Full Text
MEMORANDUM TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: Sarah Pyle, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Anjumann E Burhani Mosque, LAND 2013-0171 DATE: April 6, 2017 REQUEST: APPROVAL Project Location 15252 NE 51st Street Overlake Neighborhood R-5 Zone Project Summary The proposed project involves the construction of a new two-story mosque building with a basement on a 1.12 acre site in the Overlake neighborhood; bordered by SR 520 to the west and SE 51st Street to the south. The proposed mosque is to consist of a total of 22657 gross square feet with 2,520 on the basement level, 11,325 square feet on the main level, and 8,811 square feet on the upper level. The new building will be surrounded by surface parking, currently shown with 36 spaces (plus 29 valet) and landscape improvements, new sidewalks and utility improvements. An existing residence and attached garage will be demolished. This project came before the DRB for the first time on August 22, 2013. The City of Redmond Planning Staff has prepared this memo as part of a packet of materials for design review. ---PAGE BREAK--- Surrounding Uses, Character and Context The Anjumann E Burhani Mosque is located in the Overlake Neighborhood and is bordered by SR 520 to the west and 51st Street to the south. Adjacent land uses consist of single-family residences zoned R-5 to the north and east. A vicinity map is included in the design submittal packet. The adjacent neighborhood comprises of single-family homes that were constructed primarily in 1970’s and 1980’s. Comprehensive Plan Vision The proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan vision for the Single- Family Urban land use designation of the property, as well as the Plan’s goals for the Willows Rose Hill Neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan envisions the area as primarily for low moderate density residential uses and supporting uses like schools, churches, and parks. Below is the applicable Comprehensive Plan policy. LU-28: Allow some complementary, non-residential uses in Residential zones, such as appropriately scaled schools, religious facilities, home occupations, parks, open spaces, senior centers, and day care centers. Maintain standards in the RCDG for locating and designing these uses in a manner that respects the character and scale of the neighborhood. Zoning Designation 1. Site Requirements The site plan must comply with the following applicable site requirements: Zoning: R-5 Minimum Building Setback on all Sides: 20 feet, plus 5 feet for every 1 foot in building height over 30 feet, per Special Regulations for religious facilities Maximum Lot Coverage of Structures: 35% per Special Regulations for religious facilities Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage: 75% per Special Regulations for religious facilities Maximum Building Height: 50 feet, inclusive of steeples, bell towers, crosses, or other religious icons Minimum Open Space: 20% 2. Neighborhood Requirements (RZC 21.08.180) The proposed project is within the Overlake neighborhood. No neighborhood- specific regulations apply to this proposal. 3. Parking Requirements (RZC 21.08.080D) ---PAGE BREAK--- Parking shall not be below the minimum requirement of 10 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of floor area or 1 parking space for 5 fixed seats. 4. Landscaping (RZC 21.32) a. Interior parking lot landscaping must meet the following minimum standards: Five percent of the vehicle use area shall be landscaped for parking lots with 20-150 parking spaces. These planting areas must be situated to provide internal lot screening and shade. Perimeter planting areas are not applied to this calculation. b. Perimeter landscaping, is required along the street frontage, adjacent to NE 51st Street, that meets a minimum width of 5 feet. c. A Type I Solid Screen, 10-foot wide landscape buffer is required along the north and west property lines which abut single-family residential uses. Type I planting consists of evergreen trees and evergreen shrubs with a minimum height of five feet at planting, which will provide an 80% sight-obscuring screen at the time of planting; or a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs backed by a 100% sight-obscuring, decorative wall or fence. d. A Type II Visual Screen, landscape buffer is required along the west and south property lines which would screen the proposed parking lot from proposed sidewalks. Type II planting consists of evergreen trees and deciduous trees with large shrubs and groundcover interspersed with the trees. e. As NE 51st Street is a collector arterial, street trees will be required per RZC 21.32.090. f. All pervious areas shall be planted with a mixture of evergreen and deciduous shrubs, trees and living ground cover to provide fifty percent covering of the entire planting area at time of installation. Ground cover shall extend to the trunks of all deciduous trees and to the installed drip-line of all conifer trees. g. Grades in landscaped areas should not exceed 3(H):1(V) slope. On approved steeper slopes up to 2(H):1(V) erosion control netting or alternative procedures shall be used to prevent erosion. DESIGN REVIEW FEEDBACK The Design Review Board reviewed this project at its July 18, 2013 and August 22, 2013 meeting prior to the project encountering storm water design issues. All issues with infrastructure improvements have now been addressed. The applicant has provided an attachment with detailed responses and considerations to all of the Design Review Board’s previous feedback. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff believes the applicant has addressed all design feedback and recommends the ---PAGE BREAK--- project for approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. DRB Materials 2. Responses to DRB Feedback 3. Minuets of Previous DRB Meetings. ---PAGE BREAK--- Responses for the DRB meeting held on Aug 22, 2013 #1 - Concern about the red roof and the canopy on the front of the building (seems to stick out) The color of the red roof has been given a more realistic rendering color. Final selection will be a red-earth (sepia like) color. #2 - Is mirrored glass element in place for the sake of optical illusion and may not be necessarily needed The mirrored glass element has been removed. After further analysis we agreed with the review comment. #3 - Better screening for the garbage The concrete retaining wall for the garbage, and now the emergency generator, have both been appropriately screened with landscape by using bushes and trees to mitigate the “hard” surfaces that surround each area. #4 - Present some details about what the stucco would look like up close, including drip lines A typical section of the parapet and samples of the actual stucco materials and finish will be supplied at the Design Review Board presentation. #5 - Submission and approval from Mumbai? Mumbai was very pleased with the design. Per their request, we had to remove the smaller dome on the SE corner of the building in order to maintain focus on the central minaret #6 - Very few parking stalls provided. Want to make sure there was adequate parking on the site. Where would overflow parking would go, and did not want to see too much parking in the surrounding neighborhood. The transportation management plan includes both valet and off-site parking that will provide an additional (59) parking spaces. A total of 36 self-park stalls will be provided, including 3 tandem (i.e. Double-length parallel parking stalls) servicing the requirements of the congregation for all of the AEB Community’s Daily and Weekly Events (ranging from 5 - 60 attendees normally). Special Event activities will generate a maximum parking requirement when the Masjid is at capacity and beyond, occupying the full 65 on- site parking valet “stalls” (36 self-park + 29 max density valet parking) plus 30 additional, contracted off-site parking stalls with shuttle transport. Per the Redmond Zoning Code (Section 21.12.040B- Religious Institutions), the parking requirement is 1 stall per 5 “seats” (“seat” = prayer rug). The code requires 30 parking spaces if the full seating capacity of the Prayer Areas of 147 “seats” is fulfilled. ---PAGE BREAK--- Responses provided for the DRB meeting held on July 18, 2013 #1 - There should be a break or some feature that distinguishes the Masjid from the other main building element(s). The two very different building functions of the Masjid and Mawaid/Madrasa are now more clearly articulated on their exteriors. The exterior planes of the Masjid structure on the east are intended to be smooth and unbroken except at the modulations of building mass and the patterning of friezes, fenestration, the referenced overlay of a simulated kiswa (embroidered covering) on the Masjid proper, and the crenellation, whether 2D decorative tile or 3D framed parapet. The Mawaid/Madrasa’s exterior is modulated in the building form’s traditional manner of a unique colonnade that differentiates the structure both vertically between fl oors and horizontally between adjacent buildings. The orientation of each building is specifi c: the Masjid is oriented precisely to Qibla or toward the Kaaba in Mecca while the Mawaid/Madrasa is oriented to parallel the west boundary in order to maximize its useful square footage on the site. The confl uence of these two orientations appears on the south elevation behind the front elevation of the secondary minaret (westward and taller). The fi nal south column of the Mawaid/Madrasa abuts the side of the Minaret without interrupting the sequencing of the colonnade on the south elevation. The actual building joint between Mawaid/Madrasa and the Minaret will be a glazed strip (either vision glass for a “look out” or refl ective for privacy) approximately 10” wide extending from grade to parapet. The clearly defi ned separation between the two buildings is intended to emphasize the distinction of the two uses, while emphasizing the primary nature of the Masjid by extending the perspective of the adjacent Minaret wall into the inferred “distance” behind the south face of the Mawaid/Madrasa. Our presentation on the 15th of August will be developed specifi cally to show these improvements. #2 - Provide a detail of what the crenellation looks like, maybe a 3-D image. The crenellation details at the Masjid are of two kinds. Both have a similar origin in the early Persian designs to be found at Persepolis and in ---PAGE BREAK--- the later Fatimid Period Mosques of Cairo, but the general crenellation motif shown on the Masjid will be a 2D representation of the design of the battlements of Darius I. The primary Minaret on the east, however, will bear a 3D version as its parapet with a decorative tile or stucco covered framed parapet wall structure in the same proportion and surface materials/colors as the Masjid’s parapet frieze. Our presentation on the 15th of August will provide the detail requested. #3 - Screening of the green roof: Provide a section that shows the relationship of the Masjid to the adjacent properties to the north. To aid in the retention of privacy in the backyards of neighbors to the north, we have set the active portion of the roof deck back 10 feet from the roof edge. This will prevent a direct line of sight from the roof deck into the backyards of adjacent neighbors. In addition, screening can be provided in the way of trellis and planters. We have included a site section that shows this relationship. #4 - What is your inspiration for the design that you have developed? We have included in our presentation a board which indicates some of our sources of inspiration for the design of the mosque in Redmond. These include examples of a Mihrab enclosure and crenellation parapet at Persepolis in Egypt as well as an example of a minaret and main entry at al Juyushi and at al Hakim respectively. We did not, however, literally translate these into our building culture, but rather have attempted to use them as infl uences on our design choices for the local site and, where appropriate, familiar and resonant building features to our clients’ benefi t and sense of place. #5 - There is concern about the amount of paved area on the site. Explore ways to minimize the impact and appearance of a large parking lot The design team has studied four areas of surface design. Those include 1) the main parking lot, 2) the fi re apparatus access drive on the east side of the site; 3) the access drive to the lower level of the complex and 4) the pedestrian walkway and main building entry. Each of these areas have now been designed with distinguishing features such as stamped concrete at the west drive to indicate a more residential connection. The fi re apparatus drive will have a colored concrete surface with a green strip with a line of demarcation at the entry to indicate to the public that the area is designated for a special use only. The parking lot itself, will consist of ---PAGE BREAK--- asphaltic concrete with entry being treated special with color and textured concrete #6 - The board chair expressed that he was not familiar with Rolluda Architects work. What projects has this fi rm done? Rolluda Architects is located in the Pioneer Square area of Seattle, and although this is our fi rst project in Redmond, we have been doing projects in the greater Seattle area for the last 10 years. Our concentration in the past has been on school and educational projects, but the fi rm has recently completed mixed use projects, an Ethnic Cultural Center at the University of Washington, a Transportation Building at the University of Washington and a Forestry Service Building at the University of Oregon. #7 - Considerable concern was raised about the use of an EIFS system and it’s ability to keep moisture out. The design team is proposing to do a stucco building with EIFS detail trim to accomplish the ornamentation and detail around windows and other areas. The trim will be attached to the constructed wall. The building wall will be constructed as a stucco assembly with a cement base product and a stucco-fl ex elastomeric acrylic fi nish coat. Reinforcing fi berglass mesh is proposed for the lower areas that might be susceptible to impact. A waterway rain-screen drainage mat in addition to a weather resistant barrier will prevent moisture that gets into the system from getting to the structure. In addition, the drainage mat provides a means for moisture to drain out of the assembly. We have included details of this in our presentation Citywide Design Standards 21.60.020 Context, Circulation and Connections B. Design Context: Although this building is a religious institution in a residential neighborhood, it sits on the edge of this residential community and serves as a transition to the more commercial Microsoft buildings across SR520 and NE 51st Street. Because the site is on the edge of a residential community, it shares a boundary line with only two residential sites. Existing trees will be retained to the extent possible and additional ---PAGE BREAK--- trees planted to supplement and screen the new building from these two adjacent sites C Natural Features, Ridgelines and Hill Tops: Very little cut and fi ll will be done in order to develop the site. In fact development at this site will reduce a negative impact currently experienced by neighboring properties to the north by the constant fl ow of water downhill into their backyards. This project will catch this water and divert it into the proper system. D. Relationship to Adjacent Properties: As mentioned in item B above, this building will create a transition between the residential neighborhood and SR520 and the more commercial Microsoft buildings across SR 520 and NE 51st Street arterial. E. Relationship to Street Front: This property is unique in that it does not have a signifi cant street frontage. However, the design will incorporate signage and provide a pedestrian connection between the building entry and the street sidewalk F. Street Design: The street design has been developed to accommodate pedestrians, vehicular traffi c and a future bicycle path that runs parallel with the property. These provide adequate connections to public transportation as well as to arterials and state routes. G. Transit: A pedestrian linkage has been provided from the building entry to the public sidewalk which connects to a bus stop on both sides of SR520. H. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation: As mentioned earlier, our site frontage has been designed to allow for the future installation of a bicycle pathway which can be used to access our site. It is not envisioned that participants will be biking to the mosque, but nevertheless, accommodations in terms of access and bicycle parking will be provided I. Vehicle Entrances and Driveways Site line requirements are provided to allow safe vehicular access into and out of the site. Due to the amount of traffi c on NE 51st street, traffi c to and from the site will be limited to right-in and right-out only J. Parking Lot and Structured Parking Location and Design The main parking lot for this site has been designed such that it is not visible from the street. The elevation is approximately 4 feet lower than street elevation therefore minimizing the visual impact of the main parking lot from the arterial. In addition, it has been located away from the residential portion of the site, therefore ---PAGE BREAK--- head lights and glare will not be a problem for residences that are adjacent to the site. In addition, appropriate landscaping that will provide screening and lighting for safety will be provided 21.60.030 Community Space Not Applicable 21..60.040 Design Concepts Buildings B1. Architectural Concepts The architectural concept for the mosque centers around two main components; those being the Masjid (Mosque) and the Mawaid. These two components have very different functions and therefore we have chosen to give them different expressions on the exterior. The orientation of each component is specifi c: the Masjid is oriented precisely to Qibla or toward the Kaaba in Mecca while the Mawaid is oriented to parallel the west boundary property line in order to maximize the square footage of the site. The exterior planes of the Masjid structure on the east are intended to be smooth and unbroken except at the modulations of building mass and the patterning of friezes, fenestration, the referenced overlay of a simulated kiswa (embroidered covering) on the Masjid proper, and the crenellation, whether 2D decorative tile or 3D framed parapet. The Mawaid’s exterior is modulated in a traditional manner of a unique colonnade that differentiates the structure both vertically between fl oors and horizontally between adjacent components. Unique detailing will be incorporated at windows, roof lines, parapets and at the entry. B2. Building Scale Although the Mosque structure is not a residential structure, its scale fi ts into the character of the adjoining neighborhood. The mosque is very well modulated and broken up into components in order to reduce the scale of the building. This is done both vertically and horizontally. The addition of the mosque adds visual interest to the neighborhood’s skyline with it’s two minarets and other unique historic forms ---PAGE BREAK--- and references. Although the Mosque consist of three levels, only two of those levels are visible from the street and for the most part, only two levels will be visible from the adjoining neighborhood. B3. Rooflines The roofl ine of the Masjid (Mosque) will be unique in that it will incorporate an historical crenellation motif in the Fatimid mosque design period of Cairo as well as a frieze at the parapet. B4. Building Details, Materials and Colors: The exterior planes of the Masjid structure on the east are intended to be smooth and unbroken except at the modulations of the building mass and the patterning of friezes, fenestrations, the referenced overlay of a simulated kiswa (embroidered covering) on the Masjid proper, and the crenellation. The main building material will be a cement base stucco with EIFS trim detail. Colors will be primarily muted pastel colors with some accents at windows and doors. Windows will be aluminum clad wood. Exterior entry doors will be wood. B5. Multiple Building Design Not Applicable B6. Blank Walls: The design team has tried to avoid having blank walls on any of the facades of the structure B7. Building Design for Safety: Although this building will not be in use on a constant bases, it is being designed with a residential component that will provide some activity on the grounds at all times therefore reducing the likelihood on intruders or unwanted activity at the site. In addition , site lighting will be provided for safety Landscaping C1. Planting Design: Landscaping has been designed to be an integral part of the design of the Mosque and therefore will compliment the architecture of the structure. The landscape will consist of a composition of plant material that will create the appropriate visual character of the mosque. It will be a suitable combination of trees, shrubs, groundcover vines and lawn that will carefully be selected to provide the correct ---PAGE BREAK--- balance of color, texture, form, line and scale in both the vertical and horizontal plane C2. Parking Lot Landscaping The primary purpose of the parking lot landscaping is to reduce the summertime heat and glare build up as well as to provide screening and break up the expanse of paved areas. The landscape for the parking lot has been designed to accomplish the forementioned. Accessory Standards D1. Screening for Garbage and Recycling and Rooftop Mechanical The mechanical systems for the mosque will all be internal and garbage and recycling has be placed away from the building entries with proper screening D2. Stormwater Facilities: All stormwater features have been designed as underground structures in that it will be collected in pipes and discharged to the proper system(s). ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF REDMOND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD July 18, 2013 NOTE: These minutes are not a full transcription of the meeting. Tapes are available for public review in the Redmond Planning Department. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: David Scott Meade, Joe Palmquist, Craig Krueger, Mike Nichols, Kevin Sutton, Arielle Crowder, Scott Waggoner EXCUSED ABSENCE: None STAFF PRESENT: Steven Fischer, Principle Planner; Gary Lee, Senior Planner; Dennis Lisk, Associate Planner RECORDING SECRETARY: Susan Trapp with Lady of Letters, Inc. The Design Review Board is appointed by the City Council to make decisions on design issues regarding site planning, building elevations, landscaping, lighting and signage. Decisions are based on the design criteria set forth in the Redmond Development Guide. CALL TO ORDER The Design Review Board meeting was called to order by David Scott Meade at 7:30 p.m. PROJECT REVIEW L120351, Legacy at Town Square Description: A six-story mixed-use development with 178 apartments and structured parking Location: 160th Ave NE & NE 83rd Street Applicant: Michelle Kinsch with Tiscareno Associates Staff Contact: Dennis Lisk, [EMAIL REDACTED] or [PHONE REDACTED] Mr. Lisk noted that the Legacy at Town Square project had been approved by the DRB in September of 2012. It is currently in the midst of a building permit review. Since the approval of the project, the manufacturer of the CERACLAD panels, which were proposed to make up several facades of the building, have decided to exit the U.S. market. Thus, this material will not be available for this project. A lot of this type of material would be used on this project, and therefore, staff wanted to bring this project back to the DRB for review of the proposed substitute material. The applicant will be able to custom match the paint color that was previously approved, but there are some differences in the material. Staff is generally happy with the proposed substitute, and noted that the applicant did look at different alternatives to find something suitable for the project. Staff is recommending approval. Dan Nelson spoke on behalf of the applicant and showed the DRB where the CERACLAD panels would have been used on the project. A new fiber cement board will be used in place of it. The applicant pointed out that there were a number of different products he reviewed in making a selection. In the places where ribbed panels had been proposed before, the applicant would be using smooth panels. The west elevation, in the interior courtyard, had a few changes in particular that the applicant pointed out to the panel. The north elevation and east elevation would have some changes, as well. Where the building steps out, a metal panel is used. Where the building steps in, for the most part, is where fiber cement board would be used. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Mr. Meade: Asked about the joint details on the panels, and if they would be similar to the reveals displayed on the sample board the DRB was looking at. The applicant said yes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 2 Mr. Meade asked if the fasteners would be exposed. The applicant said exposed or concealed fasteners would cost about the same. He would like to conceal the fasteners, which would be very much like the CERACLAD product shown before. Mr. Krueger: Asked about the material, which would be a 24-inch by 8-foot panel. He asked if there would be a horizontal line with these panels. The applicant said there would indeed be a line between the panels. Mr. Krueger asked about the east elevations and the orange or gold colors proposed on the project earlier. The applicant said those areas were already a smooth material, and would not be changed in the new proposal. Mr. Nichols: Asked about the distance between the vertical reveal that would be seen, and if that would be eight feet. The applicant agreed with that number. The applicant noted that a corrugated metal panel was considered, but he said that would ruin the approach with the two materials considered. Mr. Meade asked about the panel joint lines and if there was a reference made to the floor lines. Mr. Meade noted that the lines did not hit the heads of windows and doors. The applicant said through- wall flashing would be happening at the floor line. Hearing no other questions from the DRB, Mr. Meade asked for a motion. IT WAS MOVED BY MR. PALMQUIST AND SECONDED BY MR. WAGGER TO APPROVE PROJECT L120351, LEGACY AT TOWN SQUARE, AS PRESENTED AT TONIGHT’S MEETING. Mr. Meade called for discussion, and Mr. Krueger commented that where the change is proposed from the ribbed to the flat panels, these elements are recessed from the street. He added that the applicant is staying with a similar color and material to what had been proposed beforehand. Mr. Krueger said he was looking forward to seeing this building, which he thought would be an awesome addition to the city. He was in favor of the changes proposed. MOTION APPROVED PRE-APPLICATION LAND-2013-01123, 169th Townhomes Description: 8-unit short plat Location: 8080 169th Ave. NE Applicant: Robert Pantley with Natural & Built Environments Staff Contact: Gary Lee, [PHONE REDACTED], [EMAIL REDACTED] Mr. Lee said that this was a pre-application for a project in the R30 zone just outside of Downtown and just east of the Redmond Elementary School. It is an eight-lot townhome project and the applicant, Mr. Pantley, had some new material for the DRB to consider with more details than previously distributed to the members of the DRB by staff. The applicant is asking the DRB if this project is moving in the right direction. Mr. Lee said this was a simple townhome project in the R30 zone. The site plan is doable, in Mr. Lee’s opinion. He wanted to make sure the architecture was right for the neighborhood. Mr. Meade asked if the plan distributed to the DRB was simply a reuse of a plan the DRB has seen before. Mr. Lee agreed that this plan was similar to the Retreat project, which is just a few blocks over on 167th. Mr. Pantley said those projects were similar, but there are some differences. Mr. Lee said many of Mr. Pantley’s projects have a similar concept with attached houses and a unit lot subdivision. Mr. Lee also noted that the property on 169th has some slope to it. Mr. Krueger asked if this project was a certain design district area. Mr. Lee said this project was not in the Downtown area, so design standards of Downtown would not need to be applied here. However, there are standards for general residential development that do need to be considered. Robin Murphy spoke on behalf of the applicant. He noted that there was some slope in the northeast corner of the site. The site is just north of Anderson Park and the elementary school. Looking north to south through the site, there is currently a single-family residence on the property. To the south, there is a ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 3 multi-family residence. This is a corner lot on 169th and 82nd Street. Across the street from the project is a grove of trees, which serves as a buffer of sorts along the street. Directly to the south is a larger two-story apartment complex. To the north, there is a new development planned. There are brand-new sidewalks and gutters near the project. The applicant has considered three different options for the townhomes proposed. Observing all the setbacks, the first alternative has four units in front and five in back and has a loading driveway at the south end of the complex. The second alternative would put a 24-foot wide loading driveway in the center, allowing for access to the north and south. The third alternative would allow for access to the site from 82nd Street. The applicant has selected option two. Option three had issues with grading, especially with the steep grade in the northeast corner of the site. The units facing 169th would be elevated far higher than the street level in this option. The applicant is trying to conceal some of the structure in the hillside, and the second alternative achieves that goal. This alternative also allows for pedestrian street access off of 82nd, coming in almost at the second floor level, where the parking access, or alley in the center of the site, is accessed at the lower level. The site plan calls for eight units, not nine. The applicant said with nine units, the plans would be too compact. There will be some terracing in the northeast corner of the site, with an option for rockery if possible. Some concrete retaining walls would be used, potentially, as well. There would be four units, lots one through four, coming off of 82nd Street. That would be the “front yard” of the site, even though, from a zoning standpoint, the car access has been provided off of 169th. The units on the south side, lots five through eight, would have private yards facing south and both pedestrian and vehicular access off the alley. The only exception to that would be lot five, facing 169th. Access to that site would come off of 169th as well. The idea is to face the buildings towards the streets. The roof plans involve a simple gable with dormers to differentiate each unit. The color scheme differentiates them as well. The applicant had a Technical Committee meeting recently, and one issue brought up by the City was that, with direct connection to 82nd, clear pedestrian access would have to be provided. The applicant appreciated that concern, and has worked to differentiate the building so it is not just a massive gable. The unit plans are fairly simple. The internal units are the same. The two units on the end are mirrored so that they can have access from the ends rather than the middle. The applicant has stepped both buildings into the slope. The lowest level would have only a six-inch rise, but at the second level, the rise would be an entire foot for every unit. By the time the design gets to the eastern unit, it is three feet higher than the western unit. That allows the applicant to break up the roof gable so it is not just one massive roof form, allowing the building to feel more like a townhouse with some individuality. The colors and materials involve some cedar shingles on the bay projections. Hardy plank siding would be used, with a six-inch exposure, on the rest of the building. The siding would be a beige backdrop to the color on the bay projection. The applicant is considering using some Craftsman details, including possibly some knee brackets, cornice lines, and oversized fascia that would be 2 x 10 rather than 1 x 4, with possibly a 2 x 4 element attached to it. The entry doors would be panel doors with glass lights at the top. The applicant has made spent most of his energy working on the 82nd Street elevation. The 169th elevation is just a side yard, but the applicant has decided to make some improvements in this area as well. The applicant has dressed up the entries into the two units seen off of 169th so that it feels like a building frontage rather than a side. The building is three stories tall with a steep roof that has an 8/12 pitch and 10/12 dormers. There is a massive amount of surface on the roof, so the applicant is trying to break it down. The unit at lot one, for example, has a projection facing north with cedar shingle. The applicant is considering doing a similar bay projecting to the west, thus signifying entry with a covered area to walk into. Lot five is different because there is an internal stairway in that unit. The applicant had considered having the entrance to this unit coming off the alley next to the garage door, which felt unnecessary and secondary. The applicant has changed the entry and has turned it 90 degrees so that it faces 169th. A covered entry will be put in place with a shed roof to make that area feel more welcoming and create a clear sense of entry. All the other units are internal to the site and could be accessed from the alley. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 4 Mr. Pantley stated that one of the challenges for this project was how to fit in with the neighborhood. There are 1950’s and 1960’s-era apartments surrounding the project, and a school across the street. The applicant said the decision had to be made between blending into the neighborhood versus creating something that would make an impact on the neighborhood, hopefully. Mr. Pantley said the neighborhood currently was “droopy.” The steep roofs and colors, he said, would help add some happiness to the area and could redevelop the attitude of the neighborhood. The applicant said there is a challenge with the slope on the site. The goal is to create entries from the street. Technically, that is not required for this area per the zoning, but the idea is to reflect the rest of the Downtown area. That is why there are front porch elements off of 82nd, which is different than anything else in the neighborhood. The 169th side has been strengthened with more of a sense of entry and performance of the buildings. Mr. Pantley asked the DRB for input on the color and other design ideas, such as bringing entries off of 82nd, steep roofs, and other answers to the challenges of this relatively small site. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Mr. Meade: Asked about the entry door on the end unit is isolated from the bump-out expression in that location. He asked why the door was not in the red bump-out bay section. The applicant said there were setback issues on the front. Mr. Meade asked why, then, the entry appeared to be above the roof. The applicant responded that the bump-out comes out three feet at level two, which is the entry. This helps break up the vertical wall on this elevation, which is fairly tall. The door could be in the bay Mr. Meade had specified, but the applicant said the same material and color should be used. Mr. Meade said that could work, such that it looks like it is part of the same element. The applicant had considered cutting a hole the bay to make a bracket of sorts around the door and having a column bridging the opening with a door set into it. The dimensional issues did not work with this idea due to the three-foot restriction. He believed he could achieve Mr. Meade’s suggestion with materials and color. Mr. Meade asked about the staircases and if a midpoint landing was possible. He asked what the applicant was trying to accomplish at grade level. Mr. Meade said a front yard feel could be offered if a landing was offered on the stairway. The applicant said that was a good idea, and added that the corner unit was the most complex one on the site due to the slope area. He is considering building some rockery into the area by the corner to create a small stairway element. The applicant wants to bring the project closer to street level. Mr. Krueger: Suggested doing a similar treatment to the left and right buildings. Mr. Krueger liked the idea of offering entry off of 169th and giving some life to the west elevation. He said the entry to the northwest townhome seemed to be forced. He suggested a deck in this area or some outdoor space in the corner rather than creating a difficult transition from a flat area to the sloped area. He said a gabled entry could be used in this corner versus the shed roof that has been proposed on the right-hand side. The right-hand side could be embellished, as well. Mr. Pantley liked that idea, as did Mr. Meade and Mr. Waggoner. Mr. Waggoner: Said the idea of having entries come off the street is great. Mr. Waggoner liked the steep roofs, which lend themselves to the Craftsman details. He also liked the color identity for each unit, which he believed would wake up the neighborhood a little bit. He said that improving these homes could be like other home improvement projects, which can be contagious in a neighborhood. Mr. Meade: Said the color palette was going in the right direction, and he liked the drama. He suggested pushing the body color darker and making it more sophisticated, perhaps even using a different expression for the window trim color and the body versus the bays. The window trims could be darker along with that darker body color. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 5 Mr. Meade said the applicant should play with the color a bit and have fun with the expression. He said the project has a residential feel, but he believed the applicant’s plan to make the site more playful was on target. He suggested finding a color for the concrete base of the building and the garage doors, too. He would like to see a connection of color between the front and back of the units. Mr. Nichols: Asked about the window well elements on units one through four. Mr. Nichols said there was a hole of sorts created on window four and asked if the intent was to create some outdoor space for the resident of that unit. The applicant agreed he was indeed trying to create that outdoor space, which could mean quite a bit of detailing. The idea of making the 82nd side of the site the front yard, or living yard, was the concept carrying this project. He had some concern over what side of the project would come across as the front yard for the residents. Mr. Nichols said creating a yard feel on units three and four would be very challenging. He agreed with the comments made before him about the doors on the first and fifth units. He said the green screen proposed could be continued all the way across the project and should not stop halfway. Mr. Nichols liked the roof lines and the overall modulation of the building exteriors. He said the project had a lot of promise. Mr. Meade asked about the green screen, and how it appeared to be growing under cantilevers. Mr. Pantley said the green screen would take off and get light. Evergreen clematis and Chinese wisteria could be two options here, which the applicant said were suggested by Mr. Lee. The applicant said the mix of these two plants could get the green screen growing very quickly. The applicant asked the DRB to look at an option he is considering on 169th to create an edibles front yard that would tie together with the green screen. Mr. Meade said it was cool. Mr. Waggoner said it was awesome. Mr. Nichols said it was different. Mr. Meade asked if some espalier fruit trees had been considered in this area. The applicant said he was open to that idea, and wanted to involve edibles where possible. Mr. Meade suggested some columnar apple trees, which can work well in smaller beds. Ms. Crowder said the local Master Gardener could provide some other ideas. Mr. Krueger: Asked about the south building and the way the roof changes in this area. Mr. Krueger said the roof appears to be gaining elevation in the garage level. He asked if the extra volume gained here could be put on the top floor rather than in the garage area, which is not a living space. The applicant said that volume was added to make up some of the difference between the units and their driveways. The applicant said putting in additional volume into the living space could be possible. The applicant said the northern building has a higher space at the lower level due to the sloping on the site. The southern building, however, does not have that issue. Here, the main floor could stay at the same elevation all the way across, and the main living space could be stepped up to add more volume. That could happen in the northern building, too, but would create problems for the last unit. The applicant added that height limits created some issues on the site. Mr. Krueger said the southern building did not need to step up in the way it was proposed. The applicant said that option could happen. Ms. Crowder: Said the forms are nice and she likes the colors. She said the issue of the stairs leading up to the door is not quite resolved, as discussed earlier. She was glad to hear that issue would be addressed. Mr. Palmquist: Said this project was going in the right direction. Mr. Palmquist asked the applicant to focus on the west elevation a little more. He noted that it was hard with townhomes to get modulation on a three- story wall. He suggested the tan parts on the west elevation could become a hip roof, which would change the language of the design. Mr. Palmquist said, instead of the knee braces, the applicant could drag a short piece of roof over, which the design does on its lower level. That could create modulation without sacrificing any ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 6 program space. He said this west elevation could be an important elevation, in that many people will approach the building from this direction. Mr. Palmquist asked why, on the ground floor, why the flex room on the units to the west, units one and five, could not open to the west and into the yard area. The applicant said that could happen. Mr. Palmquist said Mr. Krueger made a good point about the roofs, and said the southern building did not have to copy the northern building. Mr. Palmquist supported Mr. Meade’s ideas to change up the garage colors, and perhaps changing the trim elements on the garages to make them different. Overall, Mr. Palmquist said this was a good concept and said the applicant did a lot with their first pre- application. He was looking forward to seeing this project again. Mr. Meade said the gables and fascias could have an improved quality, appeal, and care. He suggested stacking up more shadow line trim in those areas or a some sort of richer design element to set this project apart a bit more. He said this could improve the quality of the project without having a big impact on the budget. He asked the applicant to have fun with those elements. Mr. Meade said this project was off to a great start and asked if this project could come back for an approval at the next meeting. Mr. Lee said that was possible. The applicant and DRB thanked each other for their time. PRE-APPLICATION LAND-2013-00171, Anjuman-E-Burhani Community Center Description: Multi-purpose facility to include prayer areas, classrooms and kitchen facility Location: 15252 51st Street Applicant: Ali Habib Staff Contact: Thara Johnson, [PHONE REDACTED], [EMAIL REDACTED] Mr. Fischer presented to the DRB on behalf of Ms. Johnson. This project is on a lot just off of NE 51st where that road meets up with SR 520. This is a unique site tucked in between a residential area, SR 520, and the onramp to SR 520. There are a number of challenges in accessing the site which have been worked out with the State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). The building would be 22,467 gross square feet, with a basement and a main floor at level, plus an upper level. The project would have 42 spaces for parking and has a landscape plan as well. The site currently has a single family home and outbuilding on it, which are both run down. The staff report speaks to the zoning requirements. One of the unique things about religious facilities is that they have an expanded setback. A single family home could be built at 35 feet high in a residential zone, but the height requirements for religious facilities are different. The height limit starts out lower, and for every five feet the design steps into the setback, the structure can go up another foot, up to a maximum of 50 feet, which would include a steeple or bell tower. Staff believes the proposal is in compliance with the height requirements. This is the first presentation of the project and staff is interested in the DRB’s comments about the design elements, including the site plan and layout. Staff would also like DRB’s input on the height requirements and how that interacts with the buffering in relation to adjoining neighbors. Sam Cameron, a project manager from Rolluda Architects, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He introduced his team and some members of the Anjuman-E-Burhani Community. Ali Amir also spoke on behalf of the applicant to the DRB members, and told them his community was a relatively small sect of the Shiite Muslim faith. Across the world, this sect is just a million souls strong, as the applicant put it. The majority of this community lives in South Asia, but there are members all over the world. This sect has a strong sense of community, but also has a strong sense of belonging in terms of claiming Redmond as a home. The community in the Pacific Northwest is about 70 families strong, and about 90% of this group are professionals, many of whom work at Microsoft. Mr. Cameron spoke to the DRB about the site, which the community acquired in 2010. It is about 1.12 acres and about 48,000 square feet. It involves two parcels that front SE 51st Street with SR 520 to the west and a residential community to the north and east. The site is contiguous to three sites and two property owners. The two properties to the north are owned by the same person. The property to the east is a single property owner. The zoning is R5 in this area, indicating single family urban residential. There are no overlays in this area. The residential properties to the north and east have single family homes built around 1960 that included owned and rented homes. The site had been used as a dumping site for ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 7 cars, trucks, and airplane parts for many years. The community came in after purchasing this site and did a major cleanup. One residential structure is on the site, but this will be demolished. The proposal calls for the new building to be placed back toward the rear of the property with access off of 51st Avenue. There is only one access to this property, and there is an access widening process going on right now with the City, as the current access is only residential width. A 20-foot access would be placed on the site, allowing for users and emergency vehicles to get in and out easily. Two new fire hydrants would be added to the site at the request of the fire department. A pedestrian access has been proposed from the sidewalk of the main street to the building’s main entry. Forty-two parking stalls have been providing on grade. There are some tandem parking stalls on the west portion of the site. The proposal calls for three levels. The lowest level is a basement with mechanical and storage space. The second level is the main level, which contains the mosque, main prayer areas, and meeting areas. The third level consists of offices, classrooms, and a residence for the imam. Regarding setbacks, there is a 20-foot setback on the north portion of the property. There is a 20-foot setback from the west side of the property. From the east side, there is a 31-foot setback from the property line. All of the landscaping on the east and west sides has a five-foot setback. There are some existing trees that straddle the property line. The driveway has been curbed out in an attempt to save those trees. Don Stone spoke to the DRB about the design concepts for the project on behalf of the applicant. He said this site presented an interesting challenge in how to get a religious facility in an R5 zone with much of the religious community’s influence centered in Africa. The facility is able to be permitted in this zone because there are fewer than 250 individuals in the religious community. The applicant talked about the height limitations, and pointed out that in the north-south direction, the maximum of 50 feet could be achieved. From east to west, that 50 feet height allotment would not be allowed because of setback constraints. The applicant showed the DRB that the tallest elements of the building could not be located in the middle due to the setbacks, building access, and the siting. The symbolic aspect of this building indicates that the first minaret should be the most important, and a taller height is not an option. This design has been certified by the heads of the religious community in Mumbai, India. There are two design review boards, the applicant says, in terms of dealing with the Redmond DRB and the leaders of the religious community. The secondary minaret is higher than the primary minaret. The primary minaret, the first one that a person would encounter on the way into the building, is smaller, but has different detail and scale to it. The applicant pointed out that men are separated from women on the different floors of the building, and there are separate entries for men and women. There is a balcony area on the second floor that is used for worship, mainly for women. The upper level has an open area in the center that looks down into the men’s portion of the mosque. The angle is set in such a way that the worshippers point towards Mecca, which has created a bit of an offset on the site. The common space has been reoriented in a north-south direction, in an attempt to make a better link between the common space building and the mosque building. The qibla elevation, as the applicant described it, shows the orientation towards Mecca. The east elevation shows the different details on the minarets. The imam’s office is on the eastern side, as well. The applicant showed many of the details inside the mosque, including the windows, Spanish tiles, and the mihrab, the semicircular niche in one of the walls that indicates the direction of Mecca. On the northwest corner, the two facilities are joined on the interior and exterior. The materials involve some color requirements from the religious sect, which say simple sand or white colors should be used for the exterior. Some concrete would line the base of the buildings. Wood trim has been proposed around the windows. The crenellations around the outside are attached in some areas, but detached in others. This is done to give a certain amount of dominance to the primary minaret, even though it is shorter than some of the others. The upper right hand corner of the site shows that the parking has been eliminated from the entry to the mosque so that there is a more ceremonial entry on the men’s side. The women’s entry is more suitable for groups, meaning women and children. There is a strong distinction between the male and female entrances. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 8 Mike Perfetti, landscape architect, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He noted that on the site, there is an open, unmaintained grass area. There is a row of Engelmann spruce trees that were planted adjacent to the east property line, where the driveway is currently running. Many of these trees are in poor condition, but some are okay. A big cottonwood tree is in the area where the mosque would go. The intent is to have much better landscaping than what is there currently. The concept is to create some good outdoor “rooms” for the users, looking both at the congregation and the community as well as the imam and the imam’s guests. Thus, the applicant has borrowed some imagery from the Koran, including the Four Gardens of Paradise. Four gardens have been created for the different user groups. One garden is intended for the larger community, and has been dubbed the water garden, as water is a major element. Water is also an important part of the Muslim culture and the mosque architecture. The second garden is a shaded courtyard area. There will be a small, modest water feature here, providing a more contemplative space used for the imam and his guests. Third is the hedge garden, which more of a formalized or geometric space in the northeast corner. That is intended for the imam and his guests and perhaps some children. The last garden is the roof garden, which would be the green roof on the project. The applicant is hoping to come up with an interesting pattern of sedum and other materials. The landscape design deals with the buffering of the neighbors to the east. The spruce will be removed and other trees will be planted, using a combination of native and other plants. To the west, there is quite a bit of borrowed green space along the WSDOT right of way, including trees and blackberries. This view will be less prominent. From the front, there will be a five-foot high landscape buffer. The applicant hopes to screen the building from adjacent neighbors yet also bring out the building from the street via the minarets and other parts of the building. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Mr. Meade: Asked if the driveway would be gated. The applicant said it would be open. Mr. Meade asked about what plants might be used with the native and non-native plantings proposed to replace the spruces that would be removed. The applicant said he would meet the Code’s minimum requirements, but would be looking for a fair amount of conifers. He proposed using 10-12 foot tall Douglas fir, hemlock, and cedar trees. The applicant said the hedge he mentioned for the front of the building would most likely be a non- native material. Native deciduous and evergreen ground covers would be considered in this area as well as the north side of the site. The north would need some shade tolerant plants. Mr. Sutton: Asked about the grading on the site and if everything sloped up to the north. The applicant said the site actually sloped down to the north. The applicant said the elevation was about 336 feet at the entry. The main floor is at 324, and the rear of the property is about 316. Thus, there is a drop of about 20 feet from the front to rear of the property. Mr. Sutton asked if there were any fencing planned around the perimeter. The applicant said there would be some fences. There are fences along the property lines, which the applicant said he would replace on at least three sides. There are mature trees on the site, which the landscape plan would complement. The Microsoft campus is very near this site. The site would be below the Microsoft campus. The properties to the north will have a good buffer between them and the new buildings. The new construction would also collect stormwater that currently gathers on the properties to the north. Mr. Meade: Asked about the finished floor elevation to the north. He noted that the neighboring properties are eight feet below the mosque building. However, the applicant noted that the new buildings would be a little lower than the current house on the site. The applicant has depressed the south part of the property such that it is almost level going into the mosque. There is a rampart of sorts coming from the entry and going down, following the grade of the site. Once the rampart goes around in front of the mosque, it hits a level and comes around to the parking level, which has just a different elevation than the mosque. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 9 The applicant is trying to replicate some of the characteristics of traditional mosques, in which a person would walk up, at least to the building. Mr. Meade noted that the current site drops down rapidly from 51st. He asked if the cars on the site would be concealed from the street through the grade and the buffering. The applicant said that would be the case, for the most part. The parking lot would be more than four feet below the entry drive, thus creating about a 10% from 51st to the parking lot. Mr. Waggoner: Asked about what appeared to be a loop parking connection back into the entry drive. The applicant said that this was actually a dead end parking lot, in that a retaining wall was needed near the entry. Mr. Meade: Mr. Meade said he would like to see some case study images of mosques from the applicant at the next meeting on this project so the DRB can appreciate what is inspiring and shaping this project, including textures and details. That way, the DRB can give some more quality feedback. The applicant noted that the crenellation detail dates back to the early days of Persia. He said he would bring more case studies to the next DRB meeting. The imam would have an apartment on the site, and thus the site would always be occupied. Mr. Meade said this was an exciting project because this site has been a dumping ground for many years. Mr. Waggoner: Said he appreciated how far long the design had been developed before it was brought to the DRB. He said the articulation and detail provided will provide some good scale and help it fit into the neighborhood. Mr. Waggoner liked the large notch on the north side between the two wings of the project. He noted that the two wings have different character with different window styles. He asked if there was an opportunity on the south side to change the “knuckle” element to create a better break between the two wings. The applicant said he would look into that. Mr. Waggoner not sure what could be done, but asked if there could be some flexibility in this spot to create some separation and accentuate the two sides a bit more. Overall, Mr. Waggoner thought this was a great first pass at the design of the building and appreciated how much work had gone into the proposal. Mr. Krueger: Asked about the crenellation detail and what that would look like. Mr. Krueger said he looked forward to seeing this detail and how it would change by the next meeting. He appreciated the constraints that the applicant was working under, including orienting the site toward Mecca and dealing with neighbors. He was also happy to hear that the applicant has met with and talked with the neighbors near this site. The applicant said he recently had an open house on the site and received good feedback from the neighbors. Mr. Krueger asked about the roof deck and how this would impact houses to the north of the site in terms of privacy issues. The applicant said two houses to the north side of the project have mature trees in place that should provide some screening. He added that the part of the site that borders Microsoft will have a good amount of buffering. Mr. Krueger would like to see the relationship of the existing houses neighboring the site and the roof deck element at the next meeting. The applicant said that was a good idea and he would provide a sight line analysis at the next meeting. Mr. Krueger asked about stormwater drainage. The applicant said the site collects all of it and drains it into a detention system. From there, the applicant is negotiating with a neighboring property owner for an easement across the property to a WSDOT ditch that would take the water further south. The applicant said another alternative would involve pumping the water up the site to access the WSDOT ditch in another area. The preferred design would clearly be the easement noted above. Mr. Krueger asked about the paving surface for the parking area. The applicant said the surface would be a mix of materials. He is considering using a ribbon drive in the back of the site for ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 10 emergency access, with a grass strip down the middle. The applicant said that would clue people in that this is not the main parking area. The applicant said the materials would change from the parking area to the mosque to reflect a pilgrimage of sorts to the worship area. Right now, that detail has not been provided, as the applicant wants the DRB’s guidance before talking with religious leaders in Africa about how this site would look. The applicant noted that this would be a long term project, and that many generations of this religious sect would use this facility in future years, and potentially make changes, as needed. Mr. Krueger said he was hoping to hear that and thanked the applicant for his work on this project. Mr. Meade: Asked about trash and recycling. The applicant said that would be handled in the rear of the kitchen. The waste receptacles would be out of sight. The applicant said that cars could drive in the front, back in, and then be able to drive out again fairly easily. Mr. Meade said this project was well on track with that thinking about the trash and recycling. Mr. Meade asked about the roof garden and how many people would use it at one time. The applicant said gatherings would happen there very infrequently, and would definitely have less than fifty people as there is only one means of egress from the roof area. The applicant said, because of the open space requirements, the green roof had to be provided. Mr. Meade suggested the applicant look at the Nintendo site in Redmond for green roof ideas. The applicant added that most community events would happen in the evenings, around sunset, for prayer gatherings. Often, it would be dark, which would mean the roof deck would most likely not be used all that much. Ms. Crowder: Said this was an interesting, unusual project that she was looking forward to seeing make progress. She was concerned about the exterior materials, especially the EIFS, or exterior insulation system considered. She said that was a disastrous material when no overhangs as provided. She asked if another material might be considered. The applicant said tile would be okay. The basic idea is that the building should look monolithic. Basically, mosques look like a stone or stucco box with decorations applied to them, such as friezes or Arabic scrolls, for example. The applicant said the blank walls could have decorations added to them by the next generation of people attending this mosque. The mosques do not do remodeling, the applicant said, unless they are burned or damaged. When a mosque is built, it becomes a canvas of sorts for more details to be added, sometimes thirty to forty years later. It is important to allow people to touch this building, according to this sect’s beliefs. Ms. Crowder was concerned about this material specifically because it was hard to protect it from rain. The applicant said there would be a drainage mat to keep water away from the building. Mr. Fischer said that element should be brought back to the DRB to see how the water drainage is to be dealt with. Mr. Meade: Asked about the wall coverings. The applicant said he did not think he would be using a stucco material. Some form of an EIFS system would be employed. The applicant said a drainage mat could be behind the entire system. Mr. Meade said EIFS has not been popular in the Northwest due to weather concerns. He noted that stucco can drain and breathe, but EIFS is not always able to do that. The applicant said the drainage mat is able to drain water away from the building. The applicant said he would look into the drainage issue for the next meeting. Mr. Meade asked about the glazing system on the site. The applicant noted that the window would be in wood frames. The windows are less for looking out, but are often covered with sandblasting or decorative forms. That takes up a good part of the glazing. Mr. Nichols: Agreed with his fellow Board members and their comments. He said a sight line study would be very important on the north and east sides, in connection with the residential units there. He wants to know what people see when they look up at the project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes July 18, 2013 Page 11 On the exterior, he has a concern about EIFS material, not just from water concerns but also just from a durability standpoint. He said cement plaster or stucco would be more durable. Mr. Nichols said there were very few parking stalls provided. He wanted to make sure there was adequate parking on the site. He did not know were overflow parking would go, and did not want to see too much parking in the surrounding neighborhood. He was looking forward to seeing the next iteration of the project. Mr. Sutton noted that the mosque portion of the building was much more detailed that the community room section. The applicant said this building had to be designed several times due to different height issues. The applicant said the heights of the minarets were fairly well set. The applicant made a compromise of sorts to create a dome on top of the minaret at the expense of more building height. The applicant agreed that where the two portions of the building come together, there is definitely a challenge. He said the work was nowhere near done. Mr. Sutton said he looked forward to the next meeting on this project. Mr. Palmquist: Echoed Mr. Meade’s concern that the applicant should provide some case studies to the DRB to help consider other design options. Mr. Meade said the DRB has enjoyed dealing with different faith-based buildings over the last several years and how the religion impacts their design. He wanted the DRB to appreciate what the applicant is trying to express. Mr. Meade noted that this project could be recognized with a design award, from early indications, and he wanted the DRB to push the applicant towards a premier design. He said this was a great opportunity to turn an eyesore of a location into a terrific project. Mr. Meade polled the Board and said this project was ready for approval at the next meeting. He asked the applicant to provide more landscaping details, information about the paving, sight line studies, and case studies. Mr. Krueger said it might take more than one meeting to approve this project, but he felt it was ready to move ahead. The DRB thanked the applicant team members for their time. ADJOURNMENT IT WAS MOVED BY MR. NICHOLS AND SECONDED BY MR. SUTTON TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:35 P.M. MOTION APPROVED August 22, 2013 MINUTES APPROVED ON RECORDING SECRETARY ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF REDMOND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD August 22, 2013 NOTE: These minutes are not a full transcription of the meeting. Tapes are available for public review in the Redmond Planning Department. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Joe Palmquist, Craig Krueger, Kevin Sutton, Scott Waggoner, Arielle Crowder EXCUSED ABSENCE: David Scott Meade, Mike Nichols STAFF PRESENT: Steven Fischer, Principal Planner; Dennis Lisk, Associate Planner; Thara Johnson, Associate Planner RECORDING SECRETARY: Susan Trapp with Lady of Letters, Inc. The Design Review Board is appointed by the City Council to make decisions on design issues regarding site planning, building elevations, landscaping, lighting and signage. Decisions are based on the design criteria set forth in the Redmond Development Guide. CALL TO ORDER The Design Review Board meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Joe Palmquist at 7:30 p.m. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES IT WAS MOVED BY MR. KRUEGER AND SECONDED BY MR. SUTTON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 18, 2013 MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. MOTION APPROVED Mr. Fischer noted that there would be a small switch in the agenda, and the Overlake Village project would be first and the mosque project would be third. PRE-APPLICATION LAND-2013-001227/228, Avalon Bay Overlake Village Blocks 4 & 7 Description: One 6-story mixed-use building, with retail units, five levels of residential and three levels of parking Location: 2700 – 152nd Ave NE Architect: David Kelley with Ankrom Moisan Architects Applicant: Kyran Hynes with Avalon Bay Communities Staff Contact: Dennis Lisk, [PHONE REDACTED], [EMAIL REDACTED] Mr. Lisk noted that this was a pre-application meeting for the first couple of projects that will start up redevelopment of the former Group Health property in Overlake Village. The applicant will have two presentations. One will be from Capstone Partners, the master developer of the site. Capstone will present an update on the Master Plan approved in December of 2011 by the City Council. There have been some modifications to the Master Plan. Avalon Bay will make the next presentation about the first two buildings proposed, which are two six-story, mixed-use residential buildings of about 500 units and some ground floor residential uses along 152nd Avenue. The buildings would be in the southwest corner of the Master Plan site. Staff has been reviewing these buildings for the last few weeks. It is fairly early in the design process, but staff has raised a few issues, mainly about how the buildings would relate to each other. They would be built at about the same time and are similar in size and the number of units. Staff would like to see some variety while also having buildings that play off of each other. Overlake Village design standards call for high quality building materials, as well. Staff wants to make sure that is a concern for these projects. Mike Hubbard from Capstone Partners spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said that this Master Plan and development agreement were adopted in December of 2011. The current proposal represents three years’ worth of work, of which the DRB has been a part of, in some cases. That work provided a context ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 2 for how this project might go together. The idea was to build in some flexibility for how the building would be executed. The applicant bought this site in March of 2013 with a partner out of Texas. Mr. Hubbard will explain the overall project and the architects from Avalon Bay will explain the pieces and parts. From a context standpoint, the Master Plan provided for 1.2 million square feet of commercial space, 1,400 residential units and a 180-room hotel. This much square footage of commercial space has not been done in Redmond before, Mr. Hubbard said. The intention was to make the Master Plan very fluid, in that the applicant was not sure where certain units would go. The plan contemplated moving buildings around on the site. There is 70 feet of fall from 152nd to 156th, which is nearly six and a half floors and could be very tricky. There is a tree mitigation plan that is integrated into the Master Plan, as well. In terms of executing the full project, the applicant needs to use the Sears detention vault that is underway. However, the vault is not needed for what Avalon Bay is intending to build in the spring. Capstone is engaging in Phase 1 of the project, meaning the building of roads and utilities through the site. Capstone would also build a portion of 153rd, which would require some demolition. Improvements would be made along 152nd and 156th. The intent is to do all the work now that is needed to build out all the sites. Each site will need its own individual improvements per its individual site needs, but there is enough work right now to get the entire project going. The hospital and medical office building are gone, and the applicant will start grading the roads soon. After that road work, Capstone will start the permit process, with a plan to put an office on the corner of the site on what is known as Lot 3. The plan is to permit the Lot 3 piece, and then move to another piece of the site. Much of the land grade change happens in the Lot 3 area, which will be very tricky. To build the office properly, the applicant said a park needed to be built with it. Two major changes have been made to the Master Plan since it was adopted. There have been some changes in the location of some buildings. The hotel on Lot 1 was originally on Lot 3. What was on Lot 1 is now in the upper right corner, with an extension of office toward 156th. No square footage has changed, however. The second major change is that it was originally thought that the project would pay fees to the City, and the City would build a park at some point. The applicant would like to build the park now, right when project is executed. The work to build some of the buildings on the site would affect half to two- thirds of the proposed park. The applicant said the park wants to get built when the buildings are built. The first phase of the design would involve an office on the corner of the site. The second phase would be two office buildings in the middle, and the park would go along with that. Thus, the applicant would deliver the park, not the City. Part of that process will involve the Parks Commission and the DRB working together. The applicant also talked about a set of stairs at 152nd transitioning into the project. Those stairs would potentially be the first entry point to the park. Again, all this design would be vetted with the Parks Commission. Much of the project, in the future, will depend on what the market can bear. Brian Fritz, Vice President of Development for Avalon Bay, next presented on behalf of the applicant. He said that his company is a publicly traded real estate investment trust, a national company with about 80,000 apartment homes under its ownership. In the Northwest, Avalon Bay has 4,000 units, with 1,500 of those in Redmond, spread over five different communities. He said his company had been in Redmond a long time and would continue to be. Avalon Bay is primarily an owner and developer of mixed-use and multi-family residential real estate projects, and is a long-time holder of these assets. Avalon has a vested interest in how these buildings will look and how they will perform for years to come. Mr. Fritz noted that Avalon had teamed up with Ankrom Moisan, which is a local architect that Avalon has teamed up with before. Avalon’s landscape architect is at the meeting as well. Mr. Fritz said the design was in its early stages, so colors and materials have not been decided. David Heater with Ankrom Moisan Architects next presented on behalf of the applicant. He noted that this was the first time Ankrom Moisan had presented to the DRB. His goal was to get some input from the DRB about the direction of the massing on the site. Avalon Bay believes 500 apartment units could go into Blocks 4 and 7, which would represent a third of the units of the entire Master Plan. For parking, that would work out to one parking stall per bedroom on the site. Blocks 4 and 7 are designated for residential and mixed use. There is a need for some access easements that would run into or through those sites for firefighters, required pedestrian-oriented uses, and possible retail storefronts. The Master Plan is geared around the central park area, so in looking at Blocks 4 and 7, the massing and the details should be ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 3 considered in light of strengthening the park amenity. For the park to be successful, the applicant said it would need a lot of eyes on it and should be a park that could be used safely 24 hours a day. The context for the first two buildings on the site really is around the edges of the site. Due to the steep slope, the view of the top of Bellevue and Seattle will provide something exciting for the residents of these buildings. The applicant would like to have the buildings come right up to the property line and meet the sidewalk to recreate the character of a major street, 152nd. The retail on 152nd would be pulled away from the street, and the parking is screened, as dictated by the development code. A very urban project, the affordable housing near the transit station, is very close to this new development and uses a similar design that goes very close to the lot line. With regard to the grade drop on the site, the park itself has a drop of almost 40 feet. The applicant said the blocks on the site are close to 300 feet in both directions, which allows for internal courtyards with a lot of light and internal activity. The courtyards would be 80 to 100-foot wide, which would be wider than the building walls around them. The edge conditions of the block show that the applicant is thinking about the modulation requirements needed for the Overlake District. Essentially, there are three basic conditions while going around the edges of the blocks. With the housing along 152nd, there are two levels of residential units above the pedestrian level. Below that, canopies and street trees would be incorporated, using a lot of transparency. This area, along both sides of 152nd, would have the most pedestrian activity. The buildings pull back from the lot line or the back of the sidewalk, giving six to ten feet of buffer space for vegetation or outdoor space for the unit. The building up above can come out a bit to create some privacy and a sense of outdoor space. Residents and pedestrians would be comfortable in this area. The floor lines would work out with the grade such that residents would be just above grade, from a couple feet to about six feet, which would allow for the addition of a stoop and an outdoor connection from the sidewalk into the residential units. There are overlaying code requirements, including the Zoning Code requirements for height and the Building Code. The buildings would be built out of wood, so five stories of wood could be built over concrete. However, there are restrictions to how high that construction can go and where the measurements are taken. Because of the slope on both blocks, the concrete podium is going to drop down an entire level. That could create a transition in some of the courtyard elements, which could add some interest. But that step in podium means the top of each of the blocks would have an additional story. The applicant showed the DRB how the inner portion of the blocks would help achieve the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements on the site. A large open space could be provided, or many smaller spaces could be provided. The applicant is looking at a different approach for each block, and has three options to consider. One option shows the future contour of the site and slopes from one corner to the next, not sloping evenly. Thus, an uphill and downhill building is created, with some interlocking hills and some interesting massing element at the end, such as a turn house. If the large open space option were used, that could be oriented to the south, toward 27th, to maximize sun exposure. The applicant is considering, on this block, to rotate the open space and have it open up to the park to maximize the eyes on the park and the people feeling like they were part of the park. That sense of connection would come across 153rd and into the courtyard. The applicant believed this would be a very exciting massing move. The applicant showed how a car might enter the lot off of 28th, at the north end of the lot. There are three levels for parking, and pedestrian-oriented uses on 152nd. At the courtyard, there is a double-loaded corridor in a C-shape and amenity spaces in the lobby. Because the upper level is close to the grand opening, the upper stories would be in two pieces, creating two towers at the end of the block which would frame the opening. For Block 7, the applicant has opened the views to the west, allowing residents to look out to the city with some grand urban steps. The applicant said there was also an effort to provide, possibly, a pedestrian connection between the buildings on the site. Looking at the blocks, the applicant has concentrated on the outdoor gathering spaces to create a lush setting. The spaces have rainwater treatment areas and outdoor plazas with lighting. The applicant said the exterior details will incorporate diversity in the hope that the two buildings in question will have their own distinct character. The pedestrian and residential connections could involve some covered porch ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 4 area and stoops, and the applicant showed some examples of these connections from the Seattle area. Mr. Heater said Avalon started doing urban housing projects in the early 1990’s in Portland, and the company has learned to do a lot with smaller spaces. Mr. Palmquist asked for comments from the audience. Seeing none, he asked for comments from the Board. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Ms. Crowder: Said this was a good start. Ms. Crowder said the open plazas in the park are providing an interesting opportunity. A lot of nice modern aesthetic would help revitalize this area. She would be interested to see the next phase. Mr. Krueger: Said this was a great start, and he liked the charts shown by the applicant. Mr. Krueger said he appreciated focusing on the park element, and he liked the attention paid to the 152nd exteriors. He would be very interested in that façade, because the transition in that streetscape will be very interesting. He added that the trees on the site are a sensitive issue as well, so he would really like the applicant to pay special attention to the elevation along 152nd. He said the park is important, but so is 152nd, because that is where a lot of residents will be. Mr. Krueger said the way the applicant is dealing with the grade and the step in the podium will be very interesting. He asked if there was an affordable housing requirement for this project, as there is Downtown. Mr. Lisk responded that there was a basic requirement that 10% of the units should be at the median income level. However, there is a provision in the development agreement which allows for the first 25 units to be at market rate prices. In the end, the total number of affordable units will be met through all the buildings across the site. Mr. Krueger asked if there were incentives for the use of Transfer Development Rights in this project, or if there were simply some general height requirements laid out in the Master Plan. Mr. Lisk said most of the incentives in the City code language concerning Overlake Village are not for the use of TDR’s. There are other incentives, including creating park elements or underground parking. The applicant is not planning to use TDR’s on the site. The applicant said ten floors could be built on the site, but he said that would not work fundamentally. In the future, a ten-story building could be put on the site, however. Mr. Krueger asked about parking, and confirmed that one space would be provided per bedroom, which is more than some of the Downtown requirements. Mr. Lisk said the general code for Overlake Village, he believed, was for one parking spot per bedroom. Mr. Krueger said parking would be a good discussion to have in the future, as there is a transit station next door to this site. He would like to see the parking ratio lowered, if possible. Mr. Waggoner: Said he was encouraged by the photos of Avalon’s other housing projects, but he said there would be some large, 300-foot long blocks sides of the blocks to consider. He said it would be interesting to see the how that larger massing could be broken into smaller pieces to create a neighborhood feel. Mr. Waggoner said the project was heading in the right direction. Mr. Sutton: Appreciated all the thought the applicant put in to the site planning elements and was curious to see the next steps, especially with all the changes in grade. Mr. Sutton said he would look forward to a building design that would break up the massing of the six stories proposed. Mr. Palmquist: Asked about how the buildings would cast shadows on the park, which was a big part of the Master Plan discussion prior to this meeting. With six-story buildings, that shadow might not be too big, but Mr. Palmquist would like to see some shadow studies in the future. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 5 Beyond that, Mr. Palmquist liked seeing all the effort put in by the applicant so early in the design process. He appreciated seeing the process and how the applicant was thinking about it. Mr. Lisk reiterated the applicant’s earlier point that a Parks and DRB meeting about the park element on this project would happen in the future, and that could happen in October. Eventually, the park would be brought through a site plan entitlement process, but Mr. Lisk was looking forward to bringing the Parks Commission and the DRB together to discuss the park element. PRE-APPLICATION LAND-2013-001356, Emerald Heights Campus Entry Renovations Description: Exterior renovations for existing Guard House at Campus Entrance and modifications to Landscaping Location: 10901 - 176th Circle NE Applicant: Jeremy Southerland with Rice Fergus Miller Staff Contact: Thara Johnson, [PHONE REDACTED], [EMAIL REDACTED] Ms. Johnson said that Emerald Heights was proposing to modify its guard house entry and some renovations along the entrance to its facility. The renovations would include cosmetic upgrades to the exterior of the guard house. Emerald Heights has been in previously to the DRB over the last couple of years to construct a new fitness center and other buildings. The exterior design of the guard house, and its materials, are similar to the fitness center and the multi-purpose building. New siding would be placed on the guard house that would match what was used at the fitness center. The siding would replace the existing brick and vinyl siding. A new trellis structure has been proposed at the front of the building for hanging plants and a softer, more residential feel to the security structure. The applicant is also proposing some landscape changes, including removing a paved turnaround in front of the guardhouse, which will allow for a more expansive landscape entry plaza. Architect Reuben Rios with Rice Fergus Miller presented on behalf of the applicant. He noted that the DRB is familiar with the renovation Emerald Heights has been working on for the last four years throughout its campus. Today, the guard shack has an old Emerald Heights’ logo, old turnaround lanes, and hedges that the applicant says take away from the statement of the front door of the campus. The applicant is hoping to simplify the design of the guard house. The applicant also is hoping to fix an operational problem, where there is a bottleneck between visitors who need to check in with the guard and residents who need to get to their homes. The applicant is suggesting the addition of a gate at the entry that residents could access with a remote card and that guards could operate as well. Some of the brick walls that flank the entry would be removed. A monument sign would go in front of the guard house, creating a nice lawn area. The existing brick and siding would be removed, but most of the foundation of that structure would remain in place to lessen the cost impact. Two of the roofs at the guard house are over-framed. Overall, the applicant wants to simplify the guard house and bring its design up to the level of the rest of the campus. Some of the visual cues for the design of the guard house come from the recent renovations, including the canopy used in the courtyard and in front of the dining room. The stone cladding and siding used at the fitness center and multi-purpose building would be used at the guard house, as well. The roof of the guard house has been simplified. Functionally, the guard house would get people in and out more smoothly. Some landscape will be added to the front entry. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Mr. Krueger: Asked about the sign and how it would be built. The applicant said the stone used on other parts of the side would be used for the sign. The sign itself would be cut metal. Mr. Krueger said it looked nice. Mr. Krueger said there was a great opportunity for more landscaping than grass, and he appreciated the applicant’s landscaping plan. Mr. Krueger said the guard house’s dark stain made it look dated. He liked the other buildings on campus, and he would like to see the guard house to be even more representative of those buildings. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 6 Mr. Waggoner: Agreed that the landscaping should shape up well with low ground cover. Mr. Waggoner said extending that planting out towards the road would help clarify the traffic pattern around the site. He said that the guard house does look dated, and the dark roofing and dark trim appears to be overweight compared to the continuous glass band around all four sides of the building. He wondered if the applicant could lighten up the roof or create a shed roof with a slight, modern slope like some of the other buildings on campus. Mr. Waggoner wondered why the trellis element was placed in front of the building. He said the building appeared hidden behind the trellis. He wondered if that trellis element could be part of the sign rather than floating on its own. He asked if there were personnel in the guard house. The applicant said there was. With that in mind, Mr. Waggoner said having the trellis between approaching cars and the guards in the guard house appeared to be an obstruction more than anything else. Ms. Crowder: Agreed with Mr. Waggoner’s comments on the trellis. Ms. Crowder did not think the trellis would be missed if it were gone, and said the landscape could speak for itself more without it. She wondered if the work going into the trellis could go more into the roof design so that the roof would not have to be hidden. Mr. Sutton: Agreed that the trellis could be removed. Mr. Sutton said the trellis aesthetic could go into the canopy for the overhangs, but said the trellis itself should be taken out. Mr. Palmquist: Had the same comment about the trellis, and said the trellis was simply in the way. Mr. Palmquist noted that guards were often walking around in front of the guard house, and the trellis would obstruct their view. He said that he liked the designs that showed the band of glass with a big overhanging roof above it. He thought that element should not be hidden. Beyond that, Mr. Palmquist liked the roof design and the idea to take off the over-framing. Mr. Palmquist did not mind the colors, and said if the trellis was removed, that would improve the color situation. He did not mind the darker colors and the heavier roof. The applicant said seeing the project in context with the landscaped helps frame the colors, as well. Mr. Waggoner suggested exposing the roof element a bit more by doing something with the posts that come down from the corners of the roof instead of having the stone all around the building at the same level. He suggested that the wood posts could go all the way to the group to break up the roof structure and show off the glass element. Mr. Palmquist agreed that the bottom element appeared a little heavy. Mr. Krueger said the yellow curb on the site of the current conditions was really distracting, and wondered if that painted curb could be toned down so it does not stick out so much. PRE-APPLICATION LAND-2013-00171, Anjuman-E-Burhani Community Center Description: Multi-purpose facility to include prayer areas, classrooms and kitchen facility Location: 15252 51st Street Applicant: Ali Habib Prior Review Date: 07/18/2013 Staff Contact: Thara Johnson, [PHONE REDACTED], [EMAIL REDACTED] Ms. Johnson said this was the second pre-application with the DRB on this project, a mosque located in the Overlake neighborhood that includes the construction of a new two-story building that is approximately 22,467 square feet. At the last pre-application meeting in July, the DRB provided extensive feedback on the initial proposal. The applicant has made several changes based on that feedback. One change includes creating a break or a feature that distinguishes the main building elements. The DRB had requested crenellation in a 3D image, and the applicant will present that at this meeting. The applicant will also respond to the DRB’s concerns about screening the green roof from other residential ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 7 properties nearby. The applicant is also looking to minimize the impact of proposed paved areas and the appearance of a large parking lot. The proposal includes incorporating 42 parking spaces to accommodate the congregation on a typical service schedule. The DRB was also concerned about the mosque keeping moisture out of the building, and the applicant has addressed that issue as well. Sam Cameron, project manager with Rolluda Architects, presented on behalf of the applicant with Don Stone, the principal designer for the project and Mike Perfetti, the landscape architect. The applicant said the comments from the DRB have been constructive, and he has done everything possible to address them. Mr. Cameron noted that Rolluda Architects have been around since 2001, and most of the firm’s work deals with schools and universities. He showed the DRB some projects Rolluda completed for the University of Washington and the U.S. Forest Service, as well as some mixed-use buildings in Seattle. One issue raised by the DRB was the sightline of the roof deck into the back yards of neighboring properties to the north and east. The main properties of concern are the north, in that the roof deck is closest to them. The applicant said the building is 20 feet back from the rear property line. The roof deck has been set back 20 feet from the edge of the building. Ten feet of that is part of the green roof element, but there is no access to that portion of the building. The roof deck sits back ten feet from the green roof. Also, there are several mature trees on the rear property line that would block the sightline into the residential area. The applicant showed the DRB views of the building from several areas in the surrounding community, including 154th NE and SR 520. Views from SR 520 would allow people to see most of the building. The residential community and any other surrounding areas would not provide a good view. Don Stone spoke next on behalf of the applicant and showed the DRB the perspectives of the project. The strongest modulation is on the north of the building, where it appears most residential. The south side is more institutional. The applicant said that design concept is best for the religious requirements for the orientation of the building and also, the design fits in well with the neighborhood. The DRB, at the last meeting, had been looking for some difference between the two buildings on the site, the madrasa, or community side, and the masjid, or mosque. The mosque is not that much different from the madrasa other than a few decorative elements. The applicant has added some column forms to the outside portion of the community building. The arched door in this area is the visitor’s quarters, where a high priest would be located if he came to visit. The upper left hand corner would have two paired windows and would be the location of a parsonage. The family of the local imam would live in the parsonage. Thus, this building would be occupied 24 hours a day. On the north side, the back or qibla side of the mosque is where the niche for the imam’s prayer is located. The applicant displayed the difference between that building and the community center and its columns. He showed the DRB some examples of mosque buildings in Cairo and other locations to give some context to the project. Muqarnas, or decorative elements, have been added to the site as well. The applicant said, most often, mosques are often urban fixtures in the middle of cities. He pointed out that there is a separation between the buildings that would be connected with spandrel glass. From the outside looking in, the glass would appear to be a mirror. The applicant is trying to show a difference between the two buildings while also creating a connection between them. The DRB had a question about the crenellation on the project. The applicant showed the DRB some ancient and modern examples of Islamic crenellation for context. The design form pre-dates Islam. The crenellation is used as a two- dimensional design element around most of the mosque, except at the primary minaret. Here, it would be three-dimensional and free standing. A stucco parapet would cover this design element. The applicant also brought some colors for the DRB to review. A tan, stone-like color has been chosen, as well as some reddish colors for the roof. Mr. Cameron noted that the DRB was concerned about the EPHUS product proposed at the last meeting. He said stucco, not EPHUS, would be used in most cases. Sheeting and waterproof membrane would be used in the construction, as well as a drainage mat. The mat would allow any moisture in the building to drain out. Beyond that, there would be a scratch coat, base coat, and Stuc-O-Flex finish. Extra reinforcing would be put in on the ground floor, as the applicant would be using EPHUS as a detailing material. The EPHUS would be on top of the stucco wall. EPHUS would only be used for detail work on the walls. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 8 Mike Perfetti, landscape architect, next presented to the DRB on behalf of the applicant. He said he had three main goals for the project, including making the site more appealing to the neighborhood. Right now, there are many blackberry plants and spruce trees, planted as a hedge. The applicant wants to get a much nicer aesthetic from the street, from the interior, and from neighboring properties. The applicant would also like to have a useful landscape for people using the facility. The third goal was to make a good landscape that was useful for the imam and his guests, who would use this area on a daily basis. Conceptually, there are “four gardens of paradise,” in reference to the Koran. Shade is very much valued in mosque architecture, as is water, and those elements have been highlighted in the landscape plan. One garden is called the Water Garden, which is at the entrance to the masjid. Shallow water pools would flank the entrance, a very important ceremonial space and a place for many gatherings. On the rear, on the north side, is the courtyard. This would be a shady space with a minor water feature. Green screens could be put on the back wall between the columns to help fill in that cove of the building with green and enhance the courtyard area. The third garden is the roof garden, which would be an extensive green roof. The fourth garden is the hedge garden, which is more of a formal planting area. This could be used by children and guests that are visiting the imam, so this is in less of a public area. Some plant material would complement the architecture there, including columnar trees like Italian cypress. The applicant would like to have a nice approach for visitors coming in from the street and nice street appeal from 51st. A line of trees has created a formal entry. Trees would shade much of the parking lot and provide screening for that lot, as well. Towards the back, the applicant would like to enhance the native plant palette and use more conifers. Pavement would include an asphalt driveway and parking lot. A sidewalk of concrete has been proposed going into the main entry. There is a fire lane on the site, as well as an access path to the dwelling units. The applicant said it was important to keep any other vehicles, such as people parking, away from these areas. Some design techniques could help alleviate that, including the installation of some concrete interruptions in the pavement that would indicate some areas are not parking lots and offering some separation. A ribbon drive has been proposed with a strip of grass down the middle to clue people into the fact that some areas are not appropriate for driving on. The Fire Department does not like that grass strip element, but the applicant said that look could still be achieved conceptually with the use of different-colored pavement. On the west side, there is a surface water flow coming down the middle and some cobbled texture to accentuate the water movement. Mr. Cameron noted that the lighting on the project would include LED bulbs for the exterior of the building, the parking area, and the pedestrian access. Light bollards have been included along some pathways. Lights have been affixed on standards at about 25 feet high. The applicant said the standard for parking lot lighting has been met with a one to two-foot candlepower. He did not want the lights to be too bright for the surrounding neighborhood, but he also wanted them to provide safety for pedestrians and drivers. He said there would be minimum light spillage onto neighboring properties. COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS: Mr. Krueger: Asked about the colors proposed. The applicant showed the colors, which included some pastel patterns. The doors would have a wooden color, as well as some of the windows. The color of the roof over the imam’s office would have a variation on the color of the concrete base. The crenellation would be a darker color. Overall, the applicant said he was trying to use very soft colors to create a monolithic look to the building with some modulation in the detailing of the building. Mr. Krueger said he appreciated the work done by the applicant to minimize impact to the neighbors to the north. He said the applicant has created a subtle change between the two buildings, which is a good solution. He liked the column element as well. Mr. Krueger asked about any detail that could be added to the door elements. The applicant said some of those details, as shown in other photos in other countries, often develop after hundreds of years. The applicant said the heads of the Muslim sect in Mumbai would decide on adding any further detail to the doors. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 9 Mr. Krueger said he was looking forward to seeing the details about how the different textures would look around the building. Mr. Sutton: Was concerned about the red roof and the canopy on the front of the building. The applicant said that had not changed from the last meeting. Mr. Sutton said it appeared to stick out to him more than before. He wondered if more columns could help anchor it. The applicant said the canopy is partially supported by the minaret. He noted that in the past, churches and mosques often had a lot of blank spaces on their exterior because merchants often tucked themselves into those areas. The Islamic community is that way, currently. The applicant said the proposed design was a Western attempt to recreate that concept. Mr. Sutton appreciated that reference to the merchant activity, but he did not see that function occurring at the mosque in the present day, so he had a hard time making that connection. Mr. Krueger said Mr. Sutton was possibly looking at something that was not rendered properly. Ms. Crowder: Said the project had progressed nicely, and noted the landscape has some nice features. Ms. Crowder said the building has become more detailed and is advancing in the right direction. She asked about the mosque shown as an example from Los Angeles, where the crenellation is all white and the building is all sandstone. She asked if the crenellation could have more of a look of stone rather than the accent color presented. Ms. Crowder asked what the material would be on the dome. The applicant said it would be stucco, and of a whitish color. He noted that the colors on the project could change, pending approval from Mumbai. Ms. Crowder said she liked bright accent colors, but she appreciated having a simple, elegant palette as well. She was glad to go away from the EPHUS. Mr. Waggoner: Asked for detail on the mirrored glass element the applicant was discussing. The applicant said there would be glass in two locations, at a junction between two walls on the north side and also between one of the curved walls and the minaret. The applicant said the glass would be spandrel would be transparent from the inside and then reflective on the outside. With the glass at a 90º angle to the wall, it will create a mirror and show the minaret’s wall extending and disappearing. The same thing would happen on the north side, where the view would be of the masjid, extending and disappearing. The applicant said his main effort to separate the two buildings was done through the use of the columns mentioned earlier. This was a way to connect with the client’s theological base, too. Mr. Waggoner said if it made sense to have glass in those locations that would be great. He noted that at the last meeting, the DRB members noticed that there was a deep notch on the north side of the building. He had asked if some physical articulation could be added on the south side. He said if the glass was put in place for the sake of optical illusion, it was not necessarily needed. The applicant agreed, and reiterated that Mumbai still had to approve these plans. He said using glass on two sides would help balance the project in some ways. Mr. Waggoner said the level of detail already shows some nice differences between the two buildings. He asked about a bridge with wrought iron railings that appears on the southwest corner and looks like it goes to a side door. The applicant said it was a ramp for drainage. The applicant said he could not make the grade in the back of the project, so the kitchen had to be changed. The loading dock was taken out as well, and all loading would be done at ground level. The applicant said the garbage service would change, too, into a more easily accessible space. Mr. Waggoner said with such a nice looking building, this loading and garbage area could use some sort of screening. The applicant said the garbage is behind a concrete retaining wall. Mr. Waggoner said the drawings made it look like there is a bridge extending over the grade, and the applicant said that was not the case. He liked the project overall. Mr. Palmquist: Said the applicant did a good job addressing the DRB’s concerns. Mr. Palmquist was concerned about colors as regards all the fenestration and jogs on the site. He said that in the Northwest climate, if the details are not quite right, the stucco does not look right. ---PAGE BREAK--- Redmond Design Review Board Minutes August 22, 2013 Page 10 He wanted to make sure the applicant presented some details about what the stucco would look like up close, including drip lines. Mr. Palmquist said the project is looking good and he appreciated the historical background on the design concepts used. Mr. Krueger asked about the two-dimensional crenellation and how deep it would be. The applicant said that depth would be about five or six inches. There would be some structural elements to help keep it in place. Depending on how far the applicant can go, the decorations would be applied on the outside of the stucco. The applicant appreciated the DRB’s comments and help in guiding this project. Mr. Waggoner asked how the applicant would submit final designs to Mumbai, and if at that point, the project would return to the DRB. Ali Habib spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said once the site entitlement is done the project would be submitted to the higher-ups in Mumbai. The types of changes he expected to see from Mumbai would be mainly cosmetic. He doubted any structural changes would come from the community leadership, as those leaders have been involved in the planning process all along. People who have constructed mosques in many other places have been providing input, as well, to create a strong design. Mr. Waggoner confirmed that the applicant would go through the full DRB process, including approval, and then get approval from Mumbai. The applicant said that there would be a formal final approval from Mumbai, but said if there was a drastic change needed, he would come back through the DRB process. The DRB and applicant thanked each other for their time. ADJOURNMENT IT WAS MOVED BY MR. WAGGONER AND SECONDED BY MR. KRUEGER TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:45 P.M. MOTION APPROVED October 3, 2013 MINUTES APPROVED ON RECORDING SECRETARY