Loading...
2024-11-25 Council Special MinutesEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES November 25, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir. Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. Brad Shipley, Senior Planner Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, assumed most councilmembers had purchased a house in the past and assumed they did not purchase more than they could afford. He asked when buying a house, was it the hope or the plan to win the lottery to pay the mortgage. If they missed a payment, foreclosure was the result. The same is true for the city. By his analysis the city can only afford about $2 million in loan payments for 2025 and zero in 2026 to keep the city afloat. Otherwise the city will reach a tipping point in mid-2025 where fiscal recovery will be nearly impossible based on a plan of hope. Hoping the citizens will approve the RFA as well as a levy lift is just that — hope — it is not a plan. He encouraged the council to ask the city attorney what insolvency looks like for the city, what actually happens when it reached that point and at what point did the city have to begin selling assets such as buildings and land to pay off the $7.5 million loan in 2025 and $5 million in 2026. He feared the city was headed toward insolvency and reiterated hope is not a plan. He encouraged the council to provide a plan to retain the city that residents love and not just hope voters will approve something. The council has a long way to go; budget amendments have saved $7,000 so far. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 1 5. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARD/COMMISSION Councilmembers interviewed Megan Joplin for appointment to the arts commission (responses in italics): I've worked as a photographer in commercial and fine art capacity for the past 30 years. I started doing theater photography for local theater companies in Seattle and did various other things including solo art shows. I'm also an attorney and work in an environmental practice and see the two complimenting each other; being an attorney as well as practicing fine art both require creativity. Councilmember Eck asked what mark she hoped to leave as part of the arts commission. I'm interested in art that is joyful, fun and playful and in moving into that area. There are great things in Edmonds already; I love that Edmonds has a Creative District, there is tons of stuff already happening. I'm interested in doing activities with kids. There's aprogram called Art Sunday in other cities where they bring in aprofessional artist to collaborate with children on apiece that is temporarily displayed in a storefront window. I'd love to have something like San Francisco's Peephole Cinema that has 24 hour silent movies. There is a vending machine called Art-o-mat where you pay $5 and get a piece of artwork. I'm interested in getting the community more involved and having art for everyone. Councilmember Nand asked how she could use a position on the arts commission to support the small business community. Ilove the idea of having artist displays in storefront windows. I haven't thought about other ideas that would incorporate the business community. Beautiful artwork attracts people, the Art-o- Mat or something interesting and exciting for the community will increase foot traffic and support for businesses. Council President Olson said she enjoyed meeting her through her resume and today's interview. Her background is really diverse and interesting and she has lived a lot of places; she too has lived in Tempe and Brooklyn, New York. She was hopeful this was the tip of the iceberg with regard to her involvement with the city and that she finds lots of ways to contribute due to her rich perspective. 2. BOYS & GIRLS CLUB BUILDING DESIGN - SECOND REVIEW Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Angie Feser explained the council was reviewing the design of the Boys & Girls Club (BGC) in Civic Park for the second time per the ground use agreement. The council reviewed the BGC design in July 2023, the packet includes responses to council questions, comments and suggestions along with additional building elevations from all perspectives. One change is a proposal for a set of concrete stairs inside the park property that would tie the front of the building to the park, a change staff is very supportive of. Details regarding the stairs will be worked out in the agreement prior to construction. She advised Bill Tsoukalas, Executive Director, Boys & Girls Club of Snohomish County, was present to answer questions. Adam Clark, Architect, representing Boys & Girls Club, explaining this is essentially the same design as was presented in July 2023. He displayed and reviewed views of the northwest and southwest corner in day and evening, identifying the gym on the north side of the lot and the 2-story club on the south side, high windows on three sides of the gym, and 2-story portion that provides views into the gym. In the club portion of the building, the main floor consists of the gym, a kitchen, a dining foyer, restrooms, control office for the BGC, a public area and flex space. The upper floor is dedicated to club use and two ECAP classrooms, areas for club use, restrooms, and views into the gym. The nighttime views were prepared at the request of the Architectural Design Board. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 2 Mr. Clark reviewed the following schematic which shows aspects of the park such as the skatepark and the track. He identified the BGC's main entry, an angled sidewalk with stairs, power for the park and the building that comes in at the south edge. There are plans for a paved area that can be used as a plaza. Building materials include concrete masonry and wood or cement board panels to break up the facades. There is a lot of glass on the south and west sides. The east side toward the park is primarily the gym, kitchen, restrooms, electrical room and power transformer. SOUTHEAST LOWIR - DAYTIME Mr. Clark displayed the west and south elevations (below), explaining the west elevation shows two garage doors off the sidewalk; he was uncertain those would be included. They were added as a result of a council suggestion, but there are some safety concerns; they will work with the ADB on the doors or another solution. The main entry doors are on the south elevation. 4 4 4 4 4 Q Q IL a P6"i - a.a.o6 Y T a ATIQ O O O soon NOIM!.C.:Effillij soon IsFoo�n 5 TM ELEVATION MCMIOR WtRIALS 91YR� � ■ p ■ Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 3 Mr. Clark displayed and reviewed the east and north elevations, explaining the east side is the backside facing the park and contains high windows for the gym and mechanical spaces. The north elevation contains recessed areas where there is opportunity for artwork. The artwork cannot protrude out very far due to the fire lane. They will work with an artist on potential artwork. n0 0 in:l �'� -- EAST ELEVATION T T T Q Q � i MISMMi ultil-ril imam'! NORTN E LVATION Mr. Clark and the proposed stairs. Mr. Clark displayed and reviewed the site plan, explaining there is a conditional use permit and a design review process to go through. A gym 23' clear is required to make it regulation for volleyball. The allowed height in this zone is 25', but it needs to be increased to 30' to provide room for structure and roof slopes. The existing club is about 35' tall so the proposed building reduces the overall height and mass. There is also a 20' building setback required, they are working to eliminate that so the full extent of the 12,000 square foot pad can be utilized. If those issues are not approved, they will return to council. The next step, once approved by the city council is ADB review and approval and scheduling the CUP hearing. NOfLH NFA eor5 a 61RL5 CLUB 16.M5 S.F. 5U iLOIN6 SITE RAN Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 4 Councilmember Eck commented this is a marvelous design and the stairs make perfect sense leading to the park. Both her girls went to the BGC so she is looking forward to the new building. She summarized there are tremendous opportunities with all amenities that were mentioned. Councilmember Paine referred to the ADA ramp and the stairs that abut the ramp, and asked if there had been any conversation with the DEIA commission about having stairs abutting the ramp. She did not object to the stairs but wanted to ensure they were compatible. Mr. Clark was unsure the stairs had been discussed with the DEIA commission, but he is very well versed in ADA requirements and assured access will not be impacted by the stairs. The ramp slope does not require handrails; the stairs will require a handrail, but they will be setback enough that they do not intrude onto the ramp. Councilmember Tibbott said he did not recall the previous presentation to council but could see that significant strides had been made in the architectural design. He was especially concerned with the north side of the building, but that has been broken up in this iteration of the design and the idea of art in that area is an exciting opportunity that could evolve over time. With regard to the west side, it was his understanding the sidewalk was reduced to move the building further west. Mr. Clark answered the building is at that the edge of the existing sidewalk. Councilmember Tibbott asked if a setback was required from the sidewalk. Mr. Clark answered no, there is a setback from the property line. Councilmember Tibbott recalled the council's suggestion for the rollup doors was to provide engagement with the walkway versus just a blank wall. He envisioned it would be an interesting feature for the community as well as the building users and would add ventilation. He was hopeful the design practicalities could be worked out. Mr. Clark answered that may be possible. He pointed out this will be LEED Silver building so it will include a lot of green building features; HVAC is a heavily weighted item in that process. Councilmember Tibbott commented the council recently considered green building incentives; he was unsure this building would qualify, but those incentives allows up to a 30' height with green building incentives. He suggested adding solar panels so the building could qualify. Mr. Clark said solar panels are included in the plans. Councilmember Chen recalled talking about the solar panels and the height increase to maximize uses in the building. He was excited to see this building come together and was hopeful funds could be raised to install solar panels. He was pleased there would be ADA access so the building will be fully accessible for all abilities. Councilmember Nand thanked the BGC team for their hard work, fundraising, and adding this incredible amenity that updates the downtown Edmonds skyline in such an attractive manner. Council President Olson thanked the BGC team for incorporating the council's feedback and for the detailed Q&A they provided which expedited the presentation and discussion. With regard to the art, she pointed out nearby residents will see that art every day from their homes. She was unsure whether that art, similar to the building design, would go through a public process to ensure the nearby residents are considered. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY ECK, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE SECOND REVIEW OF THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB BUILDING AS PROPOSED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. 2025 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Community, Culture and Economic Development Director Todd Tatum introduced State Lobbyist Debora Munguia. Ms. Mungua explained she has worked with the City since 2019. This year's legislative session will start January 13t1i and will be a long session, 105 days. The legislature needs to adopt biennial budgets including a 4-year balanced operating budget, a 2-year transportation budget and 2-year capital budget. The Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 5 democrats increased their majorities in both the House and Senate by one seat in each chamber. There will be a recount in the senate seat in Clark county; Senator -elect Cortes is ahead by only about 350 votes so a mandatory recount will occur. She has heard from the senate about big changes due to people who have left the legislature or left their old position for a new position. Jamie Pedersen will be the new Senate Majority Leader since Andy Billig is leaving. Senator -elect Marcus Riccelli will be the Floor Leader. Senator Solomon will be the Chair of Local Governments. Senator -elect Bateman, who ran the middle housing bills when she was in the House, will be the chair of the Housing Committee. The Senate Ways and Means Committee, the budget committee, has some big changes; two of the moderate democrats who would often vote with republicans to stop certain proposals are gone from the legislature. Ways and Means has been restructured, giving democrats more seats and added the Chair, Senator Stanford as Vice Chair of Operating, Senator Trudeau as Vice Chair for Capital, and created a new Vice Chair of Finance. Ms. Munguia explained she was still waiting for information on House committee assignments as well as information from the Senate republican caucus. The legislature will be in Olympia the week of December 9 for assembly days. The governor's budget will also come out in December. This will be Governor Inslee's last budget proposal. By law he has to propose a balanced budget which is Book 1. Book 2 can assume different revenues. It is expected Book 2 will go to Governor -elect Ferguson who will decide how to move forward with it. Ms. Munguia continued, the governor asked state agencies to submit budget reduction proposals. It is estimated the operating budget will have a $10-12B hole for the 4 years the legislature has to come up with a balanced operating budget. That does not include collective bargaining for state employees which is estimated to be $1B+. The hole is due to anticipated caseload increases for social workers, juvenile justice, child care, etc. and decreases in general revenues. The transportation budget also has a big hole due to decreasing revenues and increasing costs. The budget leaders for operating and transportation are talking with leadership about how to fill those holes. They are working collaboratively and developing various scenarios; the hope is they will identify one big thing that will backfill that or it make easier. For example, if they can do something in operating, the operating budget has many more levers than transportation, such as diverting sales tax to the transportation budget. The priorities for transportation are to finish what was started in Connecting Washington and Move Ahead packages that have been adopted, address the backlog of maintenance and preservation, and make key investments to keep the economy moving and traffic safety due to an historic loss of life due to traffic safety issues. Ms. Munguia continued prefiling of bills starts in December. In addition to the budget, there will be a lot of policy bills. There is a coalition of organizations including schools, labor, firefighters, etc. working together, led by AWC, to lift the 1% property tax cap. AWC is also looking at things to help cities with revenue such as more flexibility regarding REET such as increasing REET for higher value properties and lowering it on other properties, storage facility tax parity, a retail delivery service fee, increasing state shared revenues, creating more flexibility that would allow cities some revenue options, indigent defense standards, public safety, behavioral health services, housing, affordable housing and homelessness, juvenile justice, environmental priorities, the RAP Act, childcare, and many other important public policy issues. Mr. Tatum referred to the City's legislative agenda, explaining past legislative agendas have been 4-5 pages and included a great deal of cut and paste from other agencies' legislative agendas. The goal this year was to make the City's legislative agenda more concise. He reviewed the legislative agenda: • Hwy 99 Revitalization project o Maintain $22.5 million funding in the Move Ahead Washington package across 2025-27 ($4.3M) and 2027-29 ($18.2M) biennia for Stage 3 of the SR 99 Revitalization Project. • Key 2025-27 Legislative Priorities 1. City Revenue options: Support mechanisms to expand general revenue (e.g., lifting the 1% property tax cap, increasing REET share, and exploring state revenue -sharing) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 6 2. Behavioral Health and public safety: Support co -responder programs, increase resources to deal with domestic violence, and enhance behavioral health infrastructure (practitioners and beds) 3. Indigent Defense standards: Engage in discussions on defense standards, emphasizing state funding for any cost increases. 4. Increase Housing Supply: Back measures that support housing construction and explore new funding options for needs along the housing continuum, including home ownership and senior housing 5. Tax Increment Financing (TIF): Support TIF's viability 6. Address the impacts of state environmental and housing legislation on cities: Promote the creation of funding and programs which help cities to plan for, adapt to, and fund 7. Work with our delegates to identify solutions to: • The impacts of the lowest bidder requirements. • Increasing the ability of retired law enforcement officers to return to service. 13 Reduce the impacts of vexatious requests and litigation as a result of the Public Records Act. Mr. Tatum referred to the additional legislative issues on the legislative agenda which includes items from other agencies' as well as councilmember requests related to other issues. The intent is to bring the legislative agenda to council on a future consent agenda reflecting any changes requested by council. Councilmember Paine asked if the legislature would be looking at a roadway usage tax due to diminishing gas tax. She pointed out it would be a swap, not a double taxation to replace a gas tax with a roadway usage tax based on miles traveled. Ms. Munguia answered Representative Fey, Chair of House Transportation, is planning to put a RUC bill forward this session. He has been holding stakeholder meetings across the state. She was unsure it would pass; Senator Liias recently talked about it in a transportation meeting and his view on implementing a RUC charge in the state was it was a long term thing, taking up to 8 years to fully implement. There is discussion about potentially introducing it in different categories such as starting with electric and hybrid vehicles. It is such as a big change for Washingtonians, he would rather do it in a way that is not so abrupt and potentially create opportunities to not be successful. Councilmember Paine said she will not suggest that as a priority for this session, but wanted to recognize that gas tax revenues have been decreasing. Councilmember Paine asked the status of the legislative intent for the purchase or transfer of the Edmonds Marsh to the City. There were provisos in past years, but she did not see that in the legislative agenda. Mr. Tatum answered there has been a legislative proviso giving the City first right of purchase for the Unocal property when it transfers to WSDOT. The thought with not including it in this legislative agenda was, 1) the memorandum of understanding in which they committed to giving the City first right of purchase and setting forth a process, and 2) the property won't change hands until two years of successful monitoring once Ecology deems the property to be in compliance which hasn't occurred yet. He did not envision Ecology deeming the property in compliance before June 30, so the City wouldn't be in a position to purchase the property in this biennia. Councilmember Paine requested human services housing support be added to the legislative agenda. The City's human services department spends a lot of time ensuring people have access to housing and are able to remain in housing. There are a lot of efforts to make housing more affordable, but this would be to ensure human services to keep people housed and access to housing options at the lowest income level and to help people on the verge of becoming unhoused. Mr. Tatum offered to look at the wording in partner organization's legislative agenda items and see what makes the most sense to include. He will share that with her between now and when it is placed on the consent agenda. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 7 Councilmember Nand expressed appreciation for this year's bullet point format. With regard to the bullet points under public safety, she recalled in previous years the City supported proposals brought forward by the Edmonds Police Department related to police pursuits. There have been a rash of fatalities in Snohomish County during police pursuits and she asked if there was any movement in the legislature regarding reforms to decrease negative outcomes and if so, would it be appropriate for the City to support that. Ms. Munguia relayed Chair Goodman will be looking at that and will be introducing some legislation but she was unsure whether it would address vehicular pursuits. She envisioned that was an issue that will come before the legislature again; she was not hearing any plans to adjust that statue again, but will inform Mr. Tatum if she hears anything. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the new, more concise format. He referred to the indigenous defense standard, assuming that legislation would require a response by cities, and asked if that would be considered an unfunded mandate. Mr. Tatum answered it could be, if indigent defense standards are adopted, it would lower caseloads from 150 felonies/attorney/year to 47 by 2027, a significant reduction. Ms. Munguia said the court would change the caseload standards; even if the legislature adopts a change, the attorneys would follow the court's decision. The Association of Counties is working with AWC to introduce legislation that would assist Washington with its current standards; it would be a multitiered approach where the state would pay for half the existing costs and there is a formula where the counties doing a good job wouldn't be penalized and if the new standards are adopted by the court, the state would cover 100% of that. The state has a $10-12B deficit so she was unsure how that would play out. There is recognition that Washington State is woefully behind in helping local governments with costs. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his concern that the state continues to pass requirements that require cities to divert funding from things like sidewalks, streets, and parks. He wondered if there could be legislation that requires the state to estimate the cost to cities before they pass a mandate, something he was unsure had every been done before. Ms. Munguia relayed if the legislature passes something, it will be implemented by the Supreme Court, not necessarily the legislature. There have been hearings on this so the court knows it would be a huge financial issue. Even if the caseload standards were dropped, there isn't the workforce in place for public defenders or prosecutors or facilities so something like that couldn't be implemented right away. The court is thinking about how they could eventually roll something like that out; the expectation is they will do something. With regard to Councilmember Tibbott's concern about unfunded mandates, she recalled related to transit oriented development there was concern by cities related to costs so a proviso was included in the transportation budget last session that will look at Snohomish, King, Clark and Spokane Counties and a report will come to the legislature in June 2025. She summarized there have been examples of where the impacts have been studied. Mr. Tatum asked if the fiscal notes for bills include financial impacts to cities. Ms. Munguia answered the Department of Commerce is responsible for submitting local government fiscal notes on bills. The agencies submit their own and then Commerce submits theirs using information from AWC. Mr. Tatum said City representatives meet with delegates during the session; this legislative agenda and clear talking points about actual expenses and opportunities will be important. The legislation has asked a lot of cities; but the bottleneck is the lack of financial ability. He will prepare something related to the impacts and opportunities related to funding for use when City representatives meet with delegates. Councilmember Tibbott commented one of the unfunded mandates is related to public records requests. The City is considering laying off an employee that does that work; it would save money but also impact the ability to process public records. The legislature needs to know some of the actions the City is taking that will be detrimental to the effectiveness they envision. Councilmember Eck said she was happy to see senior housing mentioned in the legislative agenda. Edmonds has a lot of low income seniors and she was concerned with the increasing percentage of seniors who are part of the homeless population in Snohomish County. Due to the City's financial situation, she was also happy to see items related to funding, financing and revenue. She asked what proposals would Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 8 look like to address exploring state revenue sharing. Ms. Munguia said one thing cities and counties are looking at is marijuana shared revenue; when the law was first put in place, the amount anticipated to go to local governments never materialized. There is interest in changing the statute so a set amount or percentage that is significantly more than the current amount would go to cities. Again, the state has a $10-1213 deficit so a lot will depend on what the legislature does related to additional revenue or cuts that state agencies take. Councilmember Dotsch relayed she also likes the format of the legislative agenda. She seconded Councilmember Tibbott's comments, recalling the city council previously requested the legislature allow cities to retain local control over zoning and housing density. That also came with unfunded mandates to cities in terms of staffing, bandwidth, and gaps in infrastructure. Her goal would be to create no new laws that have unfunded mandates that increase the cost of city government without reasonable compensation. A one size fits all idea placed on cities like Edmonds is a mismatch. For example bills related to TOD could greatly impact downtown Edmonds. Ms. Munguia relayed she, Mr. Tatum and Ms. Hope recently met with Representative Reed regarding a TOD bill. During that meeting Ms. Hope described the unique things that would impact Edmonds and Representative Reed was open to considering things like sea level rise and ferry traffic and welcomed comments related to changes to the bill to avoid negative impacts on Edmonds. Good relationships have been established; the City has a wonderful delegation that understands the issues. Councilmember Dotsch referred to placemaking grants and asked for an example of a desired outcome of a placemaking grant for Edmonds. Mr. Tatum responded there is currently no clear grant category for something that is less than a park, an amount of public space that isn't multiple acres. There needs to be more flexible sources to connect smaller transit or trail networks, to improve sidewalk networks, to acquire smaller public spaces, etc., basically finding places in these categories to fill in the blanks in hubs and centers where private developers and retails don't provide things the City wants to make the space more attractive and appealing for residents and retailers. Councilmember Dotsch asked if the goal was to increase revenue and economic development. Mr. Tatum answered yes; having a funding source that does these things helps encourages retail to locate and flourish in mixed use developments. He has heard from the community and the council that they do not want just big boxes of housing; these spaces also enhance quality of life. Councilmember Chen was glad to hear AWC is championing efforts related to revenue, in particularly property tax. Edmonds is in a unique situation where a large percentage of the City's revenues is property tax and its sales tax is very limited compared to Lynnwood which has a large sales tax base due to the mall and other businesses. He asked if any bills had been introduced to repeal the 1% property tax cap. Ms. Munguia answered there have been conversations with Senator Pedersen who was the prime sponsor of the bill during the last session. He is now the majority leader in the Senate so there have been conversations about whether he would be willing to sponsor it again, and if not, if there is someone in his caucus who would champion it. There is no bill sponsor yet, but she anticipated there would be one soon. Councilmember Chen added the City's voice in support of that legislation, noting that is one of the things that put Edmonds into a budget imbalance and resulted in major challenges related to revenues. Mr. Tatum referred to a list of cities in support of changing this legislation that included Edmonds. Even prior to the session, Edmonds has been advocating for that issue and will continue to advocate for it during the session. Council President Olson referred to the key 2025-27 Legislative Priorities, in particular Increase Housing Supply, relaying she supports that effort, but it could mean a lot of different things. She did not support any additional density requirements from the state, noting there had been a lot of that in the past housing bills. She resented that being imposed on the City and did not want to invite more of that. The idea of funding options for needs along the housing continuum seemed like it addressed human services which a councilmember requested in her earlier comments. Ms. Munguia relayed some of the language is from AWC's legislative agenda related to permanent supportive housing, first time homeownership, homeownership for people below 80% AMI, workforce and senior housing, etc. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 9 Council President Olson asked for clarification regarding a councihnember's earlier request to add human services housing support. Councilmember Paine responded she was interested in funding support for people who are living close to the edge, 0-50% AMI, and having financial resources to house people in motels, repair roofs, rent support via Commerce grants, etc. Families who are struggling will need that support. She acknowledged behavioral health funds associated with law enforcement; this is different, it is human services to ensure people do not lose their homes through economic eviction. She wanted to encourage the state to maintain some level of funding that cities can access via the Department of Commerce. Mr. Tatum answered the explanation addresses the housing as well as the tools to support people. Councilmember Nand relayed her support for this component of the legislative priorities. She was particularly excited by the clause "including home ownership and senior housing." There has been discussion for years about the difficulty of condominiumization due to insurance challenges with developers. Some realtors in Seattle's hyper -hot real estate market have been pursuing novel joint tenancies with new and existing construction to try to get as many equity owners into a property as possible. She would be supportive of whatever the legislature could do to increase those opportunities. Mr. Tatum commented there is a lot of agreement on that statement. Condominiumization and the laws surrounding that have been of particular interest among many cities and legislators and there may be an effort to convene developers to determine solutions. Councilmember Nand commented for most people in the working and middle class, their house is their intergenerational piggy bank so there needs to be opportunities for families to build intergenerational wealth for themselves and their future offspring. Mr. Tatum advised a legislative dinner between the council and the delegation is planned for January 7 at 5:30 pm in the Brackett Room prior to the council meeting. Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess. 4. UPDATE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP Acting Planning & Development Director Shane Hope provided an introduction. • Process to date (2022-2024) o Initial research and preparation o Adoption of growth targets in Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies o Development of growth alternatives o Preparation and consideration of Draft EIS o Preparation and consideration of initial Draft Plan o Selection of preferred growth alternative o Consideration of comments and other information o Preparation and publication of revised draft plan o Community engagement included: ■ Visioning (Sept 2022) ■ Community events and activities (summer 2023) ■ EIS coping (August 2024) ■ Neighborhood meetings (Dec 2023) ■ Online open house and forum (March 2024( ■ Stakeholder interviews (April 2024) ■ Citywide meetings on goals & policies (May 2023) ■ Draft EIS public hearing (Oct 2024) ■ Draft Plan open house & webinar (Oct 2024) ■ Draft EIS comment period (Sept 29-Oct 29, 2024) ■ Draft Plan comment period (Oct 3-Nov 11, 2024) ■ Numerous city council meetings Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 10 ■ Numerous planning board meetings Process to Date — key reminder o On November 4, 2024, after considering a No Action Alternative and two Action Alternatives, along with public comments and planning board recommendation, council selected a Preferred Alternative for comprehensive plan's approach to growth and community quality of life o The preferred option ■ Combines components for Action Alternatives A and B; ■ Includes NO new components that were outside of Action Alternatives; ■ Results in housing unit numbers that are between Alts A & B for housing unit capacity Senior Planner Brad Shipley reviewed: • Development of Future Land Use Map based on Preferred Alternative for Growth o Reflects what we heard from planning City of Edmonds board and city council as it relates to Future Land Use Map neighborhood centers and hubs. _, Ms. Hope reviewed • Next Steps o Consideration of issues in revision Plan 1) What's been done to reflect council's selection of preferred alternative? Actions Include - Housing capacity for hubs and centers recalculated - Discussion with Department of Commerce about proposed numbers - Growth choices for each hub and center included in revised draft Plan (consistent with council's preferred alternative) - Land Use element updated - Future land use map adjusted - Appendix added to draft Plan to explain original growth alternatives Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 11 - Transportation projects recalculated (2+ week process) and included in new draft Transportation Element 2) Can new growth areas (e.g., new hubs and centers) be added to proposed comprehensive plan? ■ No, because additional growth areas were not considered in the Draft EIS ■ Also, not advisable because has the potential for being significant and would not have had time for public input during the regular process 3) Can overlay of critical areas be added to comprehensive plan? ■ Comprehensive plan already has a Critical area Map in the Land Use Element ■ Critical areas are specifically governed through critical area and development regulations ■ Could be considered later as part of a "zoning code overlay" but might be confusing since the map does not override the critical area regulations - but rather, the other way around. 4) What is the relationship of comprehensive plan to development regulations and other city actions? ■ Comprehensive plan covers many topics at a high level; it needs to be somewhat general for long-term, while providing useful policy direction ■ Under GMA, detailed implementation of Plan must occur through: - Development regulations (including but not limited to zoning) - City's budget - Other city plans and activities o Review of revised draft Plan (ongoing) o Council review of update process & future land use map (Nov 25, tonight) o Planning board discussion of revised draft Plan (Nov 25) o City council discussion of revised draft Plan (Dec 3) o Identification of corrections & clarifications to revised draft Plan (continuing) o Consideration of Final EIS (Dec 4) o Discussion of Final EIS (council special meeting Dec 10) o Public hearing on revised draft Plan (Dec 10) o City council adoption of Plan, with any changes (Dec 17) o Staff submittal of final Plan to state agencies Councilmember Eck commented the council has received a lot of comments about added protection for vulnerable environmental areas. The presentation spoke to an overlay and the reasons that would not be helpful. She asked staff to comment on added protections for those areas and why an overlay wasn't necessary. Ms. Hope relayed her understanding from comments she has heard is that most people want environmental sensitive, critical areas to be protected. That is an important part of the comprehensive plan and implementing regulations. The comprehensive plan includes a map of known critical areas and also addresses policies that are included in the critical area regulations. In addition, in 2025 Edmonds, like many other cities, is due to review and revise its critical area regulations as needed. The City will be entering into a really important effort in 2025 to update the critical area regulations which could include updating areas that have been mapped. Simply placing an overlay on a map does not protect critical areas any differently. Her understand of why some people wanted that was they thought it would be helpful when someone is considering a development project. Having it in the comprehensive plan wouldn't be very helpful because people usually look at the critical areas map and the development code. It is important to ensure the code protects critical area and that as much information is available as possible. The comprehensive plan is a policy direction document, but it is not a substitute for code. Councilmember Eck commented if a development is proposed in an area that includes a critical area, that is a different step entirely. Ms. Hope provided an example, a property includes 2-3 critical areas, a circle is drawn around the them and it is identified as a sensitive area, but the code only applies to the critical areas, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 12 not the other areas inside the circle. Someone who wants to develop will look at the code, the critical area map and any field work that has been done; in areas with wetlands, often a wetland survey will be done in conjunction with development. Councilmember Eck summarized this is important information to share with the community with regard to protecting critical areas. Councilmember Nand commented because the council is involved in the budget, she was most interested in the public revenues portion of economic development on pages 101-105, specifically Goal ED-2, Revitalize and enhance the City's activity centers, neighborhood centers and hubs through integrated mixed use placemaking and destination development approaches and recognition of the needs of housing, commerce and economic development. She was happy to see the policy statements include a desire to retain existing businesses as much as possible and avoid displacement. She wondered if it would be appropriate when discussing community renewal to disavow an interest in using the condemnation tools. There is a lot of sensitivity, particularly in majority and minority neighborhoods, about the use of condemnation in neighboring locations such as Seattle where activity in the CID led to pushback on attempts to use land for transportation. She asked whether that would be appropriate to include at the policy level. Ms. Hope answered the community renewal that has been talked about in the Highway 99 area is not to grab land for city or state use. The concern has been what can be done to improve and help businesses and housing opportunities be successful as well as address problem sites where undesirable activities are occurring. She offered to confer with Mr. Tatum about including a note that describes community renewal planning. Councilmember Dotsch commented she was surprised to see what is before council, much of it she hasn't seen before. A lot of terms are used that no one knows what they mean, and there isn't an opportunity for the public to interact at this special meeting during Thanksgiving week. She attended most of the neighborhood meetings and none of these maps or terms were included. She expressed concern with the giant change that is coming to council this late in the game. She referred to questions about the EIS and the comprehensive plan, commenting it would be nice to see all the questions and answers and asked when that would be available. Ms. Hope commented as far as she knew, big changes haven't been made to the plan. The only change from the original draft was adding the hubs and centers which were part of the preferred alternative. There were no other sweeping changes. Ms. Hope continued, with regard to the comprehensive plan draft comments, that closed November 11. The comments were provided to council and a posted online in a summary form for each element. The raw data could be provided to council; staff grouped the comments together based on which element they related to. With regard to the draft EIS, all the comments were provided to council and posted online. The responses are only partial and staff is working to complete that. A more complete version will be provided in the final EIS. The final EIS includes all the comments and responses. With regard to comprehensive plan comments, there wasn't an intent to respond to each of the 179 comments separately. All the comments were provided along with responses to major themes in the comments. Staff is working to complete that and provide it to council and post it online in a couple days. Councilmember Dotsch recalled attending the online meeting where there were a lot of questions as well as questions in the chat feature. Attendees were told to put comments in the chat because there wasn't time to address them all. Councilmember Dotsch commented it feels like there is a lot of information including goals from Vision 2050 that aren't requirements, but there aren't community goals of Edmonds residents. That is something that seems to have been lost in this document and seems to take a backseat to some urbanization and development goals. With regard to the map, no one at the meeting can see it because it's so small. There are definitions of a residential walkable urban designation, residential low scale, moderate density residential, mixed use general, mixed use urban center, mixed use urban core; some include the BD which is no longer on map. With regard to the new term, residential walkable urban designation which is defined as primary residential uses, some small scale neighborhood retail and services are conditionally permitted. Typical buildings are a mixture of detached and attached housing and middle housing types. This is generally located within 11/2 mile walkshed of designed neighborhood centers and hubs. There is no definition Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 13 of walkshed and having a different zoning within'/2 mile walk of neighborhood centers and hubs was never discussed with the community;, transition zones were supposed to be within centers and hubs not outside them which expands density further. Councilmember Dotsch continued, there are no definitions for low scale or medium scale or what it means to someone who owns a house in a neighborhood. She recalled at the community open house at the high school a lot of terms were used that community members were unfamiliar with. She was unsure what the community or she can comment on and there is precious little time remaining. She was trying to figure out what the goal is for rezoning all the single family neighborhoods in a manner that was not brought forward to the community. Ms. Hope responded perhaps the draft land use map needs to be revised. It is true and it has been discussed in the past that single family residential areas that cover the largest area of land in the City will no longer have for example 7200 square foot lots that are consistent with the zoning designation because they now can be divided and more units built on them and the 7200 square foot or 6 units/acre no longer applies. The intent was to find terms such as residential 1 and residential 2 to replace RS which will no longer apply in the same way once the state legislation is implemented. With regard to some of the other terms, she will take a harder look at those. With regard to HB 1110, Councilmember Dotsch said the council has not had that conversation yet; there was a presentation by the previous director using the high end of all the Department of Commerce options as potential, not the minimum. The community has a choice whether to do the minimum, there is no requirement that 1/2 mile from a center or hub has to have a different designation that the rest of the neighborhood. She recognized the requirement to allow two ADUs per lot and other things, but not every single lot will necessarily have to accommodate every type of housing. There doesn't seem to be very good definitions and planning terms are used to define neighborhoods in new ways without public input. The City has until next June to deal with HB 1110; other cities are not going this route. She feared there was a lot of missing information and community engagement and clarity. For example, including the transition zones within the centers and hubs make sense, but the planning department seems to be taking those further beyond the intent to create scalable centers and hubs. Ms. Hope offered to look at the map, assuring that was not the intent; the FLUM was not intended to change the zoning. Councilmember Dotsch commented someone included terms that have not been presented in the past. It may be a good idea but it has not been presented previously. She summarized the City has options, it can do the minimum, the centers and hubs exceed the required growth. Mr. Shipley explained the intent was to add clarity by being more specific with the titles. The lines have not changed and the density that has been discussed has not changed. The intent was to categorize it in a way that makes sense to the public. Everything the council has agreed to is in the document and nothing has changed with regard to where they're located. The only thing that has changed is more specificity about the designation for centers or mixed use. The intent is more providing more flexibility with the zoning code that would apply to each one; each one will have to have a zoning designation that applies to it. If the City pigeonholes itself by including zoning code in the comprehensive plan, the result will be a very rigid development code which is not where the City wants to go. It was his understanding the council wanted flexibility to have transition zones between the centers and hubs and the nearby residential areas. The height requirements are the same as have been discussed, it is just a way to categorize it to make more sense. Ms. Hope reiterated staff will look at it again. Councilmember Chen was glad to see that transition zones were being considered. He asked for more detail about Highway 99 development, recalling the original plan was not to touch that area, but there are transition zone issues. For example, a couple years ago a moratorium was passed related to a development, an example of the need for transitional zones between Highway 99 and single family. He inquired about transition zones between single family and hubs and centers that are incorporated into the comprehensive plan. Ms. Hope responded the Highway 99 area will be addressed in the zoning code, not the comprehensive plan. Mr. Shipley responded the development code may include a different zone on the edge of Westgate Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 14 for example where a transition area is desired; that would be a different zoning designation. There needs to be some flexibility to allow transition zones. Councilmember Chen observed the comprehensive plan is at a higher level and specific land use will be in a separate document. Mr. Shipley answered zoning is more refined than the comprehensive plan. For example, there could be a different zone that limits height to 2.5 stories in a transition zone. That will be discussed with the development code. The comprehensive plan designations offer more flexibility going forward to create the Edmonds that everyone wants instead of pigeonholing the City into a specific uniform type that applies to everything. Councilmember Chen asked when the development code will be updated. Mr. Shipley answered it has to be adopted by July 1, 2025. In a perfect world the comprehensive plan and development code would have been developed together and he understands why this conversation continues; there is a desire for specificity but the process is not there yet. Council President Olson highlighted the July 1, 2025 deadline for the development code, recalling a resident asserted it needed to be done by December 31, 2025. Ms. Hope responded some parts of the code need to be updated by 2024, but those have already been accomplished related permitting timelines and ADUs. The other code updates such as including the state legislation regarding housing needs to be done by July 1, 2025. Council President Olson referred to the term, zoning crosswalk in Table 2.2, a term she and another councilmember had not heard before. She asked staff to provide that definition for the council and public. Mr. Shipley commented some of this is related to notes passed to the consultant and the consultant included more than was intended. His first step was to look at what has been discussed so far and have it make sense with regard to implementation. He offered to remove that, agreeing it was too specific at this level. With regard to residential 1 and 2, there is no distinction between those. It is a way to start to differentiate between what residential 1 and 2 might be, residential low scale and residential walkable urban. Those are just terms to start to think about how to implement a development code around a larger vision for the City. He assured the lines have not changed. The distinction between walkable urban and low scale would be the frontage improvements, maybe one would include sidewalks and not the other depending on the distance from an urban center or hub. The different colored yellows are a legacy of the old zoning code and may not be how it is how applied in the future. Ms. Hope agreed some notes were translated in too much detail. As Mr. Shipley mentioned, the lines on the map have not changed. There were some potential designation titles used that would be used in the upcoming zoning code update and recognizing existing zoning designations. Council President Olson relayed in the past, parcel sizes were the basis for the different zones. From what she was reading in the comprehensive plan, that will go away entirely. Ms. Hope agreed. Council President Olson commented that is a tectonic shift that she did not see coming. Ms. Hope said the zone can be called RS-6, but realistically it won't be 6 units/acre based on the zoning code changes that need to be made in the coming months because some people may want to develop their lots with at least 2 units and in some areas where there is a major transit stop, it could be four units or an ADU and an additional unit. The terms won't apply in the same way as they do now where there is a minimum 7200 square foot lot in a particular zone; if someone chooses to develop their property with additional units, there won't be that minimum lot size in the future. Council President Olson said she understood there would be an impact on density from the housing bills, she was trying to extrapolate what that meant in terms of subdivision, etc. Ms. Hope said that will be part of the development code update in the next six months such as allowing subdivisions to occur on what has been a traditional single family lot. Council President Olson asked if the community conversation would happen at that point. Ms. Hope answered yes. With regard to the proposed sensitive zone overlay, Council President Olson relayed her understanding of the motivation behind that idea was if the estimate of needed units is far in excess of what the City needs, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 15 it would roll out slowly and construction wouldn't reach environmental sensitive areas until later on when it was determined the City needed to provide all the units. M s. Hope answered that is a different concept than an overlay; that would be prioritizing where development goes and trying to push growth into certain areas. Council President Olson clarified it would be to have growth in less environmentally sensitive areas. Ms. Hope answered an overlay where property is prioritized not to grow hasn't been part of the conversation with regard to hubs or centers or property near hubs or centers. The potential capacity was calculated based on removing critical areas. Council President Olson referred to comments about excluding open space and the natural environment from the land use guiding principle and asked if that was intentional or something that could be looked at. Ms. Hope reminded she was not here for some of the original discussion; she asked if there was an open space guiding principle that wasn't included. Council President Olson said the land use guiding principle did not include the concept of open space and natural space. Ms. Hope asked if the land use principle was the one reviewed by the community and the council. Council President Olson answered she did not remember that specifically. Ms. Hope relayed her understanding that was the guiding principle that went forward with council approval, but she could determine if that was the case. Council President Olson did not recall that being an overt approval by council. Councilmember Paine referred to the FLUM and the upcoming zoning map and asked if they would be identical. Ms. Hope answered probably not, because typically a comprehensive plan map is more generalized and the zoning map is more detailed. For example there may be a business district in the comprehensive plan, and the zoning includes more specific details. Councilmember Paine responded that was good and what she was expecting to hear. With regard to the environmental overlay, she asked if that would add more regulation. She recalled hearing that one area having more regulation than another area was discouraged by the laws passed by the legislature. Ms. Hope responded there is a lot of confusion and people speaking about different concepts that do not necessarily track. For example, critical areas are regulated in the City code; drawing lines on a map will not make a difference. Councilmember Paine said she experienced that when having a fence installed in critical area, but where the fence was installed, it wasn't a critical area. Ms. Hope explained the code is the driver, not the map. The map is intended to be a red flag to say there is probably an issue that requires more review of the specific site and determinations based on field work, studies, etc. whether there is actually a critical area. Councilmember Nand noted for the public when Acting Director Hope rejoined the City, it was initially predicted that the City would not have a finalized comprehensive plan in time to meeting the state's December 31, 2024 deadline. She was excited to see this very well done, 288 page draft document in November. She recognized development and building is a sensitive topic in Edmonds that rouses passions, pointing out Edmonds staff is apolitical and are following mandates from the state, county, city and mayor. She offered hats off to the planning department and Ms. Hope for salvaging the document and the process, dealing with a lot of inquiries and questions, and handling it all with incredible grace. With regard to residential low scale and residential walkable urban, Councilmember Dotsch pointed out those incorporated RS6-RS20 and RSW-12. The fact that a property is located withing '/2miles of a center or hub puts in it in one of the two designations; it is not required by the housing bills. Ms. Hope offered to revisit that. Councilmember Dotsch pointed out people living within %2 mile of centers and hubs were never told they would have retail and service. The area within''/2 mile of a center or hub was overlayed differently than areas beyond that. Ms. Hope offered to review it. Councilmember Dotsch commented this is the community's comprehensive plan, she did not see community input in the introduction, it was all the top level planning, urbanization terms, state mandates, etc. She acknowledged there would be some change in the neighborhoods, but there aren't mandates for every lot to have every type of housing. The City has choices and other cities are utilizing those choices. When this process began, there was a 15-minute city idea which was removed. The idea of property within Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 16 %2 mile of a center or hub seems to be pushing back into the walkable 15-minute city idea, but Edmonds' topography is not flat. She asked what percentage of Edmonds is %2 mile from a center or hub. Mr. Shipley said he would have to map that. Councilmember Dotsch recalled the 15-minute city encompasses nearly all of Edmonds. She wasn't sure what to tell her constituents about the plan or how to read the map. Ms. Hope reiterated staff will look at that. Councilmember Dotsch commented this process has been really flawed. The City is coming up to the deadline with something the public doesn't understand how it will affect their neighborhood. Ms. Hope advised staff would return with changes or clarifications. Mr. Shipley agreed the amount of specificity could be reduced in the comprehensive plan and that conversation continued in the development code. Ms. Hope agreed the comprehensive plan is intended to be more general. 5. COUNCIL 2025-26 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE VOTING ON BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS DURING MEETING Mayor Rosen advised no specific budget amendments were identified for this meeting. The ones submitted previously were postponed to tomorrow's agenda. He asked if councilmembers had any additional amendments. Councilmember Nand offered Councilmember Chen an opportunity discuss his amendments, explaining they were tabled to give him an opportunity to present them himself. No new amendments were proposed. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25 pm. cszzl'-'� SCOTT PASSE , CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 25, 2024 Page 17