Bio Park, Assistant City Attorney; Nicole Gaudette, Senior Planner; Andrew Leon, Planner; Lauren Anderson, Assistant Planner; were present. Bio Park, Assistant City Attorney, was introduced to the Design Commission. Andrew Leon, Planner, was introduced to the Design Commission. MEETING MINUTES APPROVAL: The Commission reviewed the minutes from the January 25, 2017 meeting. The minutes were approved as amended by a vote of 5-0. REGULAR BUSINESS: Agenda Item #1: Design Review DSR Study Session for Bartell Drugs Nicole Gaudette, Senior Planner, provided a brief staff presentation on the project. The applicant is seeking an answer to four specific questions to determine feasibility in moving forward. 1. Mercer Island zoning requires a 60 maximum frontage for multiple user. We would like to know if Bartell Drugs can take the entire street frontage as a single user. 2. To break up the street façade, we are proposing to step back the entry vestibule and provide its own fenestration and height modulation to differentiate it from the remaining store façade. Is this acceptable as we have shown? Questions 1 and 2 were considered together. Glenn Steiner, Magellan Architects, introduced himself and described how the proposed project is intended to create a look and feel of multiple users along the street frontage. The proposed use is small scale retail, and single story; the single story is about 3 feet below the street level on 78 th Ave SE. The main entrance is from the north, oriented towards the parking lot. The Commission concluded that they do not have discretion to increase the maximum frontage as proposed by the applicant in question 1. MICC (B) contains the term shall language, which prohibits any flexibility by the Commission. The Commission considered allowing for a separated pharmacy. Joanna Vanthil, real estate manager for Bartell Drugs indicated that a wellness facility, small shop space, or separated pharmacy was not feasible. Luke Randalls, Civil Engineer, indicated that a challenge with a vertical solution was providing minimum frontage along both streets. The Commission noted that the street entrance to the facility should be located at the corner. 3. For pedestrian access off 78th Ave SE, can we go down stairs and a ramp to get to the main entrance of our retail space? April 12, 2017 Design Commission Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2

3 Joanna Vanthil indicated that a response to question 3 was no longer necessary. The Commission noted that the street entrance to the facility should be located at the corner. 4. The code states if public parking is not provided, a minimum of 60% of the ground floor street frontage shall be occupied by the permitted uses: retail, restaurant and/or personal service use. We are not proposing public parking. Given the grade issues along SE 29th Street, this requirement is difficult to meet. As proposed, there is a 64-foot covered drive-thru. This represents approximately 60% of the frontage after subtracting out driveways and the plaza area. The building represents approximately 45% of the 78th Ave SE frontage, but approximately 64% when the vestibule and trellis structures are added (again after subtracting out driveways). Does this meet the intent of the code? Nicole Gaudette called the Commission s attention to MICC (B)(4), which indicates drive-through facilities should not be located along SE 29 th Street. OTHER BUSINESS: None PLANNED ABSENCES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS: Commissioner Sanderson and Chair Erwin will be absent from the April 26 th, 2017 meeting. Chair Erwin will be absent May 10, Susanne Foster will be absent May 24, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: The next scheduled meeting is April 26 th, ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 PM. Respectfully submitted, Evan Maxim, Planning Manager April 12, 2017 Design Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2

4 CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 1 May 10, 2017 Project: Description: Applicant: DSR Subway Wall Sign at the South Mercer Center A request for design review approval of a wall sign for a retail tenant at the South Mercer Center in the Planned Business Zone. Connie Guffey of Plumb Signs Site Addresses: 8415 SE 68 th St Mercer Island, WA 98040; Identified by King County Tax Parcel # Zoning District: Planned Business Zone (PBZ) Exhibits: 1. Drawings by Plumb Signs, received on February 17, SUMMARY The applicant is requesting design review approval of a wall sign for a retail tenant location on an existing retail building containing multiple retail tenant locations at ground level in the Planned Business Zone (PBZ). The applicant is proposing one internally illuminated channel letter wall sign that will be attached to the wall in front of their retail tenant location. The location of the sign was previously approved by the Design Commission for a previous tenant in 2001 (DSR01 018). The subject property is addressed as 8415 SE 68 th St. Notice of public hearing was mailed to parties within 300 feet of the subject site on April 27, The date and time of the public meeting was included in the notice. 2. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW AND STAFF ANALYSIS Pursuant to MICC (E), (F)(1)(b), (F)(1)(c), and (F)(3)(c) a minor exterior modification outside the Town Center may be reviewed by staff or by the Design Commission. The proposal is to approve new signage at a retail location outside the Town Center. Mercer Island City Code MICC and the Design Standards for Zones Outside the Town Center in Chapter provide the criteria for approval of sign design. The following is an analysis of the proposal regarding the criteria for approval: 1. MICC (D), Powers of the Commission, states that: No building permit or other required permit shall be issued by the city for any major new construction or minor exterior modification of any regulated improvement without prior approval of the Design Commission or Code Official as authorized pursuant to MICC (E). Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 1 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

5 Staff Analysis: Staff finds that the regulation is applicable to the proposal. Pursuant to MICC (F)(3)(a), formal design review is not required for projects where (6) the work does not include additional exterior lighting or a new or enlarged exterior sign. Since the proposed sign is larger than that of the previous tenant, Design Commission review is required for this project. 2. MICC E, Summary of Actions and Authorities: Minor Exterior Modifications outside the Town Center shall be reviewed by the Code Official. Staff Analysis: Because the sign for the previous tenant was reviewed as part of design review before the Design Commission, the Commission should review the new signage proposed for the building. Additionally, Design Commission approval is required pursuant to MICC (F)(3)(a), as described above. 3. MICC (F)(4), Criteria for Design Review Decisions: Following the applicable review process above, the Design Commission or Code Official shall deny an application if it finds that all the following criteria have not been met, or approve an application, or approve it with conditions, based on finding that all the following criteria have been met: a. The proposal conforms with the applicable design objectives and standards of the design requirements for the zone in which the improvement is located, as set forth in subsection G of this section: Staff Analysis: The proposal is conforms to the applicable design standards as set forth in MICC (G) and MICC (See analysis below). b. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff Analysis: Goal 17 of the Land Use component of the Comprehensive Plan states: With the exception of allowing residential development, commercial designations and permitted uses under current zoning will not change The Planned Business Zone uses on the south end of Mercer Island are compatible with the surrounding single family zone needs. All activities in the PBZ are subject to design review. Supplemental design guidelines have been adopted. This goal indicates that retail uses are permitted within the PBZ and compatible with the needs of the residents of the south end of Mercer Island. However any new use within the PBZ requires design review subject to the supplemental regulations listed in Chapter MICC. This criterion is met with the approval of the Design Commission. c. The proposal does not increase the project s degree of nonconformity. Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 2 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

6 Staff Analysis: The application is proposing to comply with all applicable signage requirements, including size, type, and placement. This criterion is met. 4. MICC (G) Design Objectives and Standards 2. Zones Outside Town Center. Design objectives and standards for regulated improvements in all zones outside the Town Center are set forth in Chapter MICC. Staff Analysis: The proposal conforms to the applicable design objectives and standards of the design requirements in MICC for zones outside the Town Center. (See analysis below). 5. MICC (A) Objectives: 1. Signs shall be distinctive in shape, of high quality and durable materials, designed to enhance the architectural character of the building and use the minimum wattage necessary to identify the facility or establishment. Channel or punch through letters are preferred over a sign that contains the text and/or logo symbols within a single, enclosed cabinet. Staff Finding: The proposed sign uses low wattage LED lighting aluminum within channel letter of a distinctive shape. This criterion is met 3. Signs shall be designed for the purpose of identifying the facility or establishment in an attractive and functional manner and to help customers find the specific establishment and location; signs in residential zones should not serve as general advertising. Staff Finding: The proposed sign is designed to identify the establishment as a Subway restaurant. This criterion is met. 4. The size of signs shall be proportional to the size of the building and site. Staff Finding: The size of the proposed sign is proportional to the size of the building and the tenant space it identifies (See Finding 6(b) below). This criterion is met. 5. Signs shall be integrated into both the site design and building design, shall be compatible with their residential, office, or business, or public park or open space surroundings, and clearly inform viewers of building or activity use, but shall not detract from the architectural quality of individual buildings or park surroundings. Staff Analysis: The proposed sign is compatible with the surrounding businesses and clearly indicates the nature of the business. The sign also does not detract from the architectural quality of surrounding business or park environments. This criterion is met. Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 3 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

7 6. MICC (B)(2) Development and Design Standards, Wall Signs: a. Number and Eligibility. An individual building or a building complex outside residential zones may display one wall sign on each street frontage. A business or other use occupying a building whose only entrance is from a driveway or parking lot shall be allowed one wall sign facing that driveway or parking lot. Staff Analysis: The business for which the proposed sign is to be installed has a single entrance from a parking lot. The applicants are proposing a single sign that faces this parking lot, so this criterion is met. b. Size. All signs shall be: i. Proportionate. Proportionate to the street frontage of the use they identify; and ii. Maximum Size. In no case shall a wall sign be larger than: (A) Twenty five square feet. Twenty five square feet for individual business or other use. (B) Fifty square feet. Fifty square feet for joint tenant directory signs identifying the occupants of a building or a building complex and located next to the entrance. Staff Analysis: The proposed sign is proportionate to the tenant s building frontage and has an area of square feet. This criterion is met. c. Determination of Size. The sign size is measured as follows: i. Boxed Sign Displays: total area of display, including the background and borders. ii. Individual Letters and Symbols: total combined area of a rectangle drawn around the outer perimeter of each word and each symbol. Staff Analysis: The signage is a series of symbols in individual channel casings. It has been measured per this code section (Exhibit 1). This criterion is met. d. Placement. Wall signs may not extend above the building parapet, soffit, the eave line or the roof of the building, or the windowsill of the second story. Wall signs shall be integrated with the overall building and site design. Staff Analysis: The applicant proposes that the wall signs will be attached to the wall along the front of the tenant space, below the eave line. The sign will not extend above the building parapet, soffit, eave line, or roof of the building, and are below the windowsill of the second story. This criterion has been met. e. Master Sign Plan. When multiple signs for individual businesses in one building or multiple buildings in a complex are contemplated, a master sign plan stipulating the location and size of future signs will be required. Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 4 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

8 Staff Analysis: This proposal is for a single wall sign. This criterion is not relevant to the project. 7. MICC Internally Lit Signs. Internally signs are prohibited in all zones other than the PBZ. Within the PBZ, lighted signs are permitted subject to the Town Center standards set forth in MICC (B)(9). MICC (B)(9) Lighted Signs. Lighted Signs shall be of high quality and durable materials, distinctive in shape, designed to enhance the architectural character of the building and use LED lights or other minimum wattage lighting, as necessary to identify the facility or establishment. Channel or punch through letters are preferred over a sign that contains text and/or logo symbols within a single, enclosed cabinet. Staff Analysis: The proposed sign uses LED illumination within aluminum channel letters of a distinctive shape. This criterion is met. 8. MICC (F)(1)(d)(iii) states: If the applicant has not submitted a complete application for a building permit within two years from the date of the notice of the final design review decision, or within two years from the decision on appeal from the final design review decision, design review approval shall expire. The design commission or code official may grant an extension for no longer than 12 months, for good cause shown, if a written request is submitted at least 30 days prior to the expiration date. The applicant is responsible for knowledge of the expiration date. Staff Analysis: As conditioned, this criterion is met. 3. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis and findings included herein, staff recommends to the Planning Commission the following: Recommended Motion: Move to grant Plumb Signs design approval for a wall sign to be placed at a retail tenant location in the PBZ located at 8415 SE 68 th Street, as shown in Exhibit 1, subject to the following conditions. 4. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All aspects of the proposed signage shall be consistent with the detail information submitted with this application (i.e. elevations, perspective drawings, colors, materials, font, size of the lettering and relationship and layout of the approved wording and graphics), as depicted by Exhibit If required, the applicant shall apply for and obtain a building permit from the City of Mercer Island prior to installation of the sign. Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 5 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

9 3. If a building permit is required and the applicant has not submitted a complete application for a building permit within two years from the date of this notice, or within two years from the decision on appeal from the final design review decision, design review approval shall expire. The Code Official may grant an extension for no longer than 12 months, for good cause shown, if a written request is submitted at least 30 days prior to the expiration date. Design Commission Design Review Agenda Item No. 1 Page 6 of 6, May 10, 2017 V:\ePlan\Cloud Files\LUP FILES\DSR\2017\DSR Subway\Decision and Staff Report.docx

10

11 CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STUDY SESSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: #2 May 10, 2017 Project No: Project: Description: Applicant: Site Address: Zoning District: DSR Dollar Development (Hotel) Study session for review of and guidance on site design of the proposed Through-Block Connection and public open space. Kenneth T. Lee, Dollar Development Co Sunset Hwy, Mercer Island WA 98040; Identified by King County Tax Parcel # Town Center (TC) TC-5 Exhibits: 1. Request for Design Commission Approvals and Guidance, prepared by Jon Graves Architects & Planners, PLLC received March 28, Conceptual Site Plans and Building Elevations prepared by Jon Graves Architects & Planners, PLLC dated February 22, SUMMARY The applicant has requested a study session with the Design Commission in order to obtain guidance on site design of a proposed Through-Block Connection and public open space to be part of a hotel development. The applicable code standards for Through-Block Connections and public open space are in MICC The site of the proposed hotel is located just south of Sunset Hwy, between 76 th Ave SE and 77 Ave SE. The site is currently occupied by a surface parking lot, with the Aljoya building to the west, Aubrey Davis Park to the north, a Chevron gas station to the east, and The Mercer building to the south. The proposed Through-Block Connection would align with a fire lane and sidewalk on The Mercer s property, which connects to SE 27 th St. This project will require design review and approval by the Design Commission prior to issuance of any construction permits. Following receipt of an application for design review, a public meeting and subsequent open record public hearing in front of the Design Commission will be scheduled pursuant to MICC (F)(2). The project is subject to the criteria in MICC Section 19.11, Town Center. 2. STAFF ANALYSIS AND CRITERIA FOR REVIEW Pursuant to MICC (F)(2)(b), and applicant may meet with the Design Commission in a study session to discuss project concepts before the plans are fully developed. The applicant has elected to use this option in order to obtain guidance on aspects of design for which there is flexibility in the code standards, subject to review and approval by the Design Commission. Page 1 of 9

12 The applicant has prepared a document "7645 Sunset Highway Project Preliminary DRB Approvals and Guidance (Exhibit 1), which requests Design Commission feedback on two specific aspects of the project design. These questions are summarized in section 1) below. Sections 2) through 12) contain the code standards relevant to areas the applicant is seeking guidance on, followed by staff analysis in italicized text. 1) The applicant has requested guidance on the following topics, summarized below and more fully described in Exhibit 1: a. Applicant Request #1: The applicant is seeking approval of the Through-Block with width(s) as shown, given the consideration of additional designated Public Space at the Sunset Highway Frontage. The applicant believes the project meets the Purpose and Intent of the section by providing a combined public open space well in excess of the required area (Exhibit 1, item 1). b. Applicant Request #2: The applicant is seeking guidance and approval relative to the individual Design Elements included for both the Public Open Space and the Through Block Connection, in particular: i. The building frontage of the Through-Block Connection is less than 50% transparent glazing in isolation; however, when considered with the Sunset Highway Public Open Space frontage, the project meets the 50% requirement of this section. We are seeking approval of this approach in satisfying E(2)(f) ii. Upper level stories of the building may overhang the Through-Block Connection by 1-3. We are seeking guidance in satisfying E(2)(f) 2) MICC (B) - Major Site Features: Any major new construction in the TC-5, TC-4, TC-4 Plus or TC-3 subarea which exceeds the two-story base height and that includes or abuts a preferred Through- Block Connection location shown on Figure 7 shall include a Through-Block Connection subject to design commission determination that such connection is feasible and achievable. Figure 7 Preferred Through-Block Pedestrian Connection Locations Page 2 of 9

13 Staff analysis: The applicant proposes major new construction in the TC-5 zone adjacent to a preferred Through-Block Connection location, and proposes a Through-Block Connection in the location shown in Figure 7. This standard is met. 3) MICC (B) - Major Site Features (cont.): Any major new construction exceeding three stories in height in the TC-5, TC-4 or TC-4 Plus subarea shall include at least one of the following major site features, subject to design commission determination that such choices contribute to a well-balanced mix of features in that subarea: Staff analysis: The proposed development is in the TC-5 zone, and exceeds three stories in height (Exhibit #2, Sheet EX2.0). Therefore a major site feature is required to be provided. The applicant is proposing a Through-Block Connection as the major site feature, however, certain code flexibilities need to be exercised in order for the Through-Block Connection to meet the applicable code standards. The applicant is also proposing an area of Public Open Space in order to meet requirements for public benefit. Sections 4) through 12) provide an analysis of how the proposal meets the Through Block and Public Open Space criteria. Where standards are not met, an evaluation of the proposed alternative is provided. MAJOR SITE FEATURE #1: THROUGH-BLOCK CONNECTIONS 4) MICC (B)(1) - Through-Block Connection: Through-block pedestrian connections will qualify as a major site feature upon satisfaction of the development and design standards set forth in subsection E of this section. If the on-site area of the Through-Block Connection does not equal or exceed three percent of the gross floor area of the development, then public open space shall also be provided so that the total area of the Through-Block Connection and public open space equals or exceeds three percent of the gross floor area of the development. Staff analysis: An analysis of subsection E is provided in the following sections 5) through 8). The applicant is proposing to provide a combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.1), which is approximately 5.4% of the gross floor area of the development. The Through-Block Connection by itself, as drawn on Sheet EX1.0 of Exhibit 2 would provide 3.4% of the gross floor area, and therefore would not trigger a requirement for a separate open space based on the standard above. However, if the area considered the Through-Block Connection were limited to the western edge of the site, as shown on Sheet EX1.0, not all of the standards in MICC (E) would be able to be met. In order to address the code requirements, the applicant is proposing to expand the scope of what is considered the Through-Block Connection by combining it with the plaza in front of the hotel in order to meet the numerical standards applicable to Through-Block Connections. 5) MICC (E) - Through-Block Pedestrian Connections: Through-block pedestrian connections are intended to provide convenient and safe public pedestrian routes through city blocks. MICC (E)(1) Location: Connections shall be located on the lots eligible for through-block pedestrian connections as shown on Figure 7 and in other locations based on the following criteria. The actual location of the pedestrian connection on the lot shall be determined by the design commission based upon the following criteria: (a) the connection will connect with existing or future rights-of-way, other pedestrian connections and/or public open spaces; (b) the connection has the effect of dividing a large city block approximately in the middle of such block in approximately the preferred locations Page 3 of 9

14 shown on Figure 7; and (c) it is likely that the remainder of the subject connection will be developed in the future based upon development conditions on surrounding lots. Staff analysis: The proposed Through-Block Pedestrian Connection would connect to an existing fire lane and sidewalk that provides access to SE 27 th St, approximately bisecting the block through the middle, and is in the location shown in Figure 7. As proposed, the Location criteria are met. 6) MICC (E)(2)(a) Design Elements: [ ] The connection shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide unless the design commission approves a lesser width because the applicant provides other site features of equal or greater public benefit as determined by the design commission. The area devoted to a connection shall be in addition to the area devoted to any other minor site feature required pursuant to subsection A of this section. Staff analysis: The proposed Through-Block Pedestrian Connection is less than 20 feet wide, therefore the connection could only be approved if the design commission approves this width because it has determined that the applicant has proposed other features of equal or greater public benefit. Other site features proposed in the project narrative to provide public benefit include: 1) Providing a combined public open space well in excess of the required area; 2) a connection designed to give the feel of focusing users towards an open and inviting plaza that would act as a jumping off point and gathering spot for activity to be carried into the adjacent park; and 3) Public Open Space that is provided at the front of the building (Exhibit 1). Staff are seeking guidance regarding whether equal or greater public benefit has been demonstrated. MICC (E)(2)(a) Design Elements (cont.): The primary purposes of the connection shall be as a means for pedestrian access between rights-of-way and secondarily as a public gathering place. Other uses, including pedestrian access to parking areas, lobby entrances, and stairs, must be secondary to and not conflict with the connection purpose and areas required for such uses shall not be included in calculating the minimum size. Staff analysis: The connection provides pedestrian access between Sunset Hwy and a connection immediately to the south that provides access to SE 27 th St. Secondarily, the connection is proposed to provide public gathering spaces in the form of outdoor seating. The seating area is proposed to be along the edge of the property, adjacent to an existing neighboring building, and not in conflict with the proposed connection (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.2). MICC (E)(2)(b): The connection shall be at the same level as the public sidewalk and incorporate sufficient pedestrian amenities such as seating areas, landscaping, art features, water features, weather protection and pedestrian scale lighting, as determined by the design commission. Staff analysis: The connection is shown as being at the same level as the base elevation of the proposed building. It appears to be feasible to make the connection the same level as future public sidewalks. Landscaping and outdoor seating are proposed along the connection (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX 1.2). MICC (E)(2)(c): The connection should use special paving, such as decorative colored concrete, concrete unit brick or stone pavers and coordinated design features such as uniform treatment of signing, landscaping and lighting over the entire length of the connection. Pervious paving is encouraged. Page 4 of 9

15 Staff analysis: Decorative tiling is proposed in a portion of the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space, and the pathway on the western edge of the site could potential use the materials listed in this code section. It appears that this standard is capable of being met. MICC (E)(2)(d): At least 50 percent of the ground level building frontage shall be designed and constructed to provide occupancy by active residential or nonresidential uses. Staff analysis: It appears that active uses are proposed on the ground level building frontage along the west and north elevations, including a dining room, conference room, and lobby (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.2). It is understood that this design is preliminary, and specifics of building design and programming may evolve as project progresses. It appears that this standard is capable of being met. MICC (E)(2)(e): Where ground level residential uses front onto the Through-Block Connection the building must feature at least one of the public/private space transition elements described below:[ ] Staff analysis: The proposed use is not residential, therefore the requirements of MICC (E)(2)(e) do not apply to this proposal. MICC (E)(2)(f): Where ground level nonresidential uses front onto the Through-Block Connection the building must feature: i. Transparent windows along 50 percent of the ground floor facade between 30 inches and 10 feet above the Through-Block Connection. Staff analysis: The west elevation by itself would provide only 35% glazing. If both the west and north elevations are used for this calculation, a total of 1167 square feet of glazing out of a total area of 2254 square feet between 30 inches and 10 feet ground level (or 51.8%) would be provided, meeting this requirement (Exhibit 2, Sheets EX2.0 and 2.1). Staff are seeking guidance on whether the expanded geographic footprint of what is considered Through-Block Connection is acceptable to the Design Commission, thereby allowing both the west and north elevations to be used for this calculation. ii. Entrances facing the Through-Block Connection are required for each tenant adjacent to the Through-Block Connection. Staff analysis: Two entrances from the hotel to the Through-Block Connection to the west are shown. Additionally, two entrances to the north elevation are shown, meeting this standard (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.2). MICC (E)(2)(g): No more than 50 percent of Through-Block Connection ground level frontages may be occupied by vehicle parking areas. Where surface level parking areas are adjacent to the Through-Block Connections, landscaping and building design features shall be included to add visual interest and screen vehicles while designing for safety of pedestrians along the connection. Staff analysis: No vehicle parking is proposed on either the west-facing or north-facing ground level frontage to the Through-Block Connection. This standard is met. MICC (E)(2)(h): The Through-Block Connection may not be covered by a roof or story; provided portions of the public open space may be covered for weather protection, but not enclosed, Page 5 of 9

16 and skybridges connecting two buildings are allowed if the skybridge is less than 20 feet wide and less than 14 feet in height. Staff analysis: The Through-Block Connection is proposed to be partially covered by building overhang by 1-3 feet, but this amount of overhang would not enclosed the connection. As the Through-Block Connection is proposed to be combined with public open space, the building overhang could be considered weather protection. Staff are seeking guidance on whether the proposed building overhang would be permissible, given the standard in (2)(h). MICC (E)(2)(i): All city approvals or permits for any structure shall be reviewed for compatibility with the alignment of any existing or approved Through-Block Connection. Staff analysis: The criterion can be addressed by adding a condition to a future Design Commission approval, requiring that all future construction permits are consistent with the Design Commission s decision. MICC (E)(2)(j): The connection shall be for exclusive pedestrian use and may not be used by vehicles except as necessary for maintenance or emergency purposes. Dumpsters and other service areas shall not be located within a Through-Block Connection, but may be totally enclosed within a building adjacent to the Through-Block Connection. Staff analysis: The Through-Block Connection is designed for pedestrian use, being too narrow in some points for vehicular access. No service areas are proposed within the Through-Block Connection. MICC (E)(2)(k): The design commission may approve a connection that is not in a straight line. Staff analysis: The proposed Through-Block Connection is generally straight, but does include a slight meander within the connection area. Staff is seeking guidance from the Commission on whether this alignment would be approvable. 7) MICC (E)(3) Connection Plan: The applicant shall submit a plan with a minimum scale of onequarter inch equals one foot for the connection, which shall include a description of all of the following elements: landscaping; lighting; street furniture; color and materials; relationship to building frontage; specific location of the connection and the relationship to and coordination with any public open space. Staff analysis: At application for design review, a plan meeting the specifications in this standard will be required. 8) MICC (E)(4) Public Access: The entire connection should be open to the public 24 hours per day. Temporary closures will be allowed as necessary for maintenance purposes. Upon city approval, portions of the connection may be separated, as required by the State of Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board or its successor agency, in order to allow outdoor seating for restaurant purposes. Staff analysis: As designed, this standard is capable of being met. MAJOR SITE FEATURE #2: PUBLIC OPEN SPACE The applicant is not required to provide a second major site feature, nor meet all of the standards Page 6 of 9

17 required for Public Open Space. This analysis is included to provide a reference point for the public benefit being provided in lieu of a full 20 foot block width for the Through-Block Connection. 9) MICC (B)(1) - Public Open Space. Public open spaces will qualify as a major site feature upon satisfaction of the development and design standards set forth in subsection D of this section. MICC (D)(1) Size: A single public open space shall be a minimum size equal to three percent of the gross floor area of the development and shall be at least 20 feet in width. [ ] The primary purpose of the public open spaces shall be as public gathering places. Other uses of public open spaces whose primary purpose is not for public gathering including but not limited to lobby entrances, stairs, and cordoned off/private outdoor restaurant seating shall not be included in calculating the minimum size of the public open spaces. Such areas shall be in addition to any area required as a minor site feature under subsection A of this section. If a development is required to provide both a public open space and a Through-Block Connection, then the area of the Through-Block Connection that meets the requirements of subsection E of this section shall also be counted towards the public open space requirement. Staff analysis: The area designated as public open space (Exhibit 2, Sheet Ex1.0) is 2% of the gross floor area of the development. However, the applicant is proposing to provide a combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.1), which is approximately 5.4% of the gross floor area of the development. The combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space consists of a corridor along the western edge of the site of less than 20 feet in width, and a roughly triangular plaza on the north edge of the site. Portions of the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space are at least 20 feet in width. The on-site area of the Through-Block Connection does exceed three percent of the gross floor area of the development, so the proposed development is not required to provide both a Public Open Space and a Through-Block Connection, according to MICC (B)(1) - Through-Block Connection. The Design Commission may authorize the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space with the dimensions proposed if it determines that it constitutes a Major Site Feature that offers equal or greater public benefit that a Through-Block Connection or Public Open Space alone. MICC (D)(2) Design Elements: MICC (D)(2)(a): Public open spaces shall be at the same level as the public sidewalk, serve as a focal point for pedestrian activity within the Town Center zone, and should be fully integrated and designed consistent with any pedestrian connection or other public amenity. Staff analysis: The proposed combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space will be at the same grade as the existing sidewalk on Sunset Hwy, and will connect to an existing corridor to the south with Sunset Hwy, Aubrey Davis Park, and the existing bike/ped trail system. b. Public open spaces shall be designed with sufficient pedestrian amenities including seating, lighting, water features, special paving, landscaping, artwork and special recreational features, as determined by the design commission. At least two linear feet of seating surfaces per 100 square feet of space should be provided. To qualify, seating surfaces shall be a minimum of 18 inches in depth. At least half the seating should have seat backs and have surfaces made of wood, rather than metal, stone or concrete. In addition, moveable chairs may be provided and shall not be for the sole use of an adjacent retail business. Page 7 of 9

18 Staff analysis: Seating is provided in the northwest corner of the plaza, and along the Through-Block Connection (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.2). Specific materials and design dimensions of the seating required by code area capable of being met. Landscaping, artwork, and decorative tiling are also proposed. Staff are seeking guidance from the Design Commission on whether the amenities shown are sufficient for this Public Open Space. c. Pedestrian-oriented frontage is required on at least two sides unless the space is linear in design, in which case pedestrian-oriented frontage is required on at least one side. Staff analysis: The applicant is proposing to combine the Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space, providing pedestrian-oriented frontage on the west and north sides of the building, consistent with this standard. d. At least 25 percent but not more than 60 percent of an outdoor public open space should be landscaped with shade trees, ground cover or other vegetation. Staff analysis: Roughly 25% of the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space is shown as landscaped or under tree cover (Exhibit 2, Sheet EX1.2). e. The public open space may not be covered by a roof, story or skybridge; provided portions of the public open space may be covered for weather protection, or be enclosed pursuant to subsection (D)(2)(f) of this section. Staff analysis: A portion of the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space is proposed to be covered by building overhang along the western edge of the site by 1-3 feet. f. Enclosed and/or covered public open space may be approved by the design commission; provided, that the space is available for public use. Staff analysis: The Public Open Space is proposed to be partially covered, and will be available for public use. g. All city approvals or permits for any structure shall be reviewed for compatibility with the alignment of any existing or approved public open space. Staff analysis: The criterion can be addressed by adding a condition to a future Design Commission approval, requiring that all future construction permits are compatible with any existing or approved public open space. 10) Public Open Space Plan. The applicant shall submit a plan with a minimum scale of one-quarter inch equals one foot for the public open space which shall include a description of all landscaping; lighting; street furniture; color and materials; relationship to building frontage; specific location of the public open space; and the relationship to and coordination with any pedestrian connection or other public amenity. Staff analysis: At application for design review, a plan meeting the specifications in this standard will be required. Page 8 of 9

19 11) Public Access. The entire public open space should be open to the public 24 hours per day. Temporary closures will be allowed as necessary for maintenance purposes. Upon city approval, portions of the public open space may be separated, as required by the State of Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board or its successor agency, in order to allow outdoor seating for restaurant purposes. Staff Analysis: As designed, this standard is capable of being met. SUMMARY OF STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed project is required to provide either 1) one of the two Major Site Features (a Through- Block Connection or Public Open Space) or 2) another Major Site Feature, if it provides equal or greater public benefit than Through-Block Connection or Public Open Space, as determined by the Design Commission. The applicant has proposed a hybrid of Through-Block Connection or Public Open Space. Where the proposal has shown that the standards for these two types of Major Site Features have been met (or are capable of being met), this is has been noted in the analysis above. Where there is flexibility or discretion in interpreting the code, staff requests the Design Commission s guidance in determining whether the proposal meets code. To re-cap from the above analysis, the points on which staff are requesting guidance are as follows: 1. Does the Through-Block Connection as proposed qualify as a Major Site Feature? 2. May the applicant count both the west and north elevations of the proposed building to meet the standard requiring that 50% of the ground floor façade be transparent windows? 3. Has the applicant provided features of equal or greater public benefit that compensate for a Through-Block Connection that is narrower than 20 feet? 4. May the combined Through-Block Connection and Public Open Space be covered by 1-3 feet of building overhang? 3. RECOMMENDATION There is no recommended motion at this time, as this is a Design Commission study session. Page 9 of 9

20 3110 Ruston Way Suite E Tacoma WA Phone: (253) Fax: (253) City of Mercer Island Planning and Development SUBJECT: 7645 Sunset Highway Project Preliminary DRB Approvals and Guidance We are seeking guidance and approvals relative to specific elements of our Site Design ; and our building massing relative to SITE DESIGN : Our pedestrian through-block connection must be less than 20 in width. This is due to the required unit density and required first-floor program features of a hotel design. Another challenge presented by the unique requirements of hotel design, is the percentage of glazing that the project can achieve along the Through-Block Connection; the site geometry dictates that the area of the building abutting the Connection is the area dedicated to support facilities and rooms that are required to operate the business (i.e. housekeeping, laundry, staff eating and changing rooms, etc). 1. We are seeking approval of the Through-Block with width(s) as shown, given the consideration of additional designated Public Space at the Sunset Highway Frontage. We believe the project meets the Purpose and Intent of the section by providing a combined public open space well in excess of the required area. We feel the Connection gives the feel of focusing users towards an open and inviting plaza that would act as a jumping off point and gathering spot for activity to be carried into the adjacent park. The building is still in early stages of design however, and the Public Open Space that is provided at the front of the building (as shown in the exhibit) may need to be diminished by 500 to 1,000 square feet (to move the building closer to the street). Even with that possible impact, the project would still be providing well over the combined area requirement. 2. We are also seeking guidance and approval relative to the individual Design Elements included for both the Public Open Space and the Through Block Connection. We would appreciate input on the various Design Elements included on the submitted site plan, but in particular we are most concerned with the following Design Element Standards: - The building frontage of the Through-Block Connection is less than 50% transparent glazing in isolation; however, when considered with the Sunset Highway Public Open Space frontage, the project meets the 50% requirement of this section. We are seeking approval of this approach in satisfying E(f) - Upper level stories of the building may overhang the Through-Block Connection by 1-3. We are seeking guidance in satisfying E(f) 1

21 RE-USE OF DOCUMENTS THIS DOCUMENT, AND THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS INCORPORATED HEREIN, AS INSTRUMENTS OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, ARE THE PROPERTY OF JGAP AND ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF JGAP. BUILDING COMPLIMENTARY AREA TO THRU-BLOCK, DESIGNATED AS "PUBLIC OPEN SPACE" PER MICC D ( +/- 1,809 SQ FT ) P L A Z A EXCLUSIVE USE AND TEMP ESM'T REC. NO FOR LOT 2 (OFF SITE) (+/- 431 SQ FT) AREA DEDICATED TO THRU-BLOCK PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION ( +/- 3,120 SQ FT ) BUILDING TRHU-BLOCK CONNECTION 7'-10 1/4" 20'-0" REQUIRED WIDTH FOR THRU-BLOCK PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION PER TC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORD 16C-06 (+/- 1,310 SQ FT WITHIN BLDG. FOOTPRINT MOVED TO NORTH PUBLIC OPEN SPACE) PEDESTRIAN ENTRY, TYP PROPOSED BUILDING 90,449 GROSS SQ FT VEHICLE ENTRY 4'-4" NEW UNDER PROPOSED LOT LINE REVISION (LLR) BUILDING STRUCTURE CROSSWALK CROSSWALK JON GRAVES ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS HOTEL MERCER 3110 RUSTON WAY, SUITE E, TACOMA, WA Ph: FAX: Sunset Highway Mercer Island WA, '-0 3/4" PROJECT: 1516 CONTENTS: 1 BUILDING DIAGRAMMATIC SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0" BUILDING SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" TRUE NORTH DIAGRAMMATIC SITE PLAN SITE & CODE ANALYSIS / 22 FEBRUARY 2017 DRAWN BY: PM: DATE: REVISIONS: GROUP: FILE: Sheet: EX FEB 17 Copyright February, 2017 by Jon Graves Architects and Planners BKB BC SITE STUDY

22 1 BUILDING BUILDING COMBINED LANDSCAPE AREA PER MICC D.2.d ( +/- 885 SQ FT ) BUILDING LANDSCAPED AREAS SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0" PROPOSED BUILDING 90,449 GROSS SQ FT COMBINED THRU-BLOCK CONNECTION / PLAZA (PUBLIC OPEN SPACE) LARGE TREE 200% LANDSCAPE RATE PER MICC B.1.a ( +/- 202 SQ FT x 200% = 404 SQ FT) BUILDING NEW UNDER PROPOSED LOT LINE REVISION (LLR) BUILDING STRUCTURE CROSSWALK SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" CROSSWALK TRUE NORTH LANDSCAPED AREAS PLAN SITE & CODE ANALYSIS / 22 FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: CONTENTS: DRAWN BY: PM: DATE: REVISIONS: FILE: Sheet: HOTEL MERCER RE-USE OF DOCUMENTS THIS DOCUMENT, AND THE IDEAS AND DESIGNS INCORPORATED HEREIN, AS INSTRUMENTS OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, ARE THE PROPERTY OF JGAP AND ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF JGAP BKB BC 22 FEB 17 GROUP: SITE STUDY EX1.1 Copyright February, 2017 by Jon Graves Architects and Planners 7465 Sunset Highway Mercer Island WA, JON GRAVES ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS 3110 RUSTON WAY, SUITE E, TACOMA, WA Ph: FAX: