recommendation administrative design review

46
CONE ARCHITECTURE SDCI # 3025269 5637 University Way NE Seattle, WA 98105 Applicant: Cone Architecture, LLC 2226 3rd Avenue Seattle, WA 98121 Contact: Tim Carter Owner: Coombes Development 4701 SW Admiral Way, Suite 385 Seattle, WA 98116 Contact: Jon Coombes SDCI Contact: Abby Weber [email protected] RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW 'THE AVE' APARTMENTS

Upload: others

Post on 09-Feb-2022

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

SDCI # 30252695637 Universi t y Way NESeat t le, WA 98105

Appl icant:Cone Archi tecture, LLC2226 3rd AvenueSeat t le, WA 98121Contact : T im Car ter

Owner :Coombes Development4701 SW Admiral Way, Sui te 385Seat t le, WA 98116Contact : Jon Coombes

SDCI Contact :Abby Weberabby.weber@seat t le.gov

R E C O M M E N D A T I O NA D M I N I S T R A T I V E D E S I G N R E V I E W

' T H E A V E ' A P A R T M E N T S

Page 2: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SITE LOCATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Early Design GuidanceProject Location + Information 3Existing Site Plan 4Proposed Site Plan 5Early Design Guidance 6Early Design Guidance 7

Proposed DesignPreferred Option 8Block Analysis 9Generative Diagrams 11Building Elevations 12Building Floor Plans 14Design Departures 16Detail Sections 17Building Sections 19Landscape Plan 20Lighting Plan 21Character Renderings 22

AppendixNeighborhood Analysis 30Neighborhood Character 31Maximum Zoning Potential 32Applicable Development Standards 33Existing Multi-Family Context 34Proposed Multi-Family Context 35Street Views + Analysis 36Site Documentation 40Options Overview 41Option Three (Preferred) 42Solar Studies - Option 3 (Preferred) 44Preferred Option Character Rendering 45

Page 3: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

3

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

PROJECT LOCATION + INFORMATION

EXISTING SITE

The project site consists of a single parcel (APN 522630-0130) on the western portion of University Way NE. Immediately adjacent to the site on the northern border is an abandoned single-family residence, and to the south is a retail property. The subject parcel is a total of 4,995 SF and measures approximately 89' in the east-west direction and 54' in the north-south direction. The site slopes downward from the southeast to the northwest with an approximate grade change in that direction of 11.5 feet. The Knarr Tavern currently occupies the parcel.

ZONING AND OVERLAY DESIGNATION

The project parcel is zoned NC2P-40, indicating that the structure may go up to 40'-0" plus additional applicable height bonuses. The NC zoning continues south on University Way NE and stretches within the contained block. Directly to the east across University Way NE the zoning drops to LR3, and immediately to the west across an alley the zoning falls to SF 5000, which will require upper level setback to be taken into account. Generally, the zoning increases NC3P-65 to the south and decreases immediately to the north until NE 65th Street.

The subject parcel is within the University District Northwest Urban Center Village, and is confirmed to be in a Frequent Transit area. No parking is required nor will it be provided.

VICINIT Y MAP

5637 University Way NESeattle, WA 98105

Site Area: 4,995 SFNumber of Residential Units: Approx. 31Commercial Space: 1 Commercial(Approx. 900 SF)Number of Parking Stalls: 0Proposed Bike Parking: Approx. 24 StallsTotal Area: 16,603 SFTotal Area Above Grade: Approx. 13,500 SFAllowable FAR = 16,234 SF (3.25)Proposed FAR = 15,324 SF (3.06)

SITE LOCATION

PROJECT PROGR AM

DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

The owner proposes the construction a new residential apartment building with approximately 30 small efficiency dwelling units (SEDUs) and a commercial space along University Way NE The objective for these apartments is to provide upscale and attainable housing that is within walking distance to the The University of Washington. The demographic that will benefit most from this housing will be students, young professionals, and wage earners in the neighborhood, or city-dwellers seeking a more pedestrian-oriented lifestyle. These small efficiency apartments will transition between the commercial and residential boundaries of the immediate area, and will create convenient and reasonable priced housing options supportive of the vibrant and rejuvenating neighborhood.

NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT

The immediate blocks in the zone are a mix of multi-family apartment buildings, commercial businesses, and single-family homes. There is a variety of commercial buildings along University Way NE ("The Ave"), which includes several restaurants, bicycle shops, bars, various small businesses, and a small, neighborhood grocery store within walking distance. Several bus lines run along both University Way NE and 15th Ave NE, and provides a quick link between the neighborhood and downtown Seattle. Many of these buses connect to the Link Light Rail near the university. Cowen Park is a major green space directly to the north of the site, and there are several small pocket parks in the area (including a community garden one block to the south.) In general, the area is conducive to an active lifestyle, ideal for students, and provides the necessary transportation and pedestrian links between the city center, the University of Washington, and the immediate neighborhood.

Page 4: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

4 EXISTING SITE PLAN

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS

PROPOSED PROJECT SITE• One parcel located mid-block on the west side of University Way NE• Site Area = 4,995 SF, and measures roughly 54’ wide by 89’ deep

TOPOGR APHY• 11’-6” slope down across site from southeast corner to northwest corner• 1'-10” slope down along University Way NE frontage from south to north

ADJACENT BUILDINGS AND USES• Existing 1-story single family residence immediately north of site (NC2P-40)• Existing 1-story retail building immediately south of site (NC2P-40)• Existing 1-story single family residence across the alley (SF-5000)• Existing 4-story apartment building across University Way NE (LR3)

SOLAR ACCESS & VIEWS• The site has great solar access due to existing topography and alley separation

to the west.• Wonderful territorial views of Cowen Park to the north, and possibly the

Downtown skyline to the south and the Olympic Mountains to the west. ALLOWABLE STRUCTURE HEIGHTNC2P-40 zoning allows for a 40’-0” structure height• 4’ bonus for rooftop features• 16’ bonus for stair/elevator penthouses

ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREANC2P-40 3.25 FAR = 16,234 SF

LEGAL DESCRIPTIONLots 1 and 2, Block 2, May Addition to the City of Seattle, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 9 of Plats, page 17, Records of King County, Washington, except the east ten feet thereof condemned in King County Superior County Cause No. 221463 for street purposes, as provided by Ordinance No, 55773 of the City of Seattle. Situate in the County of King, State of Washington.

TOPO

GRAP

HIC

& BO

UNDA

RY S

URVE

Y

COOM

BES

UNIVE

RSITY

TOPO

GRAP

HIC

& BO

UNDA

RY S

URVE

Y

COOM

BES

UNIVE

RSITY

Page 5: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

5

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

(APPROX. 13’ - 20’ HEIGHT)

(APPROX. 14’-0” HEIGHT)

(APPROX. 10’-0”)REARSHED

PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC PATTERN TO AND FROM “THE AVE” TO THE SOUTH AND RAVENNA PARK TO THE NORTH

COMMERCIAL COMPONENTALONG PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY

BIKE LANE SOUTHBOUND ALONG UNIVERSITY WAY NE

PROPOSED SITE PLAN

PROPOSED SITE PLAN

SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:

• No setbacks required except at portions of the structure above 13' adjacent to the SF5000 parcels (to the west across the alley). Minimum setbacks are proposed at north and south for glazing.

TRAFFIC CIRCULATION• University Way NE is designated as a Collector Arterial street that terminates to the north at the intersection with NE Ravenna Blvd but continues to the south for 1.2 miles where it terminates at NE Pacific Street.

• 15th Ave NE a minor north-south arterial street located one block to the east.

• Roosevelt Way NE is a major north-south arterial located 5 blocks to the west.

• NE Ravenna Blvd, located half a block to the north, is a minor arterial which connects to Green Lake Park to the northwest

• A flashing 4-way traffic signal regulates traffic at the intersection of the Ave and NE Ravenna.

• There is street parking available on both sides of the Ave adjacent to the site.

• A bus stop is located approximately 100' away to the north on the west side of the Ave.

STREETSCAPE• University Way Ne has a 12'-0" wide sidewalk with no planting strip east of the proposed site.

• There are currently no street trees or other landscaping planted in the R.O.W. for the entire length of the west side of the Ave between NE 56th Street and NE Ravenna Blvd.

• Overhead power lines run south to north adjacent to the site on the west side of the Ave.

NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERNS AND POTENTIAL• The one-story structure on the project site, while currently occupied by a tavern, is in need of major repairs and is out of scale with the development potential of the site.

• The project site can serve as a needed transition from the more dense developments planned further south along the Ave and the residential neighborhood to the north in Ravenna.

• The Ave is planned as a vibrant street with a continuous street wall and a energetic mix of commercial and residential uses.

Page 6: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

6

4'-2"C

LR.

4'-11"CLR.

199.9

3.7'

12.9'

204

202

N 89°09'28" W 92.98'

N 00°50'32" E 53.01'

SEC

ON

DAR

YEN

TRAN

CE

AT A

LLEY

PROPERTY LINE

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

ALLEY

PRO

POSE

D31

-UN

ITAP

ARTM

ENT

BUIL

DIN

G

EARLY DESIGN GUIDANCE

1

21 3 4 5MASSING AND PERCEIVED BULK ZONE TRANSITION STREET LEVEL USES &PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE

SAFETY & SECURITY MATERIALS & DETAILING

Page 7: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

7

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

EARLY DESIGN GUIDANCE

1. DESIGN CONCEPT, ARCHITECTURAL COMPOSITION AND MASSING: a. Staff directed the applicant to continue a strong street-edge by maintaining a zero-lot-line for at least the lower two levels. (CS2-C-2, CS2-D-1)

The proposed massing maintains a near zero lot line along the property edge at the sidewalk. The brick volume is maintained at a single story to respond to the existing brick structures on the block, all of which are single-story.

b. Staff supported the street-facing upper level setbacks and private patios as observed in Option 3, with the understanding the massing move was the result of required power line setbacks. However, staff expressed concern regarding the accuracy of the required setbacks, particularly surrounding the existing transformer located on the pole at the southeast corner. The applicant should confirm with their Seattle City Light local representative. (CS2-D-1, DC4-D-1, DC2-A-2)

The upper levels have been confirmed with a 3'-0" setback that is currently underway with Seattle City Light under application ID number 1000050862.

c. Staff encouraged further consideration of open railings rather than solid parapets along the rooftop amenity space to reduce perceived height and bulk. (CS2-D, DC2-A-2)

To better clarify the building massing the open rail has been replaced with a continuation of the parapet. This both simplifies the massing and improves the proportions of the street-facing facade.

2. ZONE TRANSITION:a. Staff was not inclined to support the requested departure to reduce the rear setback with the single family zone and directed the applicant to develop a hybrid massing option that maintains the rear setback, as observed in massing Option 2, and softens the zone transition. (CS2-D-3, CS2-D-4, CS2-D-5)

The rear setback from the single-family zoning has been maintained. This setback will decrease the perceived bulk from the single-family zoning and soften the transition. In addition, a high quality, durable concrete is proposed at the alley ground level to create a more appealing transition.

b. Staff identified the zone transition as a high priority and would like to review further study of additional measures to reduce the perceived height, bulk and scale, such as eliminating the solid parapet and playing with setbacks. (CS2-D-3, CS2-D-4, DC2-A-2)

The solid parapet of the roof deck amenity is important to the massing concept of the proposed design and provides additional privacy for the adjacent neighbors. However, it is set back from the building edge to decrease the perceived mass from the adjacent zones. As previously stated, the upper level setback has been maintained to better respond to the neighbors.

c. Staff supported the configuration of the rooftop amenity space as proposed in Option 3 as it is removed from the alley building edge and located in a manner sensitive to the single family zone. (CS2-D-3, CS2-D-4)

The rooftop amenity space has been maintained accordingly.

3. STREET LEVEL USES & PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE:a. Staff supported the location of commercial uses to the south as it continues the commercial street edge. (CS2-D-1, CS2-C-2)

The commercial use location has been maintained accordingly.

b. Staff encouraged continuation of the existing rhythm of small-scale retail entries as experienced along the western street wall of University Way NE to the south of the site. Staff requested additional study of existing entry patterns at the Recommendation phase. (CS2-D-1, CS2-C-2, PL3-A-1)

Existing entry patterns have been catalogue in this packet. As the majority of the entries are directly off of the sidewalk along University Way NE, the proposed design has followed this pattern. It also follows the precedent of recessed commercial entries.

c. Staff did not support the shared commercial/residential entry “front porch” concept as it is inconsistent with the existing development pattern and style of entries along University Way NE. (CS2-D-1, CS2-C-2, PL3-A-1)

The shared "front porch" has been removed per staff request.

d. Staff expressed a preference for the bike room location as proposed in Option 2 as it maximizes convenience and security. Staff was concerned that the highly-visible bike room proposed in Option 3 would encourage theft and noted that access to a basement bike room would likely occur through the front residential lobby. (PL4-B)

The bike room has been relocated in the basement to provide security and ease of access from the proposed elevator location.

4. SAFETY & SECURITY:a. Staff was concerned about safety and security associated with “hidden areas”, such as window wells and side setbacks, and requested the applicant demonstrate responsiveness these guidelines by deterring access to these areas from the street and alley. (PL2-B)

The proposed walkway to the exit has been revised in response to safety concerns. All "hidden areas" will be thoroughly planted and inaccessible by pedestrians.

b. Staff did not support the setback ground-level portion of the alley facade with overhanging massing volume, as observed in Option 3, as it creates a space which may facilitate safety and security concerns for residents. (PL2-B)

The ground level portion along the alley has been flushed out per staff request. This both eliminates safety issues and simplifies the overall building massing.

5. MATERIALS & DETAILINGa. Staff supported the large horizontal window groupings as proposed in Option 3 and requested the incorporation of a similarly patterned window on the setback portion of the street-facing facade. (DC2-B-1)

The proposed material at the front facade has been changes to a smaller, horizontal pattern. While the windows have remained a horizontal proportion, the groupings have changed to a vertical orientation to offset the horizontality of the cladding.

b. The open railing rather than the closed parapet at the upper level setback is supported as it reduces perceived height and bulk. Staff suggested extending the open railing to the building edge to increase visual interest and improve proportions. (DC2-A-2, DC2-B-1, DC2-C-1)

See response to 2b,

c. Staff identified DC2-B-2 Blank Walls as a priority guideline, and encouraged the applicant to avoid large expanses of blank wall as the hybrid massing option evolves. Where unavoidable, the design should be thoughtful in the application of facade treatments used to break up the blank wall facade. (DC2-B-2, DC2-C-1)

The majority of the blank facades are due to the proposed project being closer than 3'-0" to the property line. As such, openings in these facades are prohibited. The material utilized at these locations, however, will be small-scale and applied in a repetitive pattern to create visual interest.

d. The use of high-quality, durable materials, and encouraged tying materials and colors to building form is highly encouraged. (DC2-B-1, DC4-A)

The materials have been revised to better align with changes in massing and distinguish building volumes.

Page 8: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

8 PREFERRED OPTION

RECESSED UPPER FLOORThe upper level is recessed to avoid the HVL line that runs north to south along University Way NE. This creates additional modulation, and also decreases the massing appearance of the overall structure.

PROMINENT ENTRYThe residential entry is recessed at the northern edge of the building while the commercial space continues the commercial street wall along University Way NE to the south.

STREET /ALLEY FACING GLA ZINGThe glazing strategy on all schemes will focus windows towards the east in west. This minimizes the impacts on the adjacent neighbors, but also creates a more engaged building with the surrounding neighborhood.

POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTThe development potential on the northern and southern sites has not yet been maximized. Therefore, minimal glazing will be applied to the north and south facades.

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

17'-3"

17'-3" 17'-10"

18'-0

"5'

-01 2"

17'-10"39'-9"

30'-0

"

93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 17'-3" 11'-3"

1'-0

"47

'-0"

6'-5

"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

"

4'-4" 16'-0"5'-0" 24'-0" 18'-1"

93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 4'-3"

1'-0

"35

'-5"

2'-4

"

5'-0" 32'-4"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

"

4'-4" 24'-0" 11'-3"17'-10"93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 17'-3" 11'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"5'-0" 32'-4" 5'-0"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

5'-0"

5'-0"8'-4" 11'-3"

24'-10"5'-0"

8'-4"22'-3"

17'-3"

17'-3"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

" 4'-4" 4'-3"24'-10"93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 4'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"

5'-0" 32'-4"

54'-5

"

93'-0"24'-10"5'-0"

9

8

7

5

4

3

1

2

3

10

1

2

3RESIDENTIAL

LOBBY

COMMERCIAL(880 SF)

STREET LEVELSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOORS 2-3SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOOR 4SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

AMENITY1051 SQ. FT.

(WINDOW WELL)

BASEMENT LEVELSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

10'-10"93'-0"

21

6

STORAGE

MECH

BIKES 56

4

55'-2"

32

1TRASH

MECH

8'-4"

5'-0" 24'-0" 8'-4" 5'-0"

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

5'-0"

14'-0"HVL STBK

15'-8

"

3'-8"

3'-8"

3'-8"

C O N E A R C H I T E C T U R E 'THE AVE' APARTMENTS EDG FEASIBILITY

17'-10"

54'-5

"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

"

4'-4" 24'-0" 11'-3"17'-10"93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 17'-3" 11'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"5'-0" 32'-4" 5'-0"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

5'-0"8'-4"22'-3"

17'-3"

17'-3"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

" 4'-4" 4'-3"24'-10"93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 4'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"

5'-0" 32'-4"

54'-5

"

93'-0"24'-10"5'-0"

9

8

7

1

2

3

10

1

2

3

FLOORS 2-3SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOOR 4SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

AMENITY1051 SQ. FT.

56

4

MECH

5'-0" 24'-0" 8'-4" 5'-0"

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

14'-0"HVL STBK

3'-8"

3'-8"

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS EDG FEASIBILITY

Page 9: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

9

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

BLOCK ANALYSIS

UNIVERSITY WAY NE (”THE AVE”)UNIVERSITY WAY NE (”THE AVE”)

NE

56TH

ST

RE

ET

NE

RAV

EN

NA

BLV

D

Page 10: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

10 BLOCK ANALYSIS

COMMERCIAL BASE WITH STOREFRONTSingle-level

Solid base with modular materialsCommercial door recessed

Signage centered above commercial entry

UPPER-STORY RESIDENTIALSingle-level

Repeated punch windowsTextural patterned siding

Page 11: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

11

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

GENERATIVE DIAGRAMS

1

1

1

2

2

2

34 5

66

8

6

6

6

7

54

3

3

COM

MERCIAL ENTRY RESIDENTIAL ENTRY

'THREE VOLUME' CONCEPTThe simplified massing is distilled into three primary, interlocking volumes.

STAIR VOLUMETo provide necessary egress, the second stair must access the proposed roof deck.

COMMERCIAL STREET-WALLThis block of University Way NE is primarily comprised of 1-2 story buildings with a zero lot line.

HVL SETBACKThe existing HVL requires an upper level setback to meet mandatory clearances.

RECESSED ENTRY PATIOIn order to negotiate the sidewalk grade, the residential entry must be recessed.

NATURAL DAYLIGHTINGAs the building envelope is maximized to the property lines, the hallways must be recessed in order to get natural daylight.

Page 12: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

12 BUILDING ELEVATIONS

HARDIE PANEL, 2 ' - 0 " VERTICAL PANELS(SW GRIZ ZLE GR AY)

HARDIE PANEL, 2 ' - 0 " HORIZONTAL PANELS(WHITE)

FACE BRICK, STACKED BOND(COAL CREEK)

ALUMINUM " WOOD" MATERIAL(LIGHT CHERRY)

BASEMENT201' - 0"

LEVEL 1210' - 0"

LEVEL 2223' - 0"

LEVEL 3232' - 0"

LEVEL 4241' - 0"

T.O. ROOF250' - 6"

T.O. ELEVATOR256' - 0"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 2206' - 5 3/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 2246' - 5 3/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2250' - 5 3/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2262' - 5 3/4"

PARAPET BONUS - AREA 2254' - 5 3/4"

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

BASEMENT201' - 0"

LEVEL 1210' - 0"

LEVEL 2223' - 0"

LEVEL 3232' - 0"

LEVEL 4241' - 0"

T.O. ROOF250' - 6"

T.O. ELEVATOR256' - 0"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 1201' - 10 1/4"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 2206' - 5 3/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 1241' - 10 1/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 2246' - 5 3/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2250' - 5 3/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1245' - 10 1/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2262' - 5 3/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1257' - 10 1/4"

PARAPET BONUS - AREA 2254' - 5 3/4"

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

SDCI Project Number

Issue Date

Drawn by

CONE Project Number

SDCI

© CONE ARCHITECTURE, LLC 2017 - T

Checked by

4/6/

2017

11:

19:3

2 AM DR

COELEV

THEAPAR

MARK DESCRIPT

MUP SUBM1 MUP CY1

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION - COLOREDSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION - COLORED

1005

TIMOTSTA

SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION

1

1

11

2

2222

2

3

33

4

4

5

6

6

6

7

88 8

Page 13: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

13

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

STEEL AWNING

BUILDING ELEVATIONS

VINYL WINDOW(WHITE)

VINYL WINDOW(BL ACK)

ALUMINUM STOREFRONT(BL ACK)

ARCHITECTUR AL CONCRETE

BASEMENT201' - 0"

LEVEL 1210' - 0"

LEVEL 2223' - 0"

LEVEL 3232' - 0"

LEVEL 4241' - 0"

T.O. ROOF250' - 6"

T.O. ELEVATOR256' - 0"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 1201' - 10 1/4"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 2206' - 5 3/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 1241' - 10 1/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 2246' - 5 3/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2250' - 5 3/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1245' - 10 1/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 2262' - 5 3/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1257' - 10 1/4"

PARAPET BONUS - AREA 2254' - 5 3/4"

BASEMENT201' - 0"

LEVEL 1210' - 0"

LEVEL 2223' - 0"

LEVEL 3232' - 0"

LEVEL 4241' - 0"

T.O. ROOF250' - 6"

T.O. ELEVATOR256' - 0"

AVG. GRADE - AREA 1201' - 10 1/4"

MAX HEIGHT - AREA 1241' - 10 1/4"

HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1245' - 10 1/4"

PENT. HEIGHT BONUS - AREA 1257' - 10 1/4"

SDCI Project Number

Issue Date

Drawn by

CONE Project Number

SDCI

© CONE ARCHITECTURE, LLC 2017 - Th

Checked by

4/6/

2017

11:

19:4

8 AM DR

COLELEV

THEAPAR

MARK DESCRIPT

MUP SUBM1 MUP CY1

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION - COLOREDSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 WEST ELEVATION - COLORED

10057

TIMOTHSTAT

SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION

1

1

11

1

2 2 2

2

2

3

5

5 55

6

6

6

6

7 8 9

Page 14: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

14 BUILDING FLOOR PLANS

DN

1

A

3

4

6

7

8

B D F G

5

C E

12

2

11

10

9

90' -

5"

6' -

0"18

' - 1

0"4'

- 2"

9' -

3"15

' - 0

"8'

- 4"

4' -

6"12

' - 4

"2'

- 6"

3' -

6"6'

- 0"

51' - 0"

4' - 0"11' - 6"13' - 3"5' - 0"13' - 3"4' - 0"

229 SF

UNIT - TYPE 5002

229 SF

UNIT - TYPE 5003

227 SF

UNIT - TYPE 5004

230 SF

UNIT - TYPE 5001

363 SF

BIKE AMENITY /LAUNDRY

005208 SF

MECHANICAL006

224 SF

UNIT - TYPE 6007

STAIR A

STAIR B

298 SF

CORR000

238 SF

TRASH008

ELEVATOR

CLR.5' - 0"

CLR

.6'

- 0"

LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE

LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE, TYP.

(24 BIKES)

BIO

RE

TEN

TIO

N P

LAN

TER

10"

23' - 5 1/2"

5 1/2"

5' - 0"

5 1/2"

11' - 11 1/2"

10"

2' -

2"3

1/2"

12' -

4"

5 1/

2"12

' - 4

1/2

"5

1/2"

12' -

4 1

/2"

5 1/

2"12

' - 4

"5

1/2"

7' -

5"5

1/2"

16' -

2"

8"

8"

13' - 11 1/2"

5 1/2"

33' - 1"

8"

1' -

4"10

"21

' - 0

"5

1/2"

5' -

4 1/

2"5

1/2"

8' -

4"5

1/2"

22' -

10

1/2"

5 1/

2"16

' - 2

"8"

3' - 3"6' - 0"4' - 0"

1

A

3

4

6

7

8

B D F G

5

C E

12

2

11

10

9

221 SF

UNIT - TYPE 2101

90' -

5"

6' -

0"18

' - 1

0"4'

- 2"

9' -

3"15

' - 0

"8'

- 4"

4' -

6"12

' - 4

"2'

- 6"

3' -

6"6'

- 0"

51' - 0"

4' - 0"11' - 6"13' - 3"5' - 0"13' - 3"4' - 0"

STAIR AELEVATOR

STAIR B

227 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1109

227 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1108

228 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1107

254 SF

UNIT - TYPE 3 (TYPE A)106

320 SF

CORR100

218 SF

UNIT - TYPE 2102

845 SF

COMMERCIAL105

21' -

11"

MA

IL

CLR

.

4'-2

"

CLR.5' - 0"

CLR

.

6'-0

"

28'-

41/

2"

15' - 1"

ROOF BELOW

51/

2"17

'-11

"5

1/2"

4'-2

"5

1/2"

11'-

8"5

1/2"

11'-

8"5

1/2"

7'-5

"5

1/2"

11'-

1"5

1/2"

7'-4

"5

1/2 "

51/

2"

17'-

11"

51/

2"

4'-2

"

51/

2"

8'-4

"

51/

2"

15'-

0"

51/

2"

7'-5

"

51/

2"

6'-0

"

51/

2"

22'-

41/

2"

5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"16' - 5"5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"

51' - 0"

252 SF

LOBBY103

67 SF

VESTIBULE104 P

KG

S

10' - 0"41' - 0"

5 1/2" 15' - 7" 5 1/2" 8' - 0" 5 1/2" 15' - 7" 5 1/2" 9' - 6 1/2" 5 1/2"

1' - 4 1/8"

4' - 0 1/2" 10' - 0" 1' - 6 1/2" 1' - 6 1/2" 10' - 0" 4' - 0 1/2"

7' - 10 3/4"

PLN

TR

DN

4/10

/201

72:

26:1

9PM

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 DESIGN REVIEW FLOOR PLAN - BASEMENTSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 DESIGN REVIEW FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1

BASEMENT PLANLEVEL 1 PLAN

Page 15: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

15

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

BUILDING FLOOR PLANS

1

A

3

4

6

7

8

B D F G

5

C E

12

2

11

10

9

227 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1209

90'-

5"

6'-0

"18

'-10

"4'

-2"

9'-3

"15

'-0"

8'-4

"4'

-6"

12'-

4"2'

-6"

3'-6

"6'

-0"

51' - 0"

4' - 0"11' - 6"13' - 3"5' - 0"13' - 3"4' - 0"

8'-0

"18

'-10

"4'

-2"

32'-

7"4'

-6"

18'-

4"

227 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1208

228 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1207

254 SF

UNIT - TYPE 3 (TYPE A)206

218 SF

UNIT - TYPE 2202

221 SF

UNIT - TYPE 2201

218 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1203

219 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1204

219 SF

UNIT - TYPE 1205

503 SF

CORR200

CLR

.

4'-6

"

CLR.5' - 0"

CLR

.

4'-2

"

STAIR A

STAIR B

51/

2"18

'-4

1/2"

4'-2

"5

1/2"

11'-

8"5

1/2"

11'-

8"5

1/2"

7'-5

"5

1/2"

51/

2"

17'-

11"

51/

2"

4'-2

"

51/

2"

8'-4

"

51/

2"

15'-

0"

51/

2"

7'-5

"

51/

2"

4'-6

"

51/

2"

17'-

5"

51/

2"

5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"16' - 5"5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"

5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"16' - 5"5 1/2"16' - 4 1/2"5 1/2"

51' - 0"

ELEVATOR

LEVEL 1 ROOF BELOW

LEVEL 1 ROOF BELOW

DN

LEVEL 1 ROOF BELOW

51/

2"17

'-5"

51/

2"

1

A

3

4

6

7

8

B D F G

5

C E

12

2

11

10

9

90'-

5"

6'-0

"18

'-10

"4'

-2"

9'-3

"15

'-0"

8'-4

"4'

-6"

14'-

10"

3'-6

"6'

-0"

51' - 0"

4' - 0"11' - 6"13' - 3"5' - 0"13' - 3"4' - 0"

277 SF

UNIT - TYPE 4401

276 SF

UNIT - TYPE 4402

239 SF

CORR400

62 SF

ELEV. MECH.403

STAIR B

STAIR AELEVATOR32 SF

TEL.404

CLR

.4'

-6"

UP

PET RUN

ROOF DECK

43' - 0"

10'-

2"37

'-1"

51/

2"7'

-5"

51/

2"4'

-6"

14'-

21/

2"7

1/2"

3'-6

"

5 1/2"24' - 10"5 1/2"24' - 9 1/2"5 1/2"

10'-

2"12

'-10

"

51/

2"

8'-4

"

51/

2"

7'-6

1/2"

51/

2"

7'-0

"

51/

2"

7'-5

"

51/

2"

4'-6

"

51/

2"

13'-

9"

71/

2"

3'-6

"

5 1/2" 14' - 7 1/2"5 1/2"

23' - 6 1/2" 5' - 9"

1089 SF

S

I

D

C

© CO

C

M

1

SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 DESIGN REVIEW FLOOR PLAN - LEVELS 2 & 3SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2

DESIGN REVIEW FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 4 & ROOF AMENITYPLAN

LEVEL 4 & ROOF AMENITY PLAN LEVEL 2 & 3 PLAN

UNITS

AUXILIARY

ROOF DECK

COMMERCIAL

Page 16: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

16 DESIGN DEPARTURES

DEPARTURE REQUEST(24'-2" AVG. DEPTH)

DEPARTURE REQUEST

CONFORMING(33'-6" AVG. DEPTH)

CONFORMING

Unit lost; additional depth is low-quality space with little connection to street adjacent space at commercial front

Stair and elevator locations must remain in place to provide necessary egress separation

Rear units must remain in current locations to meet upper level setback from single-family zoning

DESIGN STANDARDSMC 23.47A.008.B.3Street-Level Development Standards

Non-residential uses shall extend an average depth of at least 30 feet and a minimum depth of 15 feet from the street-level street-facing facade.

DEPARTURE REQUESTTo allow the commercial depth to decrease from the required 30'-0" to 24'-2".

R ATIONALE FOR DEPARTURE:This cur rent commerc ial footpr int is p inned in to i ts locat ion due to egress separat ions and constrains put upon the project by adher ing to the 15'- 0 " rear setback f rom the s ingle - fami ly zoning across the al ley (to which the project now conforms per the ear ly design guidance.) Therefore, the only way to create a conforming commerc ial space is to remove a uni t and ex tend the commerc ial into the uni t . This creates a low-qual i t y space that has l i t t le connect ion to the st reet f ront . In addi t ion, the overal l width exceeds the required depth. The proposed depar ture takes the required depth and puts i t d i rect ly adjacent to the s idewalk to promote addi t ional st reet- level interact ion and improve the commerc ial l ight qual i t y.

SIDEWALK SIDEWALK

Page 17: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

17

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

COMMERCIAL ENTRY SECTION (1) RESIDENTIAL ENTRY SECTION (2)

DETAIL SECTIONS

1 2

Page 18: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

18 DETAIL SECTIONS

1

3

2

ALLEY SECTION (1) SIDE YARD SECTION (2) BASEMENT UNITS SECTION (3)

Page 19: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

19

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

2

1

BUILDING SECTIONS

Page 20: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

20 LANDSCAPE PLAN

209.41

210.40

211.47

211.1

205.0

209.88

210.25

210.79

210.60

210.98

210.90

211.72

211.95

211.70

209.8

201.4

201.6

OHPT=253.81 OHPT=255.00

OHPT=253.81

206.7

207.0

207.7201.9

199.9

3.7'

12.9'

12.6'

0.1'S

2.2'

5.5'

P

G

G

210

208

208

206

206

204

202

XWALK AHEAD

WM

PP

N 89°09'28" W 92.98'

N 00°50'32" E 53.01'

N 88°17'41" W 92.99'

N 00°50'36" E 54.41'

54.56' HELD PLAT

PROPOSED31-UNIT

MIXED-USEBUILDING

RESIDENTIALENTRANCE

SECONDARYENTRANCEAT ALLEY

COMMERCIALENTRANCE

UN

IVER

SITY

WAY

NE

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

EXIS

TIN

G S

IDEW

ALK

PROPERTY LINE

PRO

PER

TY L

INE

PROPERTY LINE

ALLE

Y

TRASHACCESSAT ALLEY

DN

DN

UP

NORTH

0

SCALE:

feet8 16 24

1/8" = 1'-0"

STREET LEVELLANDSCAPE PLAN

PROJECT TITLE

DRAWN DATE

State ofWashingtonregistered

Landscape Architect

Devin Petersoncertificate no. 1222

REVISED DATE

1/8" = 1'-0"

RE

ND

ER

ED

LA

ND

SC

AP

E P

LA

N5

63

7 U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y W

AY

NO

RT

HE

AS

T,

SE

AT

TL

E,

WA

L0

NORTH

0

SCALE:

feet8 16 24

1/8" = 1'-0"

ROOF LEVELLANDSCAPE PLAN

Page 21: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

21

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

LIGHTING PLAN

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

3

3

3

3

RECESSED CAN LIGHT

TR ADITIONAL INDUSTRIAL SCONCE

RECESSED STRIP LIGHT

CONCRETE LIGHT

MODERN SCONCE

Page 22: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

22 CHARACTER RENDERINGS

CS2 URBAN PATTERN AND FORMStrengthen the most desirable forms, characteristics, and patterns of the streets, block faces, and open spaces in the surrounding area.

CS2-B-2 Connection to the Street: A strong street edge is proposed at a zero-lot line along University Way NE. This single-story massing responds to the scale of the existing single and double-story buildings within the block.

CS2-C-2 Mid-Block Sites: The proportions of the front facade is responsive to the existing development along the street.

DC2 ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPTDevelop an architectural concept that will result in a unif ied and functional design that f its well on the site and within its surroundings.

DC4 EXTERIOR ELEMENTS AND FINISHESUse appropriate and high quality elements and finishes for the building and its open spaces.

DC4-A Exterior Finish Materials: Face brick, cement and metal panel and architectural concrete are durable, textural, maintainable and climate appropriate materials. They also are ubiquitous materials along University Way NE.

DC2-B-1 Facade Composition: The materials have wrapped around corners to define distinct volumes that compose the building.

1

1

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

Page 23: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

23

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

CHARACTER RENDERINGS

VISIBLE GREEN ROOF @ LOWER DECK CLEAN SIGNAGE, STEEL LET TERING STEEL PL ANTER @ ENTRY

DC4 EXTERIOR ELEMENTS AND FINISHESUse appropriate and high quality elements and finishes for the building and its open spaces.

DC4-A Exterior Finish Materials: The brick material proposed at the ground level will appeal at the pedestrian scale as a textural and modular material.

DC4-D Trees, Landscape and Hardscape Materials: While the project is maximizing the site and leaves little room for lush planting, small areas of planting have been focused at the street facade. A planter box will be utilized to shape the residential entry, and planting above the single-story volume will soften the perceived edge from the sidewalk.

4

4

5

5

PL2 WALKIBILITY Create a safe and comfortable walking environment that is easy to navigate and well-connected to existingpedestrian walkways and features.

PL3 STREET-LEVEL INTERACTIONEncourage human interaction and activity at the street-level with clear connections to building entries and edges.

PL2-B-2 Lighting for Safety: Lighting will be incorporated into the street facade to both provide wayfinding as well as safety along the sidewalk.

PL3-A-2 Ensemble of Elements: Canopies and landscaping will be provided to create an appealing and pedestrian-friendly experience.

PL2-D-1 Wayfinding: The commercial volume will have simple, steel signage above the entry. The residential entry will have separate signage to indicate address and direct visitor to the private sphere of the project.

1

1

1

3

3

2

2

Page 24: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

24 CHARACTER RENDERINGS

DC2 ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPTDevelop an architectural concept that will result in a unif ied and functional design that f its well on the site and within its surroundings.

PL3 STREET LEVEL INTERACTIONEncourage human interaction and activity at the street-level with clear connections to building entries and edges.

CS2 URBAN PATTERN AND FORMStrengthen the most desirable forms, characteristics, and patterns of the streets, block faces, and open spaces in the surrounding area.

DC2-B-1 Facade Composition: The materials have wrapped around corners to define distinct volumes that compose the building. The street-facing facade is perceived as three specific volumes: 1) the single-story pedestrian volume composed of brick; 2) the two-story residential volume composed of light, horizontal panel; and 3) the upper level residential volume composed of dark, vertical panel.

PL3-A-1 Entries: The commercial entry takes cues from the existing commercial buildings within the block and is centered and recessed, directly off the sidewalk. The residential entry is on the "quieter" edge of the building, and is recessed to indicate private rather than public.

CS2-B-2 Connection to the Street: The commercial component of the proposed design is located at the southernmost corner of the building to link to the commercial axis towards the south along "The Ave."

3

2

2 2

1

1

3

Page 25: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

25

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

CHARACTER RENDERINGS

ARCHITECTUR AL CONCRETE CONCRETE PL ANTER

DC2 ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPTDevelop an architectural concept that will result in a unif ied and functional design that f its well on the site and within its surroundings.

CS2 URBAN PATTERN AND FORMStrengthen the most desirable forms, characteristics, and patterns of the streets, block faces, and open spaces in the surrounding area.

PL2 WALKIBILITY Create a safe and comfortable walking environment that is easy to navigate and well-connected to existingpedestrian walkways and features.

DC2-B-1 Facade Composition: Material edges are broken at massing transitions to create distinct, compositional volumes. The overall massing creates the appearance of a dark volume resting on a lower, concrete volume.

CS2-D-3 Zone Transition: The rear of the building sets back the required 15'-0" at upper levels to decrease the massing appearance from the single-family zoning. The roof deck parapet steps back from the edge to decrease the height, bulk, and scale.

PL2-B Safety and Security: A combination of lighting, heavy landscaping, planters, and upper-level transparency will create security through prevention and lines of sight. Any "hidden areas" will be inaccessible to pedestrians and heavily planted to deter use.

3

33

1

1

2

2

DC4 EXTERIOR ELEMENTS AND FINISHESUse appropriate and high quality elements and finishes for the building and its open spaces.

DC4-A Exterior Finish Materials: The materials along the alley at the ground level are highly textural, durable, and visually pleasing to soften the buffer between the zones.

4

4

Page 26: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

26 CHARACTER RENDERINGS

PL2 WALKIBILITY Create a safe and comfortable walking environment that is easy to navigate and well-connected to existingpedestrian walkways and features.

PL2-B Safety and Security: A combination of lighting, heavy landscaping, planters, and upper-level transparency will create security through prevention and lines of sight. Any "hidden areas" will be inaccessible to pedestrians and heavily planted to deter use. Plantings and boulders will be used to deter specif ic covered areas.

1

1

DC4 EXTERIOR ELEMENTS AND FINISHESUse appropriate and high quality elements and finishes for the building and its open spaces.

DC4-A Exterior Finish Materials: The materials along the alley at the ground level are highly textural, durable, and visually pleasing to soften the buffer between the zones.

2

2

PROTECTIVE L ANDSCAPING

Page 27: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

27

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

CHARACTER RENDERINGS

CONCRETE PAVERS EX TERIOR SEATING TO CREATE "ROOMS" FREE- STANDING PL ANTERS ALONG EDGES

Page 28: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
Page 29: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

APPENDIX

Page 30: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

30

5 MINUTE WALK

10 MINUTE WALK

15 MINUTE WALK

UN

IVER

SITY

WAY

NE

15TH

AVE

NE

NE 65TH ST

NE RAVENNA BLVD

NE 50TH ST

NE 45TH ST

RAVENNA PARK

UNIVERSITY VILLAGE

COWEN PARK

ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL

UNIVERSITY PLAYGROUND SAFEWAY

UNIVERSITY DISTRICT FARMER’S MARKET

UNIVERSITY PUBLICLIBRARY

CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS

BLESSED SACRAMENT CHURCH

NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS

URBAN ANALYSIS KEY

PRIMARY ACCESS ROAD

NODE

POINT OF INTEREST

WALKSHED

BUS STOP

1

2

3 4

5

6

7

8

Page 31: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

31

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER

THE UNIVERSIT Y OF WASHINGTON

GREEN L AKE

UNIVERSIT Y VILL AGE COWEN PARK

"THE AVE" R AVENNA PARK TR AILS 65TH COMMERCIAL AREA UNIVERSIT Y FARMER'S MARKET

1

2 3

4

5 6

7 8

Page 32: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

32 MAXIMUM ZONING POTENTIAL

UNIVERSITY WAY NE

15TH AVE NE

NE 55TH ST

NE 56TH ST

NE RAVENNA BLVD

BROOKLYN AVE NE

12TH AVE NE

NC2-40

LR3

LR2

SF5000

SF5000

NC3-60

COMMERCIAL ZONING

PROPOSED SITE

PROPOSED PROJECTSTOTAL B

UILDABLE WID

TH

TOTAL BUILDABLE DEPTH

1' - 0 " DEDICATION

15 ' - 0 "

FROM ALLEY CL

VARIABLE MA X. HT. CALCS.BUILDABLE UPPER FLOOR

HVL STBK .

9'-

0"

13' -

0"

9' -

6"

9' -

6"

9' -

6"

14'-

0"

HV

L S

TB

K.

Page 33: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

33

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

ADDRESSES: 5637 University Way NEPARCEL #: 5226300130 ZONING: NC2P-40OVERLAYS: University District Northwest(Urban Center Village)SITE AREA: 4,995 SF 23.47A.004 PERMITTED USESPermitted outright:

• Residential

23.47A.005 STREET LEVEL USESResidential uses may occupy, in the aggregate, no more than 20% of the street-level street-facing facade, in a pedestrian-designated zone, facing a designated principal pedestrian street.

23.47A.008 STREET- LEVEL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS• Blank segments of the street-facing facade between 2 feet and 8 feet above the sidewalk may not exceed 20 feet in width. The total of all blank facade segments may not exceed 40% of the width of the facade of the structure along the street.

• 60% of the street facing facade between 2 and 8 feet shall be transparent.• Nonresidential uses shall extend an average depth of at least 30 feet and a minimum depth of 15 feet from the street-level street-facing facade.

• Nonresidential uses at street level shall have a floor-to-floor height of at least 13 feet.• At least one of the street-level street-facing facades containing a residential use shall have a visually prominent pedestrian entry; and

• The floor of a dwelling unit located along the street-level street-facing facade shall be at least 4 feet above or 4 feet below sidewalk grade or be set back at least 10 feet from the sidewalk.

23.47A.012 STRUCTURE HEIGHT NC2P-40Allowed Maximum Base Height: 40'-0”4’ additional allowed for rooftop features (parapets, clerestories, etc.) 44’-0”16’ additional allowed for stair & elevator penthouses: 56’-0” 23.86.006 STRUCTURE HEIGHT MEASUREMENTThe height of a structure is the difference between the elevation of the highest point of the structure not excepted from applicable height limits and the average grade level (“average grade level” means the average of the elevation of existing lot grades at the midpoint, measured horizontally, of each exterior wall of the structure, or at the midpoint of each side of the smallest rectangle that can be drawn to enclose the structure.) 23.47A.013 FLOOR AREA R ATIO Maximum FAR: 3.25 (16,234 SF)Minimum FAR: 1.5 (7,493) 23.47A.014 SETBACKS REQUIREMENTSSetback requirements for lots abutting or across the alley from residential zones:

• For a structure containing a residential use, a setback is required along any side or rear lot line that abuts a lot in a residential zone or that is across an alley from a lot in a residential zone as follows: Fifteen feet for portions of structures above 13 feet in height to a maximum of 40 feet.

A minimum five (5) foot landscaped setback may be required per Section 23.47A.016, Screening and Landscaping Standards.

23.47A.016 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING STANDARDS• Green Factor score of .30 or greater, per Section 23.86.019, is required for any lot with development containing more than four new dwelling units.

• Street trees are required when any development is proposed, except as provided in subsection 23.47A.016.B.2 and Section 23.53.015.

• Existing street trees shall be retained unless the Director of Transportation approves their removal.• The Director, in consultation with the Director of Transportation, will determine the number, type and placement of street trees to be provided.

23.47A.024 AMENIT Y AREARequired: 5% of gross floor area in residential use 5% x 16,000 SF =800 SF 23.54.015 REQUIRED PARKINGPark ing is not required. The project is wi th in an Urban Vi l lage and meets the def in i t ion of Frequent Transi t . 23.54.040 SOLID WASTE & RECYCLABLE MATERIALS STOR AGE AND ACCESSResidential, 26-50 dwelling units: 375 SFThe minimum horizontal dimension of required storage space is 12 feet.

NC2- 40NC3 - 65

LR1

LR3LR 2URBAN VILL AGE

PEDESTRIAN AREA

ROOSEVELT RESIDENTIAL URBAN VILL AGE

UNIVERSIT Y DISTRICTNW URBAN VILL AGE

Page 34: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

34 EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY CONTEXT

1 2

2 1

3

5 6

6

5

3

4

4

MODERN, SIMPLE MASSING W/ HIGH QUALIT Y MATERIALS

RECESSED, COVERED PARKING SHIELDED FROM VIEW MAINTAINING EXISTING STREET WALL W/ SIMPLE, DIRECT MATERIALS

SIMPLE MASSING WITH A DEFINED ENTRY SEQUENCE

MULTIPLE ENTRIES W/ STEEP TOPOGR APHY CHANGEMODERN DESIGN THAT CONTINUES EXISTING STREET WALL

Page 35: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

35

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY CONTEXT

1

1

2

3

2

3

4

5260 UNIVERSIT Y WAY NE - STUDIO 19 ARCHITECTS- CONTINUES STREET WALL, DEFINED VOLUMES

5001 BROOKLYN AVE NE - JOHNSTON ARCHITECTS- SIMPLIFIED MATERIAL PALLET, WOOD ACCENTS

5020 15TH AVE NE - STUDIO 77- USES LIGHT COLORS TO REFLECT SUNLIGHT, MODERN MATERIALS 4

5000 UNIVERSIT Y WAY NE - STUDIO 19 ARCHITECTS- L ARGE DEVELOPMENT WITH MUTED COLOR PALET TE

Page 36: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

36 STREET VIEWS + ANALYSIS

STREET LOOKING EAST

STREET LOOKING WEST

ACROSS FROM SITE

L ARGE GL A ZING, HIGH QUALIT Y, MODERN MATERIALS

GL A ZING FOCUSED TOWARDS THE STREET

FL AT ROOF UTILIZED ALONG COMMERCIAL A XIS

CONTINUE STREET WALL AND ENTRY PAT TERN

Page 37: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

37

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

SITE

STREET VIEWS + ANALYSIS

STREET LOOKING EAST

STREET LOOKING WEST

FL AT ROOFS USED ON BUILDINGS OF COMPAR ABLE SCALE DECKS CREATE VISUAL INTEREST

CONTINUE STREET WALL

Page 38: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

38 STREET VIEWS + ANALYSIS

ALLEY LOOKING EAST

ALLEY LOOKING WEST

SITE

Page 39: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

39

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

STREET VIEWS + ANALYSIS

ALLEY LOOKING EAST

ALLEY LOOKING WESTACROSS FROM SITE

Page 40: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

40 SITE DOCUMENTATION

REAR VIEW OF SITE FROM THE ALLEYVIEW OF COMMERCIAL STREET WALL LOOKING NORTH

VIEW OF ALLEY FROM REAR OF SITE LOOKING SOUTH

VIEW OF ALLEY FROM REAR OF SITE LOOKING NORTH

EDGE AT SOUTHERN NEIGHBOR

VIEW OF HVL LOOKING SOUTH

EDGE AT NORTHERN NEIGHBOR

Page 41: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

41

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

OPTIONS OVERVIEW

OPTION ONE OPTION TWO OPTION THREE - PREFERRED

Option One fronts the Ave with a large commercial space and a recessed residential entrance. A bike storage room is located south of the residential entrance and also fronts the Ave. The building massing holds the line of the street level spaces for three stories and then steps back to accommodate the existing location of the HVLs along the Ave. Access to the basement and 3 apartment units is available from the alley. Trash and recycling will be picked up here from an enclosed Refuse Room located immediately adjacent to the alley. The vertical circulation is consolidated to the southern edge of the property. Floors 2 and 3 each have units facing east towards the Ave as well as north towards Cowen Park. Floor 4 will have 3 units set back at the east and facing the Ave. To the west on this floor will be a large rooftop amenity space oriented to take advantage of the afternoon sun and views towards the Olympic Mountains.

Option Two also fronts the Ave with a large commercial space and a recessed residential entrance. The building massing again holds the line of the street level spaces for three stories and then steps back to accommodate the existing location of the HVLs along the Ave. Daylight access to the basement with 3 apartment units and an enclosed Refuse Room is available from the alley. Unlike Option One, the vertical circulation in this option is consolidated in the middle to allow for units on 4 sides of the building. Floors 2 and 3 each have most units facing east towards the Ave. Floor 4 will have 3 units set back at the east and facing the Ave. Also on the Floor 4, will be a large rooftop amenity space that wraps around the circulation core and offers views to the north, south and west.

Option Three explores a different approach to the massing of the building and its relationship to the Ave. A large commercial space again fronts the Ave but this time it is oriented to the southeast corner of the parcel and closer to the existing commercial development located along the Ave. As a result, the residential entry is moved to the northeast corner and oriented towards the quieter, more residential character of the Cowen Park neighborhood to the north. A Design Departure is sought to allow for a wider residential entry that can double as a covered commercial porch for the building. The building massing holds the line of the street level commercial spaces for four stories made possible by relocating the existing HVLs. The vertical circulation is consolidated at the northern edge of the property and allows units to equally face the Ave and the alley while also providing several south-facing units. From the alley, Refuse and Bike rooms are accessed as well as a handful of units. The partial 4th floor has 4 units oriented towards the Ave and a large rooftop amenity space with the towering circulation penthouses oriented to the north to minimize shading of this space.

Page 42: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

42 OPTION THREE (PREFERRED)

PREFERRED OPTION –

DISTINGUISHING FEATURES• 4-story building = 16,900 GSF• 32 apartments + 1 commercial space

OPPORTUNITIES• Large commercial space fronts the Ave• Trash/refuse is internalized and immediately

adjacent to the alley for pick-up• Many units face the Ave• Large roof deck amenity oriented towards

afternoon sun and western views

CONSTR AINTS• 4th story HVL setback at the Ave is inconsistent

with recent neighboring development on the block• Rear single-family setback constrains unit count

DEPARTURE REQUESTED: • Rear setback departure requested across alley

from single-family zoning; 4'-0" requested• Residential use departure requested at entry

sequence; 20% allowed, 28% requested in which to locate entry and leasing office

SOUTH STACKING DIAGRAM EAST STACKING DIAGRAM

11'-4"

8'-0

"12

'-0"

8'-0

"8'

-0"

4'-0

"

9'-0

"13

'-0"

10'-0

"8'

-9"

9'-0

"

55'-612"

SECTION B37'-5"

SECTION A

R14'-0"

8'-0

"12

'-0"

8'-0

"8'

-0"

8'-0

"

2'-8"

4'-0

"40

'-0"

UNIVERSITY WAY NE

ALL

EY

CE

NTE

RLI

NE

SOUTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

AVG. GRADE 207.17'

MAX. HT. 247.17'

GROUND FLOOR210'-1"

223'-1"

201'-4"

THIRD FLOOR

BASEMENT

251'-1"

SECOND FLOOR

8'-9

"

T.O. ROOF

232'-1"

FOURTH FLOOR241'-1"

HT. BONUS 251.17'

55'-612"

SECTION B

AVG. GRADE 201.69'

MAX. HT. 241.69'

HT. BONUS 245.69'

EXISTING HVL

EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

HVL

210'-1"

GRADE ATSIDEWALK

HVL @ NORTHCORNER

2'-8"

PROPOSED 32"RELOCATION

4'-0

"

12'-7"

C O N E A R C H I T E C T U R E 'THE AVE' APARTMENTS EDG FEASIBILITY

210'-1"

VIEW FROM UNIVERSIT Y WAY NE VIEW FROM ALLEY BIRDSEYE VIEW

Page 43: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

43

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

OPTION THREE (PREFERRED)

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

17'-3"

17'-3" 17'-10"

18'-0

"5'

-01 2"

17'-10"39'-9"

30'-0

"

93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 17'-3" 11'-3"

1'-0

"47

'-0"

6'-5

"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

"

4'-4" 16'-0"5'-0" 24'-0" 18'-1"

93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 4'-3"

1'-0

"35

'-5"

2'-4

"

5'-0" 32'-4"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

0'-1

0"51

'-2"

1'-0

"

4'-4" 24'-0" 11'-3"17'-10"93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 17'-3" 11'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"5'-0" 32'-4" 5'-0"

54'-5

"

93'-0"

5'-0"

5'-0"8'-4" 11'-3"

24'-10"5'-0"

8'-4"22'-3"

17'-3"

17'-3"0'

-10"

51'-2

"1'

-0" 4'-4" 4'-3"24'-10"

93'-0"

53'-0

"

4'-4" 4'-3"

1'-0

"51

'-1"

2'-4

"

5'-0" 32'-4"

54'-5

"

93'-0"24'-10"5'-0"

9

8

7

5

4

3

1

2

3

10

1

2

3RESIDENTIAL

LOBBY

COMMERCIAL(880 SF)

STREET LEVELSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOORS 2-3SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

FLOOR 4SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

AMENITY1051 SQ. FT.

(WINDOW WELL)

BASEMENT LEVELSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"

10'-10"93'-0"

21

6

STORAGE

MECH

BIKES 56

4

55'-2"

32

1TRASH

MECH

8'-4"

5'-0" 24'-0" 8'-4" 5'-0"

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

UP

PE

R L

EV

EL

SE

TBA

CK

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

1'-0

" ALL

EY

DE

DIC

ATI

ON

5'-0"

14'-0"HVL STBK

15'-8

"

3'-8"

3'-8"

3'-8"

C O N E A R C H I T E C T U R E 'THE AVE' APARTMENTS EDG FEASIBILITY

Page 44: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

44 SOLAR STUDIES - OPTION 3 (PREFERRED)

JUNE 21, 9 AM DECEMBER 21, 9 AMJUNE 21, 12 PM DECEMBER 21, 12 PMJUNE 21, 5 PM DECEMBER 21, 5 PM

MARCH / SEPTEMBER 21, 9 AM MARCH / SEPTEMBER 21, 12 PM MARCH / SEPTEMBER 21, 5 PM

Page 45: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 REC

45

C O N E ARCHITECTURE

PRELIMINARY SITE PLANSPREFERRED OPTION CHARACTER RENDERING

Page 46: RECOMMENDATION ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW

'THE AVE' APARTMENTS #3025269 RECC O N E ARCHITECTURE

46 PREFERRED OPTION CHARACTER RENDERING

ROOF PLANTERSRoof planters could create soft buffers between unit decks. These could also create visual interest for the pedestrian views from University Way NE.

OPEN RAILSOpen rails allow for individual roof decks while maintaining the overall massing clarity.

FRONT PORCHWhile the commercial space fronts the Ave, the residential entry is recessed. This creates a shared transitional space between the building and the sidewalk. This porch is intended for both commercial customers and residential tenants and would include permanent seating, plantings, and other pedestrian details.

HORIZONTAL WINDOWS GROUPINGSLarge window glazing, primarily focused towards the east and west on all schemes, is proposed in a more horizontal pattern in Option 3.

BICYCLE AMENITY PORCH AT ALLEYProviding the bike storage along the alley can activate the area with occasional pedestrian traffic without being disruptive to the existing structures. Furthermore, the bicycle porch at the alley relates to the front porch at the Ave creating a building with 2 public faces.

SOUTHERN COMMERCIALThe commercial is located at the southern edge of the site, which continues the commercial pattern from the south. The location of the residential entry will relate more to the residential areas north of the project site.

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL