2024-10-15 Council PSPHSP MinutesPUBLIC SAFETY, PLANNING, HUMAN SERVICES & PERSONNEL
COMMITTEE MEETING
October 15, 2024
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Neil Tibbott (Chair) Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Councilmember Chris Eck Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Council President Vivian Olson(ex-officio) Tristan Sewell, Planner
Mayor Mike Rosen Scott Passey, City Clerk
Councilmember Michelle Dotsch
Councilmember Susan Paine
CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council PSPHSP Committee meeting was called to order virtually and in the Fourtner
Room, 121 — 51h Avenue North, Edmonds, at 3:30 pm by Councilmember Tibbott.
2. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Committee Updates
• RFA Annexation Consideration Update
Councilmember Tibbott explained the City is in negotiations with the RFA regarding the pre -annexation
agreement and annexation plan. Discussions with the RFA have included use of the existing stations,
emergency service needs in Edmonds, staffing at existing stations, how the RFA's would use reserve
funds, and fiscal impacts related to benefit charges and assessed values. The RFA Commission is
deliberating tonight on the pre -annexation agreement and annexation plan.
• Comprehensive Plan
Ms. Hope relayed the draft comprehensive plan and DEIS are available online along with dates for the
community to provide input. The draft elements were presented to the planning board last week and
will be presented to the council at tonight's special meeting. She emphasized the elements are still in
draft form; edits to date have included removing some of the action items from the plan. Public comment
on the DEIS as well as the draft comprehensive plan will be available to council. The draft Housing and
Land Use Elements will be presented to council at a future meeting.
Ms. Hope responded to questions regarding how the action items will be captured and inclusion of the
CFP/CIP in the Capital Facilities Element.
2. Green Building Incentives
Ms. Hope provided an introduction, advising the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases are
transportation and building. The challenge with green building incentives is finding incentives that are
meaningful enough to the bottom line to be useable.
Mr. Sewell displayed the point categories for LEED and Built Green. explaining Built Green information
is available online, LEED is behind a paywall for professionals:
Built Green LEED
o Site and Water o Integrative Process
o Energy Efficiency o Location and Transportation
o Health and Indoor Air Quality
o Materials Efficiency
o Equity and Social Justice
o Operation, Maintenance, and
Homeowner Education
o Built Green Brand Promotion
10/15/24 PSPHSP Committee Minutes,
o Sustainable Sites
o Water Efficiency
o Energy and Atmosphere
o Materials and Resources
o Indoor Environmental Quality
o Innovation
o Regional Priority
2
Mr. Sewell explained Built Green is Washington specific and related to the State Energy Code. He
described the legislature's mandate that the Energy Code require a significant energy reduction by
2031, incentives that are of interest to developers, examples of existing code/Built Green 4-Star and
Built Green 5-Star or better on an RS-8 lot, examples of 2-story houses with maximized height and 5-
foot setback, minimum setbacks by zone, 35% lot coverage, and ability to specify incentives for the
primary and ADU structure. A tabletop example of an RS-8 lot with minimum setbacks was used to
consider various primary and ADU/DADU dwelling unit scenarios.
Questions and discussion followed regarding design elements that would be incorporated into Built
Green and LEED, application of LEED and Built Green standards, application of Built Green to ADUs,
online resources for Built Green, materials efficiency includes where materials are resourced and
manufacturing efficiency, whether LEED is as stringent as Washington State mandates, whether either
program addresses reuse and recycling, Built Green Resources, tree retention requirements, whether
tree preservation is effective, how often developers are interested in meeting green standards,
incentives that would made complying with green standards worthwhile, developers' interest in
expedited plan review but not as an exclusive incentive, and potential transfer of value.
Questions and discussion continued regarding whether residents understand what the incentives could
do on an adjacent property, minimum setbacks in RS-6, views protection, definition of primary structure,
planning board's proposal for lot coverage incentives which are not included in staff's recommendation,
whether green incentives could be allowed only in certain areas, setbacks from steep slopes, lack of
trees in RS-6 zones, urbanizing a suburban environment, potential for another story with 5' height
incentive, addition height requires 4:12 pitched roof, existing pitched roof bonus for multifamily, existing
green incentives in the Westgate mixed use zone, height limits and stepback requirements in the CG
zone, electrical vehicle standards, whether to delay approval until after the comprehensive plan is
approved, increased interest in ADU/DADUs, and using green building incentives to incentivize
development in specific areas.
Committee recommendation: Present proposed green building incentives to full council with options
3. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 5:03 pm.
sm--Z"�-
SCOTT PASSEY; CLERK