Loading...
2024-12-10 Council Special MinutesEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES December 10, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember (arrived 5:37 p.m.) Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir. Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Mgr. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. COUNCIL BUSINESS REVIEW OF FINAL EIS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Planning & Development Director Shane Hope introduced Acting Planning Manager Mike Clugston and Lindsey Amtmann, Herrara. She relayed the final EIS has been issued, is published online and has been submitted to the State Department of Ecology. The final EIS incorporated information from the draft EIS and other input and tweaking to make it a final EIS. The purpose of tonight's presentation is to review it at a high level and respond to any questions/concerns. Ms. Hope reviewed the EIS scope and process: • What is the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)? o Washington state law adopted in 1971 to inform government agencies and the public about environmental considerations for proposals o Provides method to identify environmental impacts and mitigation opportunities before action is taken What is Environmental Impact Statement? o Tool for identifying and analyzing environmental aspects of proposal ■ The EIS process: - Provides opportunities for the public, local, state and federal agencies, and tribal governments to participate in developing and analyzing information. - Provides decision -makers with environmental information - Identifies significant impacts Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 1 Recommends reasonable alternatives for accomplishing proposal Identifies potential mitigation for impacts Types of EIS o There are two types of EIS: Purpose Actions Covered Project Types • EIS Process Steps SEPA Project EIS Analyzes potential impacts and alternatives to a proposal Proposals that are likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact SEPA Non- Project EIS Provides a basis for future project decisions Plans, policies, programs, or regulations that control the use of the environment New construction; facility operation Comprehensive plans, watershed changes; environmental cleanup management plans, shoreline projects; demolitions; and master programs, and development purchases, sales, leases, transfers, regulations. or exchanges of natural resources. I Aug, 2023 Early step in preparing the EIS: publication of the Notice of Intent in the Federal Register. Aug4-Sept 10, Determines the scope of issues to be considered within the DEIS 2023 document. Interested parties may submit comments. Sep 30, 2024 DEIS identifies the project's goals and objectives, assesses the environmental impacts of each alternative, proposes measures to mitigate any identified adverse effects. Sep 30-Oct 29, DEIS undergoes an extensive public and agency review. Avirtual 2024 (30-days) meeting will be held 15 days after publishing the DEIS to provide an overview and seek comments. Dec 9, 2024 Includes analyzing and responding to comments received on the draft EIS. To be published no later than 60 days after the close of the comment period. • Preferred Alternative o SEPA provides for selection of a "preferred alternative" in EIS process (but does not require it) o Naming a preferred alternative critical area signal the approach thought to be the most likely for the plan or project ad clarify key things to consider o City council selected a preferred alternative on November 4, 2024 to include a modified combination of the two action alternatives identified in the draft EIS and draft comprehensive plan.... FEIS and Final Plan o A Final EIS includes public comments along with any updates from Draft EIS o Edmonds' FEIS was published online December 9, 2024 o City's comprehensive plan may be adopted only after final EIS is issued 30 days - DEIS Review and Public Comment D FEIS Issued D refinement of D Hearing D Period L Draft •. Lindsey Amtmann, Environmental Planner, Herrera Environmental Consultants, commented staff has done a tremendous job working with the team of scientists, engineers and planners to develop the EIS and issue Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 2 it to the Department of Ecology. The EIS has been formally issued and is on City's website for review. SEPA has a rule where a project proponent such as the City of Edmonds must wait at least 7 days after the final EIS is issued to make a decision, meaning selecting and adopting an updated comprehensive plan. A couple of things heard during the comment period on the draft EIS that she wanted to ensure the council was aware of, was the EIS is not detailed enough which she noted is a natural reaction to looking at a non - project EIS. Most people are used to looking at project EIS for something like an intersection improvement where the exact impacts on transportation or a nearby school are addressed and the exact mitigation such as lane channelization and lighting. That cannot be done for a programmatic EIS; it is a very qualitative analysis. This EIS meets the SEPA requirements for non -project EIS. Some comments were unsatisfied with that and wanted to know more about the details. The responses in the comment summary are that individual projects will undergo a project -specific SEPA analysis when they are proposed; that could be a SEPA checklist if a project is not anticipating significant impacts or it could be an EIS if significant impacts are expected. Ms. Amtmann continued, another comment they heard a lot was why isn't the EIS looking at certain elements of the environment such as soils, seismic areas or tsunamis. That goes back to the beginning of the project; in accordance with the SEPA scoping period, 1%2 years ago the City did a SEPA scoping which includes a published notice of the EIS and seeking input about what should be considered in the EIS. People weighed in, the City considered comments and developed a list of elements that may have significant impacts. Because, for example, there are no significant impacts anticipated to soil, that is not considered in the EIS. The City doesn't want to waste tax dollars or staff time looking at something that won't have significant impacts. The City also must follow SEPA which requires including significant adverse impacts. She acknowledged there are a handful of elements of the environment that not in the EIS. The EIS is completely adequate per SEPA and those elements simply aren't included because significant impacts are not anticipated. She concluded those were probably the two issues the council would hear from the public about the most. Councilmember Dotsch asked the results of the analysis. Ms. Amtmann responded there are no significant impacts on any element of the environment with the exception of transportation. There is a segment of Highway 99 northbound that will have a significant drop in its level of service (LOS) under the no action alternative (not adopting an updated comprehensive plan and not comply with GMA) as well as under Alternatives A and B. There were questions raised about whether the City was okay with that and just accept that terrible LOS and the response is the City will continue working with WSDOT to address this, but the City has to comply with GMA and needs to have an updated comprehensive plan. There could be significant impacts from a particular development, but not from the comprehensive plan. Councilmember Dotsch recalled 196t" & 88t" which was a LOS D becomes LOS E; she asked if that was significant. Ms. Amtmann answered dropping one level is traditionally not considered significant. Councilmember Dotsch relayed her understanding an E LOS was acceptable. Ms. Amtmann answered yes. Councilmember Dotsch recalled there were some issues related to water. Ms. Amtmann responded there were multiple comments about runoff and erosion in particular areas. This EIS is looking generally at impacts on water. If a development were proposed in an area with a steep slope next to a stream, that is a critical area and that development will be subject to critical area regulations. The City's code and State Department of Ecology guidelines for stormwater and runoff get stronger every year. What might have been approved when someone purchased their house 20-50 years ago would not be approved today or would require substantial mitigation, something many people are not aware of. That is addressed in the EIS; specific projects will have to go through the process of complying with water quality regulations and requirements. Councilmember Dotsch inquired about water pressure for firefighting. Ms. Amtmann answered the City consulted with public service providers like the water district, stormwater, etc., and those individual Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 3 agencies update their planning documents in response to growth and have to increase pressure as growth occurs. Councilmember Eck asked Ms. Amtmann to reiterate what she said about seismic threats and its inclusion/omission in the final EIS. Ms. Amtmann answered the critical area ordinance covers geologically hazardous areas which can be seismic, a risk of a slump or slide, that has to be considered if something will be built in an area at the bottom of a steep slope. Seismic threat is difficult to analyze but it is covered in the Edmonds code. For example, if someone wants build in Edmonds, they have to go through a SEPA checklist or EIS and will have to look at that seismic threat; it could be they have to build to a higher standard of seismic safety. This is a seismically active area and development cannot be prohibited, but the code can require buildings are safe for the people living or doing business there. Council President Olson relayed the sense of expectation that the EIS would make the City aware of areas that required additional protection. She asked if that expectation was incorrect and not what the EIS was for. Ms. Amtmann responded the EIS is not designed to point out where extra protection is needed, it is to look at the potential impacts of not doing the project, or Alternative A or B. Areas that need extra protection, critical areas, are already known and mapped. The EIS was updated in 3-4 places to say the updated comprehensive plan will have maps that show block by block where a neighborhood center or hub is located; rather than the representative blue and pink circles, it will show exactly where they are and overlaid on a critical area map. For example, if a neighborhood center or hub was on a CARA, near a slope, etc., anyone that wants to develop there will have to ensure their stormwater runoff complies with Ecology or whatever else they need to do related to building on a steep slope. Those maps will be in the plan, but they are not part of the EIS. Council President Olson commented when this process began, promises were made to one of the Highway 99 neighborhoods that their area would be looked at with more scrutiny and care; if that didn't happen, she wanted the council know that, because it may require revisiting that in the future. Ms. Amtmann answered all areas of the City were considered equally. She recalled discussion about why the City wasn't doing another Highway 99 EIS and a decision was made to look at the entire City and not favor one area like Highway 99 or the Bowl over another. No special consideration was given to Highway 99; it was considered at the same high level as the rest of the City. Council President Olson asked the benefits of revisiting a specific area like Highway 99 at this point. Ms. Amtmann answered it would depend on whether there was a proposed action that might have significant impacts, then an EIS would be done. If the council just wanted to ensure the community was being adequately represented and treated fairly, that is a separate process, not SEPA; that is the code, public outreach, zoning and land use designations. Councilmember Nand referred to page 36 of EIS, Community Engagement Framework, recalling when the council accepted VIA or Herrera's recommendation to do a citywide EIS instead of a specific EIS for Highway 99, they were told there would be a level of community engagement for the subarea that would address the concerns about repealing the ordinance requiring a separate EIS for Highway 99. She asked Ms. Amtmann to described the equitable community engagement framework and how many public meetings and public outreach were done on Highway 99. Ms. Amtmann explained the outreach was designed to let people from all areas of the City have a voice and not favor one area over another. Ms. Hope responded the SEPA process wasn't particularly oriented to a particular neighborhood, however, there was a lot of process as part of the comprehensive plan. She was not with the City then, but knew there was quite a bit of process that included that area. If there are changes to be made to that area in terms of development regulations, that would be another critical time to reach out to the community. Councilmember Nand commented most of the community was unaware they had been upzoned to Commercial General (GC) in 2017 and when big developments were proposed without transition elements, the council began hearing from community activists in that area which is why the council responded with Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 4 a request for more community engagement and more buy -in from the Highway 99 community, an area that is zoned differently than the rest of the City. Ms. Amtmann explained there is a requirement for public involvement through SEPA which the City met and the City also elected to do additional outreach beyond the bare minimum; a list of the meetings that were held is included in the EIS. Councilmember Chen relayed his understand about treating the entire City equally and appreciated the discussion related to Highway 99 where special regulations were needed for some of the projects that happened there. With regard to applying the same lens to the entire City, he referred to the Perrinville where there has been downstream flooding that the City has been dealing with for a long time. He asked what approach was taken in the EIS study and what was the finding regarding the potential for accelerating flooding in Perrinville. Ms. Amtmann answered Perrinville is a stream of concern for Edmonds and it was her understanding a lot of work has been done on that steam. If a development were proposed in that area, it would have to go through a SEPA analysis that looked at stormwater and would be required to comply with Edmonds' code related to stormwater and critical areas and the Department of Ecology. If a developer wanted to build in an area that is already getting a lot of attention and is under stress, they would be faced with that. She asked if the preferred comprehensive plan included a neighborhood hub in Perrinville. Ms. Hope answered a neighborhood hub is proposed in Perrinville, part of the council's preferred alternative; the idea was if that went forward, it would allow a small area of Perrinville to have multifamily or commercial. Meanwhile any existing development is still subject to all SEPA, stormwater, and critical area regulations. The council can decide whether they want to keep Perrinville as a hub, recognizing it may be a small amount of additional development. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for Ms. Hope sending out the updated number of housing units that indicate the comprehensive plan capacity is approximately 10,100 units, more than the required 9,069 which means there is some room to allow the council to consider if they still want to proceed with that hub. Councilmember Paine referred to utilities and water issues and the indication "this may exceed conveyance capacity, reservoir storage and water supply." She recalled projects intended to improve water storage and asked if there were ways to leverage the EIS to help with grant funding or help prioritize projects based on the EIS. Ms. Amtmann answered the City could use the EIS as a way to say we need to negotiate with our partner agencies for more supply. The comprehensive plan is the document to help look at the future. The EIS is just comparing the alternatives, and is not the forward -looking vision for the City. Councilmember Paine commented there is some data in the EIS about exceeding it by 18%. Ms. Amtmann explained that information is taken from the City's planning documents. The EIS could be cited in discussions and planning documents. Councilmember Dotsch relayed Edmonds residents are concerned about cumulative impacts. For example, Five Corners, one development goes in, a second development goes in and they pass, but a third development doesn't pass. She asked who was responsible for the upgrades for that third development. Ms. Amtmann asked what she meant by passed. Councilmember Dotsch responded it passed SEPA and all that stuff. Ms. Amtmann agreed cumulative impacts were important to think about and is an important part of most EIS. This EIS considered the cumulative impacts of adopting an updated comprehensive plan along with the impacts of Lynnwood and Snohomish County updating their comprehensive plans. What Councilmember Dotsch was talking about was a project level cumulative impact. The threshold for what is considered in a cumulative impact analysis is called reasonably foreseeable; something that is in a comprehensive plan, funded, and has gotten a permit. One wouldn't be able to say they think the cumulative of a hotel would be terrible because people might want to develop around it. That is not what SEPA cumulative impacts looks at. It would look at the cumulative impacts of the hotel and the two other projects and determine if there would be a significant impact on the environment and then the City issues that SEPA Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 5 checklist and the City decides whether or not to permit that project. The City looks at the cumulative impact analysis to determine whether to approve a project. Councilmember Dotsch relayed her understanding that did not come from the FEIS. Ms. Amtmann answered the FEIS has no authority to approve or deny a project; it simply discloses impacts so the decision - makers can use that information to make a decision. Councilmember Dotsch relayed she was trying to figure out where that process bumps up against something being out of scale with the infrastructure. Edmonds has very aged infrastructure. She commented on the cumulative impacts of HB-1110 which allows 2-3 units/per lot and up to 4 if near transit, and centers and hubs which are also cumulative. She asked when the City has the opportunity to say something is creating challenges. Ms. Amtmann answered it comes into play at the project level where the City has the opportunity to permit or not permit every single project. Councilmember Dotsch asked what the City can look to when saying yes or no. Ms. Hope answered it doesn't relate to this FEIS; it is a project specific question. There are two major kinds of cumulative impacts that people typically think of, environmental/stormwater and infrastructure. Those get updated on a periodic basis and are part of the planning process. There is an opportunity to update infrastructure facilities. In addition there is a requirement for development to pay impact fees for transportation and parks as well as connection fees so they pay a share of future improvements and expansion of the system. Ultimately if something is unable to meet the City's standards, then that development has to pay a share of the additional costs or they are not allowed to develop if they not able to meet standards (concurrency). Improvements are made over a course of 20 years to replace and expand the system, including contributions from development. Councilmember Dotsch recalled when the CFP/CIP was presented, it did not initially plan for this growth. She asked if that would come later. Ms. Hope agreed it will come later, but there has been some planning for additional capacity for water, sewer and stormwater. Councilmember Dotsch recognized project level was different than the high level of this EIS. Edmonds annexed a lot of semi -rural areas, a complex design for urban design. If upstream development can tap in, but downstream pipes aren't at capacity, when does that coordination come into play. Some areas have not be updated for a while and other areas have been updated. Ms. Hope suggested talking with public works regarding more details; in general, they look at those thing on an ongoing basis, both in terms of the system being inadequate because it is older and the need for additional capacity. The water, stormwater and sewer comprehensive plans are due to be updated soon. 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, RCW 42.30.110(1)(I) At 6:06 pm, the Council convened in executive session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) until 6:33 pm. Meeting Extension At 6:31 pm, Mayor Rosen announced the executive session would be extended to 6:43 pm. 4. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION The meeting reconvened at 6:43 pm. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 6:43 pm. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 6 SCOTT PASSEY;tKCLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 10, 2024 Page 7