The URL can be used to link to this page

2014-12-10 Planning Board PacketMEETING AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North December 10, 2014 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Reading / Approval of Minutes: November 12, 2014 3. Announcement of Agenda 4. Audience Comments: (3 Minute Limit Per Person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 5. Development Services Director Report to Planning Board 6. Public Hearings: (Public participation is welcome) 7. Unfinished Business: (No public participation) a. Continued discussion of draft General Section and draft Land Use Element 8. New Business: (No public participation) a. Introduction to Utilities Element and related Elements 9. Nominations / Elections of 2015 Board positions 10. Administrative Reports: Review Extended Agenda 11. Planning Board Chair Comments: 12. Planning Board Member Comments: 13. Adjournment AI-7333 2. Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 12/10/2014 Reading / Approval of Minutes: November 12, 2014 Staff Lead/Author: Planning Department: Planning Initiated By: Information Subject/Purpose Reading / Approval of Minutes: November 12, 2014 Staff Recommendation It is recommended that the Planning approve the draft minutes. Previous Board Action N/A Narrative Approve the draft minutes. Attachments PB draft minutes 11.12.14 CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 12, 2014 Chair Cloutier called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 — 5t' Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Todd Cloutier, Chair Neil Tibbott, Vice Chair Bill Ellis Philip Lovell Daniel Robles Careen Rubenkonig Valerie Stewart Mike Nelson READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Shane Hope, Development Services Director Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Karin Noyes, Recorder BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 22, 2014 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES The Board introduced Evan Zhao and Pavi Chance, applicants for the Student Representative position on the Planning Board. It was discussed that a subcommittee of Board Members interviewed the two applicants and found both qualified and enthusiastic. They appointed Mr. Zhao to serve as the Student Representative through the remainder of the academic school year. Ms. Chance would serve during the 2015-2016 school year. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, requested that the Board consider placing the sign code on their current priority list as a housekeeping issue. She expressed her belief that residents have become so accustomed to the appearance of Edmonds that they sometimes forget how it all started. She said she moved to Edmonds in 1942 when there was still a saw mill on the waterfront. Until the 1960's, Edmonds was a scruffy commercial town; the only one between Everett and Seattle. When the freeway was constructed, people began to understand that Edmonds was a fine residential area, and there have been a number of significant improvements since that time. She reviewed the following list of improvements that have occurred over time under the direction of various community leaders, business people and residents of the City: • In the 1960s, all of the utility lines on Sunset Avenue were undergrounded. Washington State Ferries put in a parking lot and the City Council required landscaping as part of that improvement. The fountain was installed in the 1960s, as well. • In the 1970s, the utilities on 5th Avenue were undergrounded and the corner parks were created. The Architectural Design Board and the Edmonds Arts Council were formed. There was a sign code dispute, and a pole sign that was proposed at Westgate was appealed and eventually replaced with a monument sign. Signage at Harbor Square was also appealed and upheld. • In the 1980s, a portion of the utilities on Main Street were undergrounded and the ornamental streetlights were installed. The flower baskets were added during the 1980s, as well. • In the 1990s, the Anderson property and the Bible College property were acquired by the City. • In the 2000s, the City Council established a Public Facilities District, which allowed the Edmonds Center for the Arts to be constructed at the Bible College property. • Since 2010, the remaining utilities on Main Street were undergrounded and the Five Corners Roundabout was installed. Changes were also made on Sunset Avenue. Ms. Shippen summarized that all of these improvements suggest that the City and its citizens are concerned about appearance. The list demonstrates what can be done when individuals approach the City with ideas and the City takes action. She said she would like to see the sign code brought up to date with the effort that has been made to make Edmonds a better place to live. Signing has a stigma attached to it, and she is concerned that the current sign code allows too much signage. She asked the Board to review the sign code and said she would provide suggestions at a later time on how it could be improved. Vice Chair Tibbott encouraged Ms. Shippen to put her notes into an article that could be published on myedmondsnews.com or in The Edmonds Beacon. Her comments present an interesting historic perspective that illustrates the transition that Edmonds has gone through. Ms. Shippen agreed that Edmonds has a long history of individual effort to make it look well. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Ms. Hope referred the Board to the written Director's Report dated November 0'. In addition to the items in the report, she advised that the 2014 Comprehensive Plan update will be the subject of a public hearing before the City Council on November 18th. In addition, the City Council is considering a potential revision to the policy related to trees in public rights - of -way. The current policy is that trees can only be removed from rights -of -way if they are causing damage to the City's infrastructure, but sometimes they cause damage to other things like house foundations, etc. The City Council is considering potential amendments to make the policy more encompassing. Board Member Lovell requested an update on where with the City Council is with the Westgate Plan, Shoreline Master Program (SMP), Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Development Code Update. Ms. Hope advised that the City Council decided to table taking further action on the Westgate Plan until after the SR-104 Analysis has been completed sometime in early 2015. Regarding the Development Code Update, the City Council is considering whether to continue remaining 2014 funding into 2015, increase funding in 2015 or wait until a subsequent year to move forward with the project. The City Council was prepared to move the SMP forward to the Department of Ecology (DOE) with a buffer requirement of 100 feet instead of 150 feet. However, there has since been more discussion about how the proposed SMP would impact redevelopment of the Senior Center. In particular, they discussed rehabilitation and/or restoration of the area where the parking lot is currently located. There is an issue about whether that area is adequate going forward, and it was noted that the breakwater will probably need to be replaced or shored up. It is anticipated that some minor change will be made to the SMP to provide clarification of this issue before it is forwarded to the DOE. The SMP is on the City Council's November 181h agenda to make a decision on whether or not to forward the document to the DOE. The DOE will review the document and either approve it or ask for changes before its final adoption by the City Council. The CFP and CIP were scheduled on the City Council's November IOtb agenda. However, due to the lateness of the hour, the two items were postponed to a later meeting. Board Member Stewart clarified that the SMP currently being considered by the City Council is an interim document. Instead of a 150-foot setback and a 50-foot buffer, the City Council voted 6-0 to approve a 100-foot setback and a 50-foot Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 2 buffer. The vote was 5-1 related to properties that are physically separated and functionally isolated. It is anticipated that the City Council will take action regarding the SMP on November 18ch PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDING CHAPTER 17.35 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REMOVE REOUIREMENTS ABOUT KEEPING OF DOMESTICATED ANIMALS FROM THAT CHAPTER AND CONSOLIDATING THEM WITH CHAPTER 5.05 (ANIMAL CONTROL) OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE. Ms. Hope advised that the Police Department and Development Services Department staff have been working together to review various parts of the code that overlap or are complimentary. The draft ordinance represents staffs joint effort to better coordinate and consolidate the regulations regarding animals. As proposed, the amendment would move portions of the Development Code that reference animals (Chapters 16 and 17) into Chapter 5.05 of the City Code. This will consolidate all the animal regulations in a single place, which will help the understanding, interpretation, and enforcement of the regulations. Chief Lawless explained that the Police Department's Animal Control Officers have struggled for several years with having regulations related to animals in both the Development Code (Chapters 16 and 17) and the City's Municipal Code (Chapter 5.05). The current situation creates gray areas, making the regulations related to animals difficult to enforce. The proposed amendment was created via a collaborative effort to clean up the language and put it in its proper context. Vice Chair Tibbott asked the nature of the most common animal noise violations. Assistance Chief Lawless answered that most of the complaints have to do with barking dogs, more specifically the incessant barking that drives neighbors crazy. At this point, the Animal Control Officer's ability to address these situations is limited. Vice Chair Tibbott asked how the City typically remedies these situations. Assistant Chief Lawless answered that the Police Department's initial approach should be to educate people about the regulations and try to obtain voluntary compliance before charging people or issuing citations. However, as the ordinance is currently written, enforcement action is required. In addition, the process for categorizing a nuisance is burdensome on individuals and limits what the Police Department can do. Board Member Ellis noted that the Noise Ordinance includes specific criteria related to dogs barking. He said he likes the idea of having standards, but he questioned if someone would actually be required to time the length of time a dog barks. Assistant Chief Lawless advised that the proposed amendments are consistent with rulings on prior court cases in Edmonds. He acknowledged that the City does not have the resources to visit a site and measure the length of time a dog barks. However, individual neighbors have the ability to record the event, using time stamps, and report to the Police Department. Adopting a standard of 10-minutes of nonstop barking will help with enforcement. He emphasized that the goal is to find a balance between addressing the concerns of the party that is being annoyed and protecting the rights of the dog owner. Again, he said the proposed language is based on previous court rulings, consultation with the City Attorney, and reviewing successful code language from other jurisdictions throughout the region. Board Member Ellis asked if Assistant Chief Lawless believes the proposed language represents a workable standard. Assistant Chief Lawless answered affirmatively and said the language is based on experiences in Edmonds and surrounding jurisdictions. Board Member Lovell summarized that the intent of the proposed amendments is to remove the requirements about the keeping of domesticated animals from Chapters 16 and 17 and consolidate them into Chapter 5.05 of the Edmonds City Code. Assistant Chief Lawless concurred. Ms. Hope added that the proposed amendment is intended to clean up and consolidate the existing code language, but no substantial changes have been proposed. She recommended the Board forward the proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation of approval as proposed. Chair Cloutier opened the public hearing. No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment, and the public hearing was closed. Board Member Lovell said he supports the proposed amendment that places all regulations related to animal control into a single chapter of the code. This will make the code easier to implement. He asked if this is similar to the approach staff is thinking about with respect to future Development Code updates. Ms. Hope explained that the animal regulations are just Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 3 one small piece of a larger effort to consolidate the Development Code requirements. Board Member Lovell agreed that this is one example of the kinds of change that can be made to the code to make it better and easier to understand. Board Member Robles asked if anyone in the City would be worse off as a result of the proposed amendment. Ms. Hope answered no. She explained that the proposed changes will be of particular benefit to animals and their owners. The way the current ordinance is structured, voluntary compliance is not an option for animal owners. The only tool the Animal Control Officer has to address a problem is to issue a criminal citation. The proposed amendment represents a tiered approach that allows for three infractions before a criminal citation is issued. The goal is to obtain voluntary compliance first, recognizing there are extreme cases where more drastic enforcement measures will be necessary. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 17.35 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. AS PROPOSED THE REQUIREMENTS ABOUT THE KEEPING OF DOMESTICATED ANIMALS WOULD BE REMOVED FROM CHAPTER 17.35 AND CONSOLIDATED WITH CHAPTER 5.05 (ANIMAL CONTROL) OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RECOMMENDATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Mr. Chave referred the Board to Attachment 1, which is a clean version of the draft Housing Element, and Attachment 2, which shows the edits from the current adopted Housing Element. He explained that Attachment 1 is similar to the draft language the Board reviewed at their October 22°d meeting. However, some changes were made to update the background data, update material on housing needs, update terminology, and include broader housing issues. In addition, the section on the County's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy was eliminated as it is out of date and not useable in its current form. Mr. Chave invited the Board Members to identify additional changes and then forward the document to the City Council for review. He noted that the Board would conduct a public hearing later in the process when they have completed their work on all of the Comprehensive Plan elements. As the Board completes its review of each of the elements, they will be presented to the City Council for review. Board Member Nelson referred to the performance measure on Page 18 and pointed out a possible discrepancy in the number of additional dwelling units each year. Mr. Chave explained that the City's goal is to add approximately 2,800 units by 2035, which equates to 112 units per year between 2010 and 2035. Rather than identifying the total number of dwelling units in the City by 2035, Board Member Nelson suggested the performance measure could be to identify the number of additional 2,790 dwelling units by 2035. Mr. Chave agreed that change would be appropriate, but the Development Services Director has recommended that the performance measure also identify the number of additional units per year. Future reports will provide numbers for both the yearly growth and the cumulative growth since 2010. Board Member Robles said he supports the changes that have been made to clarify that accessory structures and other forms of infill can be utilized to meet the needs of families. He specifically referred to Housing Goal F.2.b, which calls for providing accessory housing in single-family neighborhoods that address the needs of extended families and encourage housing affordability. This type of housing is particularly suitable for seniors, children, and co -living situations. Board Member Stewart asked if co -housing development would be consistent with the language proposed in the Housing Element related to multi -family housing. Board Member Robles commented that there are co -housing developments in other cities where kitchens and bathrooms are shared, and there are proponents of this type of housing in Edmonds, as well. He noted that the housing type is not specifically called out in the Housing Element, but it does not appear the proposed language would preclude it, either. Board Member Lovell pointed out the legal problems associated with co -housing development in Seattle and cautioned against venturing into this realm in Edmonds at this time. His understanding is that the proposed language in the Housing Element encourages more multi -family residential units. He said it will be interesting to see what development occurs now that the City Council has approved the Planning Board's recommendation to allow residential development on all floors in the General Commercial (CG) and CG2 zones on Highway 99. He suggested that more investigation is needed before the Board pushes forward a co -housing concept in Edmonds. Board Member Robles agreed Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 4 that co -housing should not be specifically mentioned in the Housing Element, but the language should not set up barriers that impede the use, either. Vice Chair Tibbott questioned how co -housing development would be different than single-family development that has two master bedrooms. In either case, bedrooms can be rented out or co -owned and residents share kitchen facilities. Chair Cloutier asked staff to respond to whether or not the proposed Housing Element would create a barrier to co -housing opportunities. Mr. Chave answered that the proposed Housing Element is very open ended and encompasses a variety of housing options. It will take some effort to conduct research and match the needs of the residents versus what the codes do and do not allow and decide what direction the City wants to go. Chair Cloutier summarized that there is nothing in the Housing Element about specific kinds of development. The Housing Element clearly indicates that infill development is desirable and this policy will guide the Board and City Council when updating the Development Code in the future. Board Member Lovell said he reviewed the red -lined draft of the Housing Element (Attachment 2) and observed that instead of trying to develop one program to deal with affordable housing, the City will work in partnership with the Alliance for Affordable Housing (AAH) to help achieve its goals. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides specific policies for the various activity centers in the City, and the activity centers will become the nucleus for various forms of development in the future. In addition, the Housing Element encourages more multi -family residential housing in the City. Board Member Stewart said she would like the word "healthy" to be inserted into the Housing Element wherever possible. For example, Housing Goal C could be changed by inserting the words "healthy and" before "suitable." She expressed her belief that it is important to emphasize the need for healthy living environments for all people. This would be consistent with language found in the Sustainability Element. Board Member Rubenkonig indicated support for the draft Housing Element (Attachment 1). However, she questioned if the phrases "accessory dwelling unit," "accessory uses," and "accessory units" are interchangeable or should one term be used throughout the document. She specifically referred to Housing Goal F.2.b, which calls for providing accessory housing in single-family neighborhoods. Mr. Chave explained that "accessory dwelling unit" refers to a specific use, whereas "accessory uses" refers to a classification of uses. The two are not interchangeable in this section. The term "accessory uses" is broader and includes more than just accessory dwelling units. Board Member Rubenkonig said she would prefer to use one phrase that everyone can catch on to, and hear the same thing in their minds. She asked staff to consider whether all three terms are necessary or if one term should be used consistently throughout the document. Chair Cloutier referred to the proposed implementation action and performance measure. Rather than simply measuring the number of new units permitted each year, he questioned if it would be possible to obtain a meaningful estimate of the number of units that are affordable. Mr. Chave pointed out that the implementation action calls for developing a strategy to measure both the supply of affordable housing and the City's progress in meeting diverse housing needs. He explained that "affordability" is very difficult to assess and measure on an annual basis because data is scarce. In addition, affordable housing can change significantly, and this change can have little to do with housing stock and more to do with the economy in general. However, he agreed that "affordability" is not something the City should lose track of. Vice Chair Tibbott observed that the entire introductory section is a study of the affordability of housing in Edmonds, so there are clearly metrics available to measure affordable housing. He agreed that the City should have some method in place to keep track of affordability. Board Member Lovell suggested that this issue could be addressed in the future in collaboration with the AAH. Chair Cloutier suggested that perhaps there could be two implementation actions: one related to a strategy for increasing the supply of affordable housing and meeting diverse housing needs and another related to a metric for accessing affordability. He acknowledged that the Board is not the correct body for solving this issue, but an action item that says someone needs to solve the issue would be appropriate. Mr. Chave explained that affordable housing data is generally easier to come by as you scale up. Regional data is easy to obtain, but as you drill down to local data, it becomes more difficult to assess. Typically local jurisdictions must deal with multiple sets of data and figure out how it all fits together. Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 5 BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AS DRAFTED. CHAIR CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GENERAL INTRODUCTION SECTION AND LAND USE ELEMENT Mr. Chave reviewed the attachments provided in the Staff Report as follows: Attachment 1 is the proposed Land Use Element Outline, Attachment 2 provides examples of what the updated data will look like, Attachment 3 is the current adopted Land Use Element, and Attachment 4 is Board Member Stewart's comments dated October 30, 2014. He explained that the intent of the Land Use Element is to update planning data and improve the overall organization of the element to be consistent with the more recently adopted Sustainability Element. Staff does not anticipate changes to the general policy direction. Mr. Chave referred to the Downtown Plan, which is included in the current Land Use Element and discusses a variety of design guidelines. Staff is proposing that these guidelines be moved to the Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. He explained that it makes more sense to group all of the design guidelines into one section and then clean up and reorganize the material. He invited the Board Members to share their additional comments and ideas related to the Land Use Element. He particularly asked for comments on the proposed outline for the Land Use Element as presented in Attachment 1. Board Member Stewart said she supports the outline presented by staff in Attachment 1. However, she suggested that the reference to "nomadic bands of Native Americans" on Page 10 of Attachment 3 is somewhat derogatory. While it is likely that the tribes moved around depending on the season and in their search for food and shelter, the term "nomadic" is not truly indicative of the way Native Americans in the area lived. She noted that the history portion of the Shoreline Master Plan has a better accounting of local tribes living on the land. She also noted that mention of "participatory tribes" on Page 15 of Attachment 3 may not reflect the true history of occupation back then. Mr. Chave explained that some of the descriptive language that was included in the 1995 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was transferred to the Comprehensive Plan. Some of this language is still in the plan, and he invited the Board Members to highlight specific language they would like staff to consider changing and/or eliminating. Board Member Lovell observed that the Land Use Element did not get specific about areas in the City until 1995, when the Downtown Plan was added. Again, Mr. Chave pointed out that the Urban Design Elements contained in the Downtown Plan will be transferred to the Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan where all of the other design related goals and policies are located. Board Member Lovell said it would be helpful if each of the sections in the Land Use Element that pertain to specific areas of the City could be organized the same way. This will make it easier to identify the differences in terms of what currently exists and what strategies are in place to guide future development. He noted that there are different opportunities in each of the areas that should be heralded in the Comprehensive Plan. Board Member Lovell questioned if it would be appropriate to identify more specific strategies and policies in the Comprehensive Plan for each of the areas. Mr. Chave cautioned that developing more specific strategies and policies for each of the areas would be akin to creating a neighborhood or subarea plan for each section of the City. He explained that the goals and policies in the Land Use Element focus on two activity centers: downtown and Highway 99. There are also individual sections that talk about the neighborhood commercial areas such as Five Corners and Westgate. Indirectly, the Land Use Element discusses the different parts of town, but it does not talk at any length to the surrounding neighborhoods associated with these areas. This would require a significant outreach effort, which is beyond what the City is able to do with this update. Board Member Robles asked if the language in the Land Use Element would allow opportunities for new technologies to be implemented. For example, the Land Use Element should not exclude decentralized businesses such as drones, Airbnb, etc. He anticipates these uses will come to the City one day. While he does not advocate that the Land Use Element specifically identify these opportunities, it should not exclude them, either. Mr. Chave said he cannot think of anything in the current Land Use Element that would preclude or limit these future opportunities. Chair Cloutier reminded the Board that they are discussing the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and not the Development Code. The Land Use Element is intended to outline the City's vision statement for how land in Edmonds will be used. He cautioned the Board to avoid Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 6 language that calls out specific uses. Mr. Chave suggested these uses could be better addressed in the Development Code, which will be updated in the near future. He cautioned that the line between what is allowed outright under existing zoning versus what requires a public approval process becomes very critical. This lens will make the most sense to look at the uses discussed by Board Member Robles. Again, he said there is nothing in the current Comprehensive Plan that would prohibit or limit these opportunities. Board Member Rubenkonig suggested it might be appropriate to refer to the hospital as "Swedish Edmonds Hospital" rather than "Stevens Hospital." Mr. Chave agreed. Board Member Stewart suggested that the second to the last paragraph on Page 39 of Attachment 3 should be changed to read, "The City should consider using incentives to achieve development and infill goals and zoning incentives or other measures to ensure that land adjacent to infrastructure is utilized to maximize the economic and environmental benefits of that infrastructure." Board Member Lovell defined infrastructure as "anything that is manmade that supports the livability of people." Board Member Stewart commented that "green infrastructure" would be environmental systems that are not manmade that serve to harness nature and do the work that has previously been accomplished with engineered facilities. She said that in her experience and study, infrastructure should refer to both manmade and natural infrastructure. Board Member Lovell said he understands the point Board Member Stewart is trying to make. However, he cautioned against creating language that serves as a barrier to a property's development. For example, her proposed language could be interpreted to mean that trees could not be removed from a site because they are considered part of the natural infrastructure. Board Member Stewart said it is not her intent to place additional barriers on development, but she does not want to preclude the idea of using natural systems as part of the infrastructure. For example, New York City has done a great deal of work using marshes and wetlands instead of engineered infrastructure to address flooding issues. This alternative has saved New York City a lot of money, and the concept could be applied in Edmonds in conjunction with what engineers have done for decades. She does not want to look at the future and think of infrastructure as human engineered structures, only. There must be a way to implement this concept without creating additional obstacles for developers. She and Board Member Lovell agreed to work with staff to come up with language for the Board's consideration. Mr. Chave suggested that the paragraph referenced earlier by Board Member Stewart (second to the last paragraph on Page 39) seems out of place in its current location. The Board Members concurred, and Mr. Chave agreed to consider a more appropriate location for the language. He noted that the concept outlined in the paragraph is likely addressed in a policy contained in the Sustainability Element, but it would be appropriate to echo the concept in the Land Use Element. Board Member Stewart referred to Item 4 at the bottom of Page 69 of Attachment 2 and requested clarification on what is meant by the term "small." Mr. Chave advised that this is very old Comprehensive Plan language that is inconsistent with the current Critical Areas Ordinance. He suggested the language be removed from the Comprehensive Plan. Board Member Stewart also referred to the 4"' paragraph of Item A on Page 84 of Attachment 3 and suggested the first sentence be changed to read, "City beaches, including the near shore environment, represent unique habitats for marine organisms." She pointed out that breakwaters and pilings are not desirable human artifacts for habitat purposes, and they should not be considered unique habitat. Mr. Chave advised that much of the language in this section was inserted prior to 1995. Board Member Lovell added that much of the information is covered in depth in the Shoreline Master Program, and it does not need to be included in the Land Use Element, too. Chair Cloutier observed that the language makes reference to survey data that was collected in 1974. Board Member Lovell asked if the Comprehensive Plan Update, including the Land Use Element, is being done in house. Mr. Chave answered affirmatively and added that the City has hired a temporary planner to assist in the effort. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Chave advised that the December 10"' meeting agenda will include continued discussion of the draft Land Use Element and an introduction of the Utilities Element. He noted that the quarterly report by the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director has been postponed to January. Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 7 PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Cloutier did not provide any comments during this portion of the meeting. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Stewart reported that there has been some discussion amongst City Council Members about the concept of video recording the Planning Board Meetings. She was asked to solicit feedback from the Planning Board Members as to whether or not they would be in favor of this practice. She reminded the Board that throughout the next year, they will be working on updating the Comprehensive Plan, Stormwater Code, etc. If recorded, the meetings could be available to citizens on line, and this might encourage more public participation in the process. Board Member Nelson said he supports the concept. It is obvious that more public involvement is desirable, and video recording the meetings would make it easier for people to participate. Chair Cloutier concurred. Board Member Lovell expressed some doubt that video recording the meetings would result in more public participation. Vice Chair Tibbott commented that the Board Meetings are intended to allow a more collaborative conversation than the City Council Meetings, and he would hate to lose that in the process. Very good minutes are taken of the Board Meetings, and information provided on-line for each of the meetings can be easily accessed by the public. Citizens can also request an audio recording of the meetings. Board Member Stewart expressed her belief that video recording the meetings would provide an additional method of public outreach, and this would be particularly helpful given the importance of what the Board will be discussing over the next year and a half. Board Member Rubenkonig said she would like more time to consider the option before providing her opinion one way or another. She likes that video recording the meetings would provide another measure of accountability. If the meetings are recorded, Board Members may be more careful about how they explain their thoughts. The public would have three avenues for participation: reading the minutes, attending the meetings, or watching the video recording. Evan Zhao, Edmonds, noted that this is the first Planning Board meeting he has attended, but he will begin participating as the Student Representative on December loth. He commented that the world is quickly advancing into an age of information and data collection, and recording public meetings will eventually become a reality. He explained that the benefit of video recordings is that it is possible for a person to fast forward to the discussions he/she is interested in. Audio recordings are not as interesting to listen to and connect with. People who watch the video recordings will feel more connected with the happenings of the Board, making them more likely to contribute by adding their voice. Vice Chair Tibbott questioned how many people would actually view the recordings to improve the dialogue. On the other hand, he noted that it is becoming less costly to store digital media, and there may be value in collecting a video history of the Board's meetings. Board Member Stewart noted that the City Council would likely need to make a decision on whether or not to record the Planning Board Meetings prior to the Board's next meeting. She agreed to report to the City Council that the Board discussed the concept. While they noted the benefits, not everyone was on board. Vice Chair Tibbott said he likes what the City has done with the focus areas along Highway 99 (International and Hospital Districts). Not only is it helpful to see the areas displayed this way to provide identity, he looks forward to the planning and future redevelopment that will take place along the strip. Vice Chair Tibbott questioned if anyone anticipated, when the 1995 growth projections were made, that the City would only add 400 new residents between 2000 and 2010. He questioned how accurate the current growth projections are for the years 2015 to 2025, and how much the City should rely on the growth projections when planning for the future. Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 8 Board Member Robles reported that he spoke at the Living Economics Forum in Oakland, California where a lot of great ideas were discussed. He said he is actively looking at these issues. He advised that he would also host a panel at The Future of Money and Technology Summit in San Francisco, California on the topic, "Everything That Can Be Decentralized Will Be Decentralized," and he plans to share his thoughts on Edmonds. Board Member Stewart requested a link to these two discussions. Board Member Rubenkonig questioned when her term as Board Member expires. Chair Cloutier advised that the City has a chart showing when each of the term limits expire, and it is typically updated and presented to the Board in January of each year. The Board discussed that there is no limit on the number of terms a Board Member can serve, but reappointment by the Mayor is necessary for each term. Board Member Rubenkonig said she was delighted to interview both Evan Zhao and Pavi Chance for the Student Representative position. Both of them love Edmonds, and it was insightful to hear what they enjoy about the City and what attracts them to the City. They are both open to understanding how things take place in the City, and they both answered affirmatively when asked if they would feel comfortable sharing their points of view with the Planning Board Members. She said she looks forward to their future involvement. Board Member Lovell announced that he would attend the November 19`h meeting of the Economic Development Commission and provide a report to the Board on December IOth. He also announced that the City Council has had continued discussions regarding strategies for constructing a restroom in downtown Edmonds. However, he is disappointed that they postponed their decisions related to the Westgate Plan, the Shoreline Master Program, the Capital Improvement Plan and the Capital Facilities Plan. ADJOURNMENT The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Planning Board Minutes November 12, 2014 Page 9 AI-7346 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 12/10/2014 Development Services Director Report to Planning Board Staff Lead/Author: Shane Hope, Director Department: Planning Initiated By: Information Subject/Purpose Development Services Director Report to Planning Board Staff Recommendation Review the attached Director Report Previous Board Action N/A Narrative Attached is the Director Report Attachments Director Report 12.05.14 Nov. Bldg Report Code Update-PB Retreat 5. oV EbM MEMORANDUM Date: December 5, 2014 To: Planning Board From: Shane Hope, Development Services Director Subject: Director Report Next Planning Board Meeting The Planning Board's next meeting is on December 10. Consideration of a draft Land Use Element for the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update will be a major part of the meeting. Permit Activity Still Strong 2014 has been a good year for projects being built in Edmonds. For example, building valuation for projects permitted in Edmonds through November of this year is about 2.6 times greater than for the same period in 2013. Similarly, building permit fee revenues are more than double for the same periods. [Note: Building permit information is a good indicator of general development activity.] For more details, see the attached Building Division Report. Housing Forum "Creating Happy Communities through Urban Design" was the theme of an affordable housing forum, sponsored by the Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County on December 4. The forum featured a slide presentation illustrating important concepts for affordable housing developments. These included making sure that a range of housing choices are provided, that attractive common space is included, and that the housing is respectful of the neighborhood character. Development Code Update Project Following an RFQ process this fall, a professional services agreement to assist the Development Services Department with the Development Code Update was approved December 2 by the City Council for the Mayor's signature. The selected firm is Makers, which is also bringing on board SVR, a firm that specializes in stormwater management and other environmental issues. Some initial analysis work will take place before the end of the year. The remainder of the project, which will include draft code language for various topics, as well as public input opportunities, will follow in 2015. While I have not worked directly with the Makers team in the past, I have professionally known several members over the years and observed from other cities and counties that their work was well respected. Code projects that the Makers team has worked on include the following (with an asterisk marking those that received awards): - Ellensburg Land Use Code (note: this is a major project --the entire land use code-- and Ellensburg appears to be very pleased with it. - Boise Design Standards - Sammamish Town Center Code - Evergreen Way Plan and Development Standards - Tacoma Design Review - Chelan Downtown Code * - Everett Downtown Regulations and Design Guidelines - Woodinville Design Guidelines - Tumwater Capitol Boulevard Plan/ Code Update - Lacey Residential Development Code - Bellingham Residential Code Study and Design Guidelines. The Development Code Update project is expected to reflect the principles and objectives that the Planning Board recommended at its retreat this summer. (See attachment.) Updating regulations is intended to not only clarify and update the existing development code but also to incorporate new stormwater requirements from the state Department of Ecology and consider other improvements as appropriate. Topics include: • Subdivisions • Planned residential developments • Design review • Off-street parking • Bicycle facilities • Streets and sidewalks • Right of way construction • General zoning requirements • Criteria and processes • Accessory dwelling units • Multifamily residential • Site development standards —zoning • Administrative procedures • Definitions • Other topics as time and resources allow Sound Transit —Final Supplement EIS Thousands of Puget Sound residents have commented on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for updating Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan. Sound Transit reviewed the comments to shape a Finals SEIS, now released. (View it at: www.soundtransit.org/LongRan2ePlan.) This updated document provides the technical basis for where mass transit should expand after the current set of projects are complete in 2023, funding for which was approved by voters in 2008. City Council Update from December 2 Meeting • The Council held a public hearing on the draft Housing Element of the 2015 Comp Plan Update, which was forwarded from the Planning Board. On December 9, the Council will further discuss the draft Housing Element. • A final report on the Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Study and Pre -Design Project was reviewed. • Establishment of a Diversity Commission was a topic of lively discussion. Council members expressed keen interest in having a Diversity Commission but details still need to be worked out about what the specific charge of the Commission would be, who would be on it, and how the City would staff it or provide other resources. Community Calendar ❑ Town Hall meeting —December 10, Wednesday, from 6:30 — 8:30 pm at the Point Edwards Charter Club located at 85 Pine Street. The meeting is offered especially for community members in Southwest Edmonds, although it's open to anyone. ❑ The Edmonds Historical Museum puts on a festive holiday air this week, and it's all about toys. "Toys of Yesteryear," the new exhibit in the freshly -remodeled upstairs space, opens this weekend and will feature toys that might have appeared under holiday trees of the last century. Adults may just see that favorite toy from their childhood, and younger folks will get to see what lit up the eyes of their parents and grandparents in holiday seasons past. ❑ The public is invited to join the City of Edmonds in the spirit of giving by participating in the city -sponsored Giving Trees program. Stop by Edmonds City Hall or the Frances Anderson Center to select a tag with the name of a person in need and their gift suggestion. Purchase a gift and return the wrapped gift to either location by Dec. 12. Edmonds City Hall is located at 121 5th Ave. N. and the Frances Anderson Center is located at 700 Main St. The tags are provided by Volunteers of America Western Washington and the gifts will be donated to local children and adults who need your help to make this holiday season a little brighter. For more information, contact Cynthia Cruz at Edmonds Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services at 425-771-0231 or email cynthia.cruzkedmondswa.gov. ❑ The City of Edmonds Historic Commission is proud to announce the release of the 2015 Historic Edmonds Calendar. This high quality twelve month calendar depicts important events, places, and people from Edmonds past and is free to the public while stocks last. The historic photographs were provided by the Edmonds Historical Museum. City offices will be closed Wednesday Dec. 24 — Thursday Dec.24 for Christmas Holiday. EDMONDS BUILDING DIVISION REPORT FOR MONTH OF NOVEMBER 2014 NAME ADDRESS WORK COLEMAN SELECT HOMES WOODVALE /BURNSTEAD WOODVALE /BURNSTEAD 902 9TH AVE S 8902 216TH ST SW 23704 105TH PL W 23708 105TH PL W NEW SFR NEW SFR NEW SFR NEW SFR TYPE TOTAL FOR MONTH TOTAL FOR YEAR PERMITS VALUATION PERMITS VALUATION Single Family -New Duplex -New Apartment/Condo -New Commercial -New Mixed Use -Office/Condo 4 $1,657,198 44 $15,216,793 0 $0 2 $653,776 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 5 $36,707,117 0 $0 1 $7,232,284 Single Family Add/Alter Apartment Add/Alter Commercial Add/Alter 11 $427,936 86 $3,828,421 3 $25,940 14 $179,060 7 $353,870 61 $5,016,234 Public Building -New Public Building Add/Alter CarportlGarage 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 1 $20,000 0 $0 10 $252,947 Demolition Mechanical/Plumbing Miscellaneous TOTAL 2 $0 18 $0 31/37 $0.00 222/324 $18,977 35 $75,500 383 $837,099 130 $2,540,444 1171 $69,962,708 L:\Building New Folder 2010\Reports (Permits &Inspections)\Permit Reports\2014 Permit Reports\NOVEMBER 2014 Building Report.xlsx EDMONDS BUILDING DIVISION REPORT FOR NOVEMBER 2014 BUILDING PERMIT FEES RECAP NOVEMBER 2014 NOVEMBER 2013 NOVEMBER 2012 VALUATION $ $2,540,444 $858,094 $1,562,209 YEAR TO DATE $69,962,708 $26,696,289 $19,553,175 PERMIT FEES $ $42,224 $19,942 $30,312 YEAR TO DATE $604,112 $392,607 $313,682 REVIEW FEES $ $20,459 $8,379 $13,855 YEAR TO DATE $4061560 $197,670 $149,054 # OF PERMITS 130 112 107 YEAR TO DATE 1171 1269 1020 PLAN REVIEW FEES RECEIVED YEAR TO DATE PLAN REVIEW FEES TAKEN IN ON CURRENT APPLICATIONS FOR OCTOBER 1- 30th NOT YET ISSUED) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUDGET PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXPENDED YEAR TO DATE $406,560 $29,413 $92,000 $70,489 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PERCENTAGE USED 76.62% Code Re-write/Update As Identified at the July 2014 Planning Board Retreat Public Process An open public process is vital. It will include many opportunities for public input from a broad range of persons. Principles ❑ Consistency with current state laws ❑ Consistency with Edmonds Comprehensive Plan ❑ Predictability ❑ Some flexibility ❑ Recognition of property rights ❑ Clear, user-friendly language and format ❑ Enforceability Key objectives ❑ Ensuring reasonable and clear processes for all actions ❑ Providing expanded and up-to-date set of definitions ❑ Encouragement of appropriate development ❑ Protection of critical areas and shorelines ❑ Recognition of diverse neighborhoods and their characteristics ❑ Encouragement of pedestrian -friendly and bicycle -friendly access ❑ Encouragement of low impact stormwater management (consistent with Ecology rules) AI-7344 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 12/10/2014 Continued discussion of draft General Section and draft Land Use Element Staff Lead/Author: Rob Chave, Planning Manager Department: Initiated By: Planning City Staff Information Subject/Purpose Continued discussion of draft General Section and draft Land Use Element Staff Recommendation Provide feedback to staff. Previous Board Action 7. a. This is part of continuing work by the Board on various Comprehensive Plan elements for the 2015 update. Narrative This item concerns two different sections of the Comprehensive Plan, the General introductory section, and the main Land Use Element itself. This is a progress report showing the work done thus far, which includes updates to the narratives and data and reformatting of the goals and policies to be consistent with the format used in the Sustainability Element. In terms of goals/policies, we have not made significant changes. There are two sections worth pointing out, however. We added a new section on "Public Process" at the end of the "General" section (Attachements 1 and 2), and a new Goal B for the Downtown/Waterfront Area addressing current concerns about rail and safety conflicts downtown (Land Use Element, Attachments 3 and 4 -- see plan page 46 of Attachment 3). Attachments Attachment 1: General section, clean version Attachment 2: General section, version showing edits Attachment 3: Land Use, clean version Attachment 4: Land Use, version showing edits General Background Planning Area The City of Edmonds is located in south Snohomish County on the western shores of Puget Sound approximately 14 miles north of Seattle. Situated within the urbanized Puget Sound region, the city encompasses approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres) in area, including 5 lineal miles (26,240 feet) of marine shoreline. Roughly triangular in shape, the city is bounded by Puget Sound on the west; Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace on the east; unincorporated Snohomish County on the north; and the town of Woodway, unincorporated Snohomish County (the Esperance area), and King County on the south. Land Use Pattern Single-family residential uses are relatively evenly dispersed throughout the city and occupy the majority of the city's land use base. Approximately 3,272 acres, or 56.3 percent of the City's area is developed for single-family residential uses. Higher density residential development (including apartments and condominiums) is primarily located south and north of the downtown; in the vicinity of the Edmonds-Woodway High School site and Stevens Hospital; and adjacent to 196th Street, 76th Avenue and Highway 99. Together, single-family and multi -family residential units comprise approximately 3,453 acres (nearly 59.4 percent of the total land in the city). Commercial activity is concentrated in two principal areas -- the Downtown/Waterfront and the Highway 99 corridor (which includes the retail and medical development in the vicinity of Stevens Hospital). Smaller commercial nodes that primarily serve adjacent neighborhoods are located at the intersection of Edmonds Way (SR104) and 100th Avenue/9th Avenue (Westgate) and at 212th Street/84th Avenue (5 Corners). The Port of Edmonds is located in the southern portion of the city's waterfront. The Port owns and manages 33 upland acres as well as a small boat harbor and marina, with space for 1,000 boats (approximately 11 acres). The Port's property is occupied by approximately 80 businesses including office uses located in Harbor Square. Approximately 258 acres of parks and open space lands are owned or operated by the City, while there are another 229 acres of County -owned parks and open space land in the Edmonds area. Regional parks and beaches figure prominently in the City, including Brackett's Landing North and South, the Edmonds Fishing Pier, Edmonds Memorial Cemetery, Edmonds Underwater Park, Marina Beach Park, Olympic Beach Park, local tidelands, and the South County Senior Center. The Edmonds Marsh is a significant City -owned open space (23 acres), while Yost Memorial Park is the largest community park owned by the City (48 acres). The largest County resources are Southwest County Park (120 acres) and Meadowdale Beach County Park (95 acres). Overall, approximately 96 percent of the city is developed. Figure 1 and the accompanying Table 1 summarize existing land uses in the city. 8 General Background Figure 1: Existing Land Use Pad 9 Recreatiary Open Space 6 5% Vacan! Com+nercial k,1ulti Family Schaal,, d_0?4 . 3_fi3fi 3.196 3.05b �� q age rrd�l kns+ _i Wr I$F R$IeLYIIQIS 1.+455 Meads d.5°,� GovernMEWE 0.1% Source- Ci%iy afFdmoads Gfs, Mv. 2014 Table 1: Existing Land Use Total Acres by Use % of Total Acres Single -Family 56.3% 3272.3 Streets/Parking/Driveways 18.8% 1093.9 Parks/Recreation/Open Space 6.5% 375.4 Vacant 4.0% 230.3 Commercial 3.6% 209.7 Multi -Family 3.1 % 181.0 Schools 3.0% 171.5 Tidelands/Bays/Lagoons/Water Retention 1.4% 80.1 Religious 0.7% 41.6 Medical 0.7% 40.8 Mixed Use 0.7% 39.3 Industrial 0.6% 32.2 Retirement/Special Needs 0.3% 16.9 Government 0.2% 14.0 Utilities 0.2% 13.8 Total Source: City of Edmonds GIS data, Nov-2014 100.0% 5812.8 General Background 9 Historical Development The earliest inhabitants of the area were likely nomadic bands of Native Americans. As European exploration and settlement in the Pacific Northwest increased, settlers began homesteading and logging activities in the general area of the present-day city. The community that became the City of Edmonds grew out of a homestead and logging operation started by George Brackett in 1876. Logging and shingle -splitting were the dominant economic activities in the community during the 1880's and 1890's. The town continued to grow as other industries including box making, pulp mill, a cigar factory, and increased waterfront activities developed. The Great North Railroad reached the town in 1891 and for many years provided access for goods and passenger travel to Everett and Seattle as well as to the eastern part of the state. Although fires destroyed many of the waterfront mills, shingle production continued to be the primary industry in the city into the 1940s. Ferry service to Kingston began in 1923 when a ferry terminal was built near the location of the existing ferry dock The present ferry terminal was built in the early 1950's after acquisition of the ferry system by the State of Washington. The city continued to grow during the 1940's and 50's, resulting in a more active role of the municipality in providing water, sewer and streets for the residential and commercial expansion. The Port District was formed in 1948 and began waterfront improvements. Commercial and retail businesses within the downtown provided a wide range of services to the community. Completion of Interstate 5 and increased growth in the Puget Sound region led to a gradual change in the character of city with more emphasis on residential development and a decline in the retail importance of the downtown. The city is now primarily a residential community; it also provides many amenities for residents and visitors including restaurants, and specialized shopping as well as cultural events such as the annual art festival. The City of Edmonds was incorporated in 1890 with the original town site encompassing approximately 550 acres. The original town site is now occupied primarily by the downtown and adjacent residential areas. The city has expanded in area through annexations to approximately 8.9 square miles. Population The rate of population growth has been relatively stable over the years with major increases occurring primarily as a result of annexations in the 1950s and 1960s. Population growth since 1980 has occurred at a relatively slow rate. Table 2: City of Edmonds Between 1980 and 1990, the population Historical and Projected Growth, 1940 to 2035 increased 11.1 percent (approximately 1 Edmonds Percent Avg. Annual Snohomish Percent Avg. Annual percent per year) to 30,744. Since 1990, Year Population Increase Increase County Increase Increase this slow growth trend has continued 1940 1,288 88,754 1950 2,057 59.7% 4.8% 111,580 25.7% 2.3% with the city reaching a population of 1960 8,016 289.7% 14.6% 172,199 54.3% 4.4% 39,515 in 2000 (an annual increase of 1970 23,684 195.5% 11.4% 265,236 54.0% 4.4% 2.5% per year during the 1990s). Even 1980 27,679 16.9% 1.6% 337,720 27.3% 2.4% this relatively modest increase during the 1990 30,744 11.1% 1.1% 465,642 37.9% 3.3% 1990s was largely due to annexations in 2000 39,515 28.5% 2.5% 606,024 30.1% 2.7% 2010 39,709 0.5% 0.05% 713,335 17.7% 1.6% the southern portion of the city's urban 2035 (proj.) 45,550 14.7% 0.6% 955,280 33.9% 3.0% Souce: US Census 10 General Background growth area (Esperance). Growth was marginal between 2000 and 2010, reaching a population of 39,709 (an annual growth rate of 0.05%). 10% 4% 10% 4% 2% 0016 1940 Source: US Census Figure 2: Edmonds Population 1950 1%0 1970 19eo 1990 200C 2010 ■ Edmonds Population ■Avg, Annual Increase z 40 35 30 = O M 25 3 CL O 20 a- 1$ � 10 5 0 Figure 2 summarizes the recent population trends in Edmonds and the surrounding area. As of 2014, Edmonds is the 3rd mosrt populous city in Snohomish County, and the 27th most populous city in the state. The city ranks 7th in overall population density state-wide, with a 2014 estimated population density of 4,418 people per square mile *(OFM, 2014). The city has a higher percentage of retired persons and senior citizens than its neighboring cities and Snohomish County as a whole (see figure 3 on next page). The median age of the population in 2010 was 46.3 years, up from 42.0 years in 2000 and 38.3 years in 1990. In the 2010 Census, the population was predominantly Caucasian (83.4%), with approximately 7.4% Asian or Pacific Islander, 2.6% African American, 0.70/oNative American and Alaskan Native, and 4.1% mixed race. General Background 11 Figure 3: Age Distribution of Edmonds Residents and Nearby Cities Edmonds Age � .�� Gr*ups shoreiine '� ■ <5 „ Lynnwood w1 e10to 14 ■ 15 to 19 Mountlake Terrace m 20 to 24 Everett a 25 to 29 s 30 to 34 i3othc1l s 35 to 39 ■ 40 tc 44 Mill C(eek i45 to 49 ■ 50 to 54 Muki3teo ■ 55 1, 59 — is50 to 64 Kirkland - 55 to 09 King County 70 to 74 j75to79 Snohomish County 80F 10% 2C% -419% 40% 50% &Y-1 70% 90% 947E 100% Source: US Census,2010 Economic Factors During the first decade of the 215t century, covered employment in Edmonds grew at a modest average annual growth rate (AGR) of 0.56% (compared to Snohomish County at 1.53% AGR and King County -0.32% AGR). These figures are based on the Puget Sound Regional Council's Covered Employment estimates and consist of all employment covered by the Washington Unemployment Insurance Act except jobs in the resource, mining, and construction fields which were excluded to remain consistent with Snohomish County Tomorrow's (SCT) long-term employment targets that do not consider resource, mining, and construction fields into their projections. From 2010 to 2013, Edmonds experienced significant growth in employment as the economy recovered from the global recession. During this period, overall employment grew at 2.46% AGR with the most notable rise in service fields (professional services, waste management, private sector educational services, healthcare and social services, arts and entertainment, accommodation and food services) at 18.5% AGR. Figure 4 shows how the employment mix in Edmonds changed over time. Figure 5 shows the percent change of specific industries from 2010 to 2013. In 2013, the Edmonds' 12 General Background total Covered Employment was 12,638. The SCT's 2035 employment projection for Edmonds is 13,948, representing an AGR of 0.47%. Figure 4: Covered Employment Estimate for Edmonds 2000, 2006, and 2013 000 Source: Puget Sound Regional Council. 2006 2D13 ■ ConskReS ■ FIRE ■ Manufacturing ■ Rekail ■ ^&inr ir.HH ■ VVTU ■ Govem merit ■ Education Figure 5: Percent Change in Covered Employment Estimates, 6M 5 zrr� 10% 0% -r, -, � Chaige M Post -Recession 2010 to 2013 0 1 0 1 0 —a— FAO-iNg RNOY I $ff+K*S WrU GW*MM*M eouwi*M T*W S xi 0% Ion% I 7410% 1 -14 M 7$.50% 2i.B31b z to% Source: Puget Sound Regional Council. General Background 13 According to the 2000 Census, the median household income in Edmonds in 1999 was $53,522, which is equivalent to the median income for King and Snohomish Counties ($53,157 and $53,060, respectively). Median income in 1990 was $40,515. Retail trade is a significant employer in the city. However, on a per capita basis, taxable retail sales in the City of Edmonds are relatively lower than Edmonds' neighbors and other cities of similar size, as shown in Figure 6, and roughly the same as Snohomish County as a whole. The City's location amidst densely populated areas suggests that Edmonds has the potential to attract higher retail sales comparable to other cities its size. Figure 6: Taxable Retail Sales per Capita (all NAICS) in 2010 SW.ea, Zo.ox MTOW e a � s�a_aaa r $$4 U06 5 �O.C44 Edmonds Mo rWake Shorelne Lynn,roao NWVAw MPI Deft Bone'. ✓ar+lena Ea ner Seahle Redmw w Snaham" IGg 1&M*X Cuuwy Gwray' Source: Department of Revenue Housing The city is primarily residential with single-family residences as the predominant land use. Of the 18,378 dwelling units in 2010, 11,685 were single-family (63.6% of the total) and 6,664 were multi- family (36.3% of the total). As shown in Table 3, multi family is continuing to increase its share of total housing stock. In 2000, 68% of all housing units were owner -occupied; this increased to just over 69% by 2010. Average household size continues to decrease over time, from 2.59 persons per household in 1980 to 2.26 persons in 2010. 14 General Background Table 3: Selected Housing Statistics Selected Housing Statistics 1980 1990 2000 2010 SF Housing Units 7,529 8,550 11,391 11,685 MF Housing Units 3,072 4,165 6,038 6,664 Mobile Homes 101 230 90 29 Total Housing Units 10,702 12,945 17,519 18,378 % Single Family 71.3% 67.8% 65.5% 63.6% % Multi Family 28.7% 32.2% 34.5% 36.3% Avg Household Size 2.59 2.41 2.32 2.26 Avg Persons/Unit 2.59 2.37 2.26 2.16 Source: U.S. Census Transportation The existing transportation system consists of a network of principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors and local streets. Three major arterials link together state routes or connect the state route system to major centers and to the ferry system; - SR-104, SR-524/196th Street SW and SR-99. SR- 104 serves east -west travel on the south end of the city and provides access to the Edmonds -Kingston ferry and Interstate 5; SR-524/196th Street SW extends bordering through the east side of the city. SR-99 carries the highest volume of traffic in Edmonds. The Burlington Northern Railroad runs adjacent to the city's shoreline and links Edmonds with Everett to the north and Seattle to the south. The rail line is currently used for freight and AMTRAK and Sound Transit commuter rail passenger rail service; approximately 37 trains a day pass through the city. Bus service is provided by Community Transit with 3 regular bus routes (with service to Mill Creek, Lynnwood, and Alderwood) and 4 peak period only commute bus routes (with service to the University of Washington and downtown Seattle). In 2009, the Swift bus rapid transit was launched, servicing a 17-mile stretch from Shoreline to Everett. The Edmonds -Kingston Ferry connects south Snohomish County and north King County with the northern Kitsap Peninsula and points west on the Olympic Peninsula via the Hood Canal Bridge. The Edmonds -Kingston ferry route remains on of the busiest routes in the state's ferry system. Figure 7 shows historical growth in passenger and vehicle demand from 1980 to 2000. Ridership more than doubled during the 1980s, increasing from nearly 1,950 vehicles and more than 4,250 persons daily in 1980 to over 4,500 vehicles and 9,200 persons daily in 1990. Ridership also increased appreciably in the 1990s, growing by more than 40% to over 6,750 vehicles and 13,000 persons daily during 2000. The 1992 Cross Sound Transportation Study (Booz-Allen and Hamilton Study Team, 1992) concluded that there was no reasonable alternative to the ferry service to meet the projected increases in travel demand. The PSRC based its Transportation Element of Vision 2020 on the Edmonds - Kingston ferry service growing to support the allocation of population within the region. PSRC Destination 2030 identifies the Edmonds Crossing project as a ferry project on the Metropolitan Transportation System and thus a crucial element to the mobility needs and economic vitality of the region. General Background 15 Figure 7: Historical Edmonds Daily Ferry Ridership 201J 5.9w 3.7�J3 3 ■Vehit3as and Driver MVehitle Passengers t ! u Foot Pammgars I 1W I 2,000 4,000 B,aoo am MOW 12,00o ..I. -DOD 0 of Passengers Source: Washington State Ferries, Ferry Traffic Statistics Rider Segment Report In response to this need, the Edmonds Crossing project is being developed to provide a long-term solution to current operations and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration [FTA]), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and the City of Edmonds, in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps], the U.S. Coast Guard, the Suquamish Tribe, the Tulalip Tribe, the Lummi Nation, the Swinomish Tribe, and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street in downtown Edmonds to another site farther from the downtown core at Point Edwards. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate the ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. Access would be provided by a realigned State Route (SR) 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity (Amtrak) passenger service and commuter rail loading requirements; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities for accommodating both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers of the available transportation modes (parking, drop-off areas, retail and concessionaire space, and waiting areas); and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users Neighborhoods Edmonds has a variety of neighborhoods, big and small, named and unnamed. Some neighborhoods, such as in the Highway 99 area, in the "Bowl," Firdale, and Perrinville, include commercial activities. (Note: The Bowl refers to the downtown area and vicinity; it comprises about 17% of the City's 16 General Background population.) Many neighborhood areas include parks, trails, and other amenities that help identify them or add to their unique character. Each neighborhood is valuable and contributes to the community as a whole. Recognizing this character and value, while still allowing for positive changes in neighborhoods over time, is an important concept. Public Process Public Participation Goal A. It is the goal of the City of Edmonds to provide early and continuous public notice for the proposed comprehensive plan amendments in advance of all opportunities to comment on the proposals, and to allow those who express an interest in any of the amendments to be able to track their progress through the legislative decision process. A.1. Use a variety of methods to provide early and ongoing public notice of the proposed amendments, including such things as publication in news outlets, advertising on local public access television, placing notices in a City newsletter, compiling a list of interested parties, and/or providing information on the City's website. A.2. Information provided by the City of Edmonds as part of this public participation process will be designed to: 1. Use plain understandable language. 2. Provide broad dissemination of information regarding the proposals. 3. Provide early and continuous notification. 4. Provide opportunities for commenting in a variety of ways — verbally, in writing, and via email. A.3. In addition to providing early and continuous information on the plan amendment proposals, the City of Edmonds will provide a formal adoption process with public hearing(s) and opportunities for public comment and input. General Background 17 General Background Planning Area The City of Edmonds is located in south Snohomish County on the western shores of Puget Sound approximately 14 miles north of Seattle (Fig . Situated within the urbanized Puget Sound region, the city encompasses approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres) in area, including 5 lineal miles (26,240 feet) of marine shoreline. Roughly triangular in shape, the city is bounded by Puget Sound on the west; Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace on the east; unincorporated Snohomish County on the north; and the town of Woodway, unincorporated Snohomish County (the Esperance area), and King County on the south. Land Use Pattern Single-family residential uses are relatively evenly dispersed throughout the city and occupy the majority of the city's land use base. Approximately 34,-003,272 acres, or -556.3 percent of the City's area is developed for single-family residential uses. Higher density residential development (including apartments and condominiums) is primarily located south and north of the downtown; in the vicinity of the Edmonds-Woodway High School site and Stevens Hospital; and adjacent to 196th Street, 76th Avenue and Highway 99. Together, single-family and multi -family residential units comprise approximately 3,400-453 acres (nearly 60-59.4 percent of the total land in the city). Commercial activity is concentrated in two principal areas -- the Downtown/Waterfront and the Highway 99 corridor (which includes the retail and medical development in the vicinity of Stevens Hospital). Smaller commercial nodes that primarily serve adjacent neighborhoods are located at the intersection of Edmonds Way (SR104) and 100th Avenue/9th Avenue (Westgate) and at 212th Street/84th Avenue (5 Corners). The Port of Edmonds is located in the southern portion of the city's waterfront. The Port owns and manages 33 upland acres as well as a small boat harbor and marina, with space for 1,000 boats (approximately 11 acres). The Port's property is occupied by approximately 80 businesses including office uses located in Harbor Square. Approximately 258 acres of parks and open space lands are owned or operated by the City, while there are another 229 acres of County -owned parks and open space land in the Edmonds area. Regional parks and beaches figure prominently in the City, including Brackett's Landing North and South, the Edmonds Fishing Pier, Edmonds Memorial Cemetery, Edmonds Underwater Park, Marina Beach Park, Olympic Beach Park, local tidelands, and the South County Senior Center. The Edmonds Marsh is a significant City -owned open space (23 acres), while Yost Memorial Park is the largest community park owned by the City (48 acres). The largest County resources are Southwest County Park (120 acres) and Meadowdale Beach County Park (95 acres). Overall, approximately 96 percent of the city is developed. ale -Fide 1 and the accompanying Eigtue Table 1 summarize existing land uses in the city. 8 General Background Figure 1: Existing Land Use Park 9+fi.ecreatiary Open Space 6 5% Vacan! Com+nercial k,1ulti Family Schaal,, d_0?4 . 3_fi3fi 3.196 3.05b �� q a9 rrd lankns+ _i Wr [$F R$k9n 1.+455 3�e;irer�ent'�c;a� Meads d.5°,� GovernMEME 0.1% Mpllues 0 2 sa=e.- Ci%iy afFdmoads Ges, Mv. 2014 Figure 1: Existing Land Use Vacant, Unclassified, 6.6% ROW, 19.2% Public, Utility, 0.6%� Open Space, Recreation, 4.4% Community Facilitie 5.0% Commerc Multi Family, 4.8% Single Family, 54.8% General Background 9 Table 1: Existing Land Use Total Acres by Use % of Total Acres Single -Family 56.3% 3272.3 Streets/Parking/Driveways 18.8% 1093.9 Parks/Recreation/Open Space 6.5% 375.4 Vacant 4.0% 230.3 Commercial 3.6% 209.7 Multi -Family 3.1 % 181.0 Schools 3.0% 171.5 Tidelands/Bays/Lagoons/Water Retention 1.4% 80.1 Religious 0.7% 41.6 Medical 0.7% 40.8 Mixed Use 0.7% 39.3 Industrial 0.6% 32.2 Retirement/Special Needs 0.3% 16.9 Government 0.2% 14.0 Utilities 0.2% 13.8 Total Source: City of Edmonds G/S data, Nov-2014 Land Use Type Single Family •xROW Nl-ulfi cmianciiia 100.0% 5812.8 Table 1 Existing Land Use Acres 3 2-74 2" 2750 -36 1, 37-9 10 General Background Historical Development The earliest inhabitants of the area were likely nomadic bands of Native Americans. As European exploration and settlement in the Pacific Northwest increased, settlers began homesteading and logging activities in the general area of the present-day city. The community that became the City of Edmonds grew out of a homestead and logging operation started by George Brackett in 1876. Logging and shingle -splitting were the dominant economic activities in the community during the 1880's and 1890's. The town continued to grow as other industries including box making, pulp mill, a cigar factory, and increased waterfront activities developed. The Great North Railroad reached the town in 1891 and for many years provided access for goods and passenger travel to Everett and Seattle as well as to the eastern part of the state. Although fires destroyed many of the waterfront mills, shingle production continued to be the primary industry in the city into the 1940s. Ferry service to Kingston began in 1923 when a ferry terminal was built near the location of the existing ferry dock The present ferry terminal was built in the early 1950's after acquisition of the ferry system by the State of Washington. The city continued to grow during the 1940's and 50's, resulting in a more active role of the municipality in providing water, sewer and streets for the residential and commercial expansion. The Port District was formed in 1948 and began waterfront improvements. Commercial and retail businesses within the downtown provided a wide range of services to the community. Completion of Interstate 5 and increased growth in the Puget Sound region led to a gradual change in the character of city with more emphasis on residential development and a decline in the retail importance of the downtown. The city is now primarily a residential community; it also provides many amenities for residents and visitors including restaurants, and specialized shopping as well as cultural events such as the annual art festival. The City of Edmonds was incorporated in 1890 with the original town site encompassing approximately 550 acres. The original town site is now occupied primarily by the downtown and adjacent residential areas. The city has expanded in area through annexations to approximately 8.9 square miles. Population The rate of population growth has been relatively stable over the years with major increases occurring primarily as a result of annexations in the Table 2: City of Edmonds 1950s and 1960s. Hisi Historical and Projected Growth, 1940 to 2035 Population growth Edmonds Percent Avg. Annual Snohomish Percent Avg. Annual since 1980 has occurred Population Increase Increase count Increase Increase at a relatively slow rate. Between 1980 and Year Po P 1940 1,Year 88,754 11 1950 2,05757 59.7% 4.8% 111,580 25.7% 2.3% 1960 8,016 289.7% 14.6% 172,199 54.3% 4.4% 1940 1990, the population 1970 23,684 195.5% 11.4% 265,236 54.0% 4.4% 1950 YO increased 11.1 percent 1980 27,679 16.9% 1.6% 337,720 27.3% 2.4%° (approximately 1 1960 1990 30,744 11.1% 1.1% 465,642 37.9% 3.3% YO percent per year) to 1970 2000 39,515 28.5% 2.5% 606,024 30.1 % 2.7% 30,744. Since 1990, this 1980 2010 39,709 0.5% 0.05% 713,335 17.7% 1.6% 2035 (proj.) 45,550 14.7% 0.6% 955,280 33.9% 3.0% 1990 Yo Souce: US Census 2000 39,515 29% 0 2.5% n 606,024 r, % 30% 2.7% General Background slow growth trend has continued, with the city reaching a population of 39,515 in 2000 (an annual increase of 2.5% per year during the 1990s). Even this relatively modest increase during the 1990s was largely due to annexations in the southern portion of the city's urban growth area (Esperance). Growth was marginal between 2000 and 2010, reaching population of 39,709 (an annual growth rate of 0.05%). 10% 14% M m 10% 3 C 8% C Q 4% 2% AW 1940 Figure 2: Edmonds Population 1950 1 %0 1 WO ■ Edmonds Population MO 1990 2000 ■Avg, Annual Increase 45 40 35 30 O 25 CL O 20 1$ � 10 5 — 0 2010 12 General Background Source: UScensufigure 2: Edmonds Population 45,000 40,000 35,000 O E 30,000 Q 25,000 d 20,000 15,000 O 10,000 5,000 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 Period Ending... ■ City Population 16.0% 14.0% O N 12.0% L 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% Q 4.0% 2.0% Q 0.0% 2000 ■Avg Annual Increase Figure 3: Edmonds: City vs. Area Growth 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 C O 30,000 25,000 Q 0 20,000 0. 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Period Ending... ■ Edmonds Area ■ City Population General Background 13 Figures 2 a -ad 3 on the �--summarizes the recent population trends in Edmonds and the surrounding area. ' degree of gr-ewth in the 199N due- to A-44-n-ex-ations, pepWatien growth in the over-all Edmonds afea r-emained a4 ., lee leve . As of 24042014, Edmonds is the 2xdk3rd largest mosrt populous city in Snohomish County, and the 22a27th largest most populous city in the state. The city ranks &h-7th in overall population density state-wide, with a 20042014 estimated population density of 4-,3-824,418 people per square mile *(OFM, 2014). The city has a higher percentage of retired persons and senior citizens than its neighboring cities and Snohomish County as a whole (see figure 3 on next page). The median age of the population in 2000 2010 was 42.046.3 years, up from 39.342.0 years in 49W2000 and 33-538.3 years in 49801990. The In the 2010 Census, the population is -was predominantly Caucasian 83.4% , with approximately 4 7.41/o pe t-Asian or Pacific Islander, 2.6% African American, 0.70/oNative American, Eski ,,, AletA, and other and Alaskan Native, and 4.1% mixed race. 14 General Background Figure 3: Age Distribution of Edmonds Residents and Nearby Cities Edmonds Age Groups Shoreline Lynnwood Mountlake Terrace ��+eeett 8athc1l Mill Creek Mukilleo Kirkland King County Snohomish County M, 10% 2C% 3996 40% 50% 6D% n% OU% 3crx 100% Source USCensus,201+inv. rgure-t Age Distribution of Edmonds residents and Nearby Cities (.4 01 Local Population 1Q946 943t d4% -j 74% 64% 50% kl 40% 50% 2l w w 52ao 539b r5511 older 24-54 ■ 19 R under 55% 55¢b EMonds shoreline L}nrrkood Mountlake Terrace Source: U.S. Census, 2000 544'n G1¢o 57% t <5 ■5 to 9 ■ 10 to 14 ■ 15 to 19 020 to 34 i25 to 29 s 30 to 34 ■ 35 to 39 a 40 to 44 a 45 to 49 ■r50t454 ■ 56 hr 59 it 60 to 64 sfr5 to 69 ih70to74 ■ 75 to 79 „ 80+ Eeerett Bothell Kirkland King Count. suahainish Cau uk: General Background 15 Economic Factors During the first decade of the 2 1 " century, covered employment in Edmonds grew at a modest average annual growth rate (AGR) of 0.56% (compared to Snohomish County at 1.53% AGR and King City -0.32% AGR). These figures are based on the Puget Sound Regional Council's Covered Employment estimates and consist of all employment covered by the Washin tg_on Unemployment Insurance Act except jobs in the resource, mining, and construction fields which were excluded to remain consistent with Snohomish County Tomorrow's (SCT) lon -tg erm employment targets that do not consider resource, mining, and construction fields into their projections. From 2010 to 2013, Edmonds experienced significant growth in employment as the economy recovered from the global recession. During this period, overall employment grew at 2.46% AGR with the most notable rise in service fields (professional services, waste management, private sector educational services, healthcare and social services, arts and entertainment, accommodation and food services) at 18.5% AGR. Figure 4 shows how the employment mix in Edmonds changed over time. Figure 5 shows the percent change of specific industries from 2010 to 2013. In 2013, the Edmonds' total Covered Employment was 12,638. The SCT's 2035 employment projection for Edmonds is 13,948, representing an AGR of 0.47%. Figure 4: Covered Employment Estimate for Edmonds 2000, 2006, and 2013 lip, 0111, Mvp Table Edmonds Employment by Sector - 2000 Gensuc FIRES Mafmfaetufing Retail men mien Total 7-74 4,48 4-62 ''� 56-1 '� 544 �4 16 General Background 2000 2006 _Source: US-. Census, ", 200npujzet Sound Regional Council. 201 ■ ConsWe ■ FIRE ■ manufack ring ■ Rekail ■ 4VTU ■ Govem nt ■ Educetian Figure 5: Percent Change in Covered Employment Estimates, S 7 S ., z ]C% . -, -70% -, -, #F Ch91Yae: Post -Recession 2010 to 2013 ■ FYglE a+�b !u 5" I 11 4 1 SOW"f. 6 4K •8@w% I Ion% , 74 10PA Source: Puget Sound Regional Council. 0 WTLP Gm*ni d dw*i" Tool 1 94 21F?b 7$ °Zi'B3�b ?3 i$46 According to the 2000 Census, the median household income in Edmonds in 1999 was $53,522, which is equivalent to the median income for King and Snohomish Counties ($53,157 and $53,060, respectively). Median income in 1990 was $40,515. Retail trade is a significant employer in the city. However, on a per capita basis, taxable retail sales in the City of Edmonds are relatively lower than Edmonds' neighbors and other cities of similar size, as shown in Figure 6-, and roughly the same as Snohomish County as a whole. The City's location amidst densely populated areas suggests that Edmonds has the potential to attract higher retail sales comparable to other cities its size. General Background 17 Figure 6: Taxable Retail Sales per Capita (all NAICS) in 2010 R 6 &Vow c $20 om SIO-Mo Edmcni% Mountlexe ShoMme Lxnnwoao LWVA o NII Ut-w bAell Klf Jwm &rnen same Redmonc Sno wwA Ksg Ta zw C+wr4 Gwmy Source: Department ofRevenue Taxable Retail Sales per Capita for the City of Edmonds and Surrounding Areas (:ooa 5} €#GJap6 €3€,Op6 €3G,Op6 €2€)p00 €2G,000 €1€)p00 €10,000 €€)p00 so Mour9lake SndFomish Kiig pdmatids LynmNood Shardine Terrace 0a1he1 Puriei IGrklerj Evtrett CounFf Ccurty 02M2 Tam61e Kehl Sales Per Capita P.269 535.2d3 P.711 $ 913 $1 Q15d $9,9M 5M372 M 29617 $7,221 A9g99 2M2 %p+uhlian 3$5117 M.990 5Z730 2Q470 3Q910 31.1310 45.790 93,1350 CZ7.500 1.779,000 200L2 Tamble Rt"I Sale (milkce) 5297 %1.232 $411 55e 5313 "17 1750 $1.157 A6M 117.245 Source: Washington Star Department cf Revenue, Office f Financial Management Housing The city is primarily residential with single-family residences as the predominant land use. Of the 47—,5,W18,378 dwelling units in 2-OW2010, 44-,-UAI 1,685 were single-family (65�.5pereet63.6% of 18 General Background the total) and 4,03-96, 664 were multi -family (34.5 per-ee�*36.3% of the total). As shown in Table 34, multi family is continuing to increase its share of total housing stock. In 49W2000 tic 3 peree t68% of all housing units were owner -occupied; this increased to just over 69%8 per -cent by 20002010. Average household size continues to decrease over time, from 2.59 persons per household in 1980 to 2—.3-22.26 persons in 20002010. Table 3: Selected Housing Statistics Selected Housin 1980 SF Housing Units 7,529 MF Housing Units 3,072 Mobile Homes 101 Total Housing Units 10,702 • Single Family 71.3% % Multi Family 28.7% Avg Household Size 2.59 Avg Persons/Unit 2.59 g Statistics 1990 2000 2010 8,550 11,391 11,685 4,165 6,038 6,664 230 90 29 12,945 17,519 18,378 67.8% 65.5% 63.6% 32.2% 34.5% 36.3% 2.41 2.32 2.26 2.37 2.26 2.16 Table SeIeG e`iza HEWSirRStati;St;GS 19" 499 2000 SF Housing Units 7,529 8,550 11,3947 � 0 72 4,165 6 03- �z �� Q Mobile 14of os- 1 n1 230 on �T ��o Total Heusing Units �12 on c 17,519 �z � n v:rry Iry Iry 759 741 737 Avg Per-seas,Uai 7.7 59 7�T 37 7 7� �L� Source U.S. Census, 2000. General Background 19 Transportation The existing transportation system consists of a network of principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors and local streets. Three major arterials link together state routes or connect the state route system to major centers and to the ferry system; - SR-104, SR-524/196th Street SW and SR-99. SR- 104 serves east -west travel on the south end of the city and provides access to the Edmonds -Kingston ferry and Interstate 5; SR-524/196th Street SW extends bordering through the east side of the city. SR-99 carries the highest volume of traffic in Edmonds. The Burlington Northern Railroad runs adjacent to the city's shoreline and links Edmonds with Everett to the north and Seattle to the south. The rail line is currently used for freight and AMTRAK and Sound Transit commuter rail passenger rail service; approximately 37 trains a day pass through the city. Bus service is provided by Community Transit with 3 regular bus routes (with service to Mill Creek, Lynnwood, and Alderwood) and 4 peak period only commute bus routes (with service to the University of Washington and downtown Seattle). In 2009, the Swift bus rapid transit was launched, servicing a 17-mile stretch from Shoreline to Everett. The Edmonds -Kingston Ferry connects south Snohomish County and north King County with the northern Kitsap Peninsula and points west on the Olympic Peninsula via the Hood Canal Bridge. The Edmonds -Kingston ferry route is remains on of the busiest routes in the state's ferry system. Figure 76 shows historical growth in passenger and vehicle demand from 1980 to 2000. Ridership more than doubled during the 1980s, increasing from nearly 1,950 vehicles and more than 4,250 persons daily in 1980 to over 4,500 vehicles and 9,200 persons daily in 1990. Ridership also increased appreciably in the 1990s, growing by more than 40-pefeeftt%o to over 6,750 vehicles and 13,000 persons daily during 2000. The 1992 Cross Sound Transportation Study (Booz-Allen and Hamilton Study Team, 1992) concluded that there was no reasonable alternative to the ferry service to meet the projected increases in travel demand. The PSRC based its Transportation Element of Vision 2020 on the Edmonds- Kingston ferry service growing to support the allocation of population within the region. PSRC Destination 2030 identifies the Edmonds Crossing project as a ferry project on the Metropolitan Transportation System and thus a crucial element to the mobility needs and economic vitality of the region. Figure 7: Historical Edmonds Daily Ferry Ridership 20 General Background 201 1,457 199� ,00 4,v6= 6,000 8.U04 IQ.004 i2,000 14,130o # of Passengers Figure —6 HictnriGaI EdMO ds Daily Ferry RidersrTrF hip 2000 1 9 94 V lide Passengers (4010) W4cOn Paeeengera (1 Vehicles& Drivers Vehicle Passengers (3249) Vehides & ❑dyers 1 ��a Vehicle & Walk -On Passengers 2,31 T VehideS & DdVGFS 1,945 Min 4,70fi wWra (1,457) 4,5U9 oVehicies and Drnrer biVeh'tie Passengers s+Font Passengers ,27$ 8,755 Seuree=Source: Washington State Ferries, Ferry TraTic Statistics Rider Segment Repo-E-dmends CFeswing Final SAS nr,,,,,.,Mx r 2004 General Background 21 In response to this need, the Edmonds Crossing project is being developed to provide a long-term solution to current operations and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration [FTA]), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and the City of Edmonds, in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps], the U.S. Coast Guard, the Suquamish Tribe, the Tulalip Tribe, the Lummi Nation, the Swinomish Tribe, and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street in downtown Edmonds to another site farther from the downtown core at Point Edwards. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate the ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. Access would be provided by a realigned State Route (SR) 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity (Amtrak) passenger service and commuter rail loading requirements; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities for accommodating both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers of the available transportation modes (parking, drop-off areas, retail and concessionaire space, and waiting areas); and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users on the west facing slopes of Puget Sound provides many amenities including extensive views of the area. The city provides a wide variety of parks and recreational facilities. An active arts and cult"al eeffhmtmity eentfibtites to the stfong sense of eivie pride widely shafed in the eonwmfflity. There afe numer-ous well -kept r-esidefAial neighbor -hoods, a viable eeeaemie base, a -ad an aetive, ifwalve Edmonds has a variety of neighborhoods, big and small, named and unnamed. Some neighborhoods, such as in the Highway 99 area, in the "Bowl," Firdale, and Perrinville, include commercial activities. (Note: The Bowl refers to the downtown area and vicinity; it comprises about 17% of the City's population.) Many neighborhood areas include parks, trails, and other amenities that help identify them or add to their unique character. Each neighborhood is valuable and contributes to the community as a whole. Recognizing this character and value, while still allowing for positive changes in neighborhoods over time, is an important concept. Public Process Public Participation Goal A. It is the goal of the City of Edmonds to provide early and continuous public notice for the proposed comprehensive plan amendments in advance of all opportunities to comment on the proposals, and to allow those who express an interest in any of the amendments to be able to track their progress through the legislative decision process. 22 General Background A.1. Use a variety of methods to provide early and ongoing public notice of the proposed amendments, including such things as publication in news outlets, advertising on local public access television, placing notices in a City newsletter, compiling a list of interested parties, and/or providing information on the City's website. A.2. Information provided by the City of Edmonds as part of this public participation process will be designed 1. Use plain understandable language. 2. Provide broad dissemination of information regarding the proposals. 3. Provide early and continuous notification. 4. Provide opportunities for commenting in a variety. o�ys — verbally, in writing, and via email. A.3. In addition to providing early and continuous information on the plan amendment proposals, the City of Edmonds will provide a formal adoption process with public hearing(s) and opportunities for public comment and input. a IZ ... . ...... ............. ....... rATAXAMMMIRM WON AN ��. General Background 23 Land Capacity Background The Growth Mangement Act (GMA) provides the framework for planning at all levels in Washington State. Under the mandate of the GMA (RCW 36.70A.215), local governements are required to evaluate the density and capacity for Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Edmonds has been allocated population, housing, and employment growth targets through County Planning Policies. Population projections are based on the official 20-year population projections for Snohomish County from the Office of Financial Management and distributed as represented in Puget Sound Regional Council's Vision 2040 Regional Growth Strategy. Edmonds is considered a Larger City for regional growth strategy purposes. The Larger City designation is applied to cities that have a combined population and employment total over 22,500. Currently, eighteen cities are grouped in the Larger City designation. As a group, these cities are expected to accommodate 14% of the region's projected population growth and 12% of the regional projected employment growth. The 2035 population target for Edmonds is 45,550 persons, up 14.4% from the 2011 population estimate of 39,800. To accommodate the targeted growth, Edmonds will require approximately 2,772 new housing units and 2,313 new jobs. Table 4 summarizes available GIS data on land supply in Edmonds as it existed in 2014. Developed acres include the entire parcel boundaries that contained development, not just the building footprint. The Edmonds Marsh accounted for all vacant acres listed under Parks & Open Space. Table 4 City of Edmonds Land Supply (Gross Acres), 2014 Land Use Total Acres Developed Lands Acres % of Total Acres Vacant Lands Acres % of Total Acres Residential Single -Family 3428.9 3272.3 56.9% 156.6 2.7% Multi -Family 203.9 181.0 3.1% 22.9 0.4% Retirement/Special Needs 16.9 16.9 0.3% Business Commercial 209.7 209.7 3.6% Industrial 32.2 32.2 0.6% Medical 40.8 40.8 0.7% Mixed Use 62.8 39.3 0.7% 23.5 0.4% Public Facilities Government 14.0 14.0 0.2% Schools 171.5 171.5 3.0% Parks & Open Space 416.7 393.3 6.8% 23.4 0.4% Religious 41.6 41.6 0.7% Streets/Parking/Driveways 1093.9 1093.9 19.0% Utilities 13.8 13.8 0.2% Total 1 5746.7 1 5520.3 96.1% 226.4 3.9% Source: City of Edmonds GIS data, Nov-2014 38 Lana Use Overall, nearly 4% of the City's land was vacant in 2014. Approximately 79.3% of the vacant lands (226.4 acres) were designated for residential uses: 69.2% for single-family residences and 10.1% for multi -family residences. Of the remaining vacant lands, 10.4% was designated for mixed use and 10.3% represented the Edmonds Marsh. While the GIS data is useful for evaluation of the distribution of land use in the city, it has limitations when analyzing vacant and/or under -developed lands for potential development as it accounts for a parcel's entire area without consideration of site development standards (e.g. setbacks), critical areas, or other parcel limitations. For a more in-depth study, the 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) developed build -out capacity estimates for vacant and under -developed parcels. Using a process developed by Snohomish County Tomorrow, the BLR was prepared in 2012 and adopted by the Snohomish County Council in June 2013. This report provided the city with the necessary information to complete a development capacity analysis. Table 5: Summary of Buildable Lands Report Additional Additional Housing Unit Additional Housing Unit Additional Population Employment Capacity (before reductions) Capacity (after reductions) Capacity (after reductions) Capacity (after reductions) SF I MF Sr. Apts Total SF MF Sr. Apts Total SF I MF Sr. Apts Total Buildable Lands Report 561 2,381 482 3,424 444 1,868 334 2,646 1,236 3,437 393 5,065 2,820 Source: Buildable Lands Report 2012 Given the limited supply of vacant land within the city, capacity estimates were not calculated strictly on the amount of vacant buildable land, but also on increased densities and intensity of redevelopment within various areas of the city. Different methods of development were targeted to provide additional residential capacity. For example, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were one method of attempting to supplement capacity in single family neighborhoods, while encouraging mixed use development in commercial areas provided for additional capacity in areas already experiencing a higher level of activity. Planned Residential Developments (PRDs) were also targeted as a way of assuring maximum buildout of single -family -zoned areas while maintaining the character of the city. Following adoption of the 1995 comprehensive plan, the city embarked on an implementation program to achieve the goals identified in the plan. Many of these implementation measures are described in the Housing Element under the discussion of "strategies to promote affordable housing." These measures were taken by the city to address issues related to both capacity and affordable housing. A key feature of Edmonds' comprehensive plan is its emphasis on mixed use development, which includes both commercial and residential uses on a single lot or combination of lots. For example, a mixed use development could include a two-story development with residential dwelling units on the second floor and offices, shops or other commercial uses on the ground floor, or it could consist of a mixture of uses arranged in proximity to each other. Mixed use development is allowed in both of the city's Activity Centers and Corridor development areas. In the 1995 comprehensive plan, mixed use development was to be allowed under all the alternatives considered, but would only be encouraged under the adopted "Designed Infill" alternative. The encouragement of mixed use development Land Use 39 continues as a basic assumption underlying the current comprehensive plan. The importance of mixed use in the city's land use pattern can be seen in Figure 9. Figure 9: General Use Categories by % of City Land Area Single Family Urban .j9.74% Source: City of Edmonds GIS, Nov-]4 Population and Employment Capacity Multi Family -6.4r% Mixed Use S.89% Commercial 0.86% Medical 0.32 Parks 5.27% ----Open Space 55 �3�0 5 U[111tiees 0.24% The 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) showed an Edmonds housing capacity of an additional 2,646 units through the year 2035, which would accommodate a total population of 45,550 residents. Since the BLR was finalized in 2012, some of the assumptions regarding buildable lands have changed. During the 2015 Comprehensive Plan update, city staff considered how these changes affected capacity projections. For example, recent actions taken by the City to encourage mixed -use development in the Neighborhood Business areas of Westgate and Five Corners, plus the removal of restrictions on first and second floor residential development in CG and CG2 zones along the Highway 99 corridor, should provide the city with buildable lands capacity not considered in the 2012 BLR. In total, the City conservatively estimates these actions can increase the buildable lands capacity by approximately 850 net housing units applying the same methodology used in the Buildable Lands Report. With these adjustments, the City estimates a total capacity of 2,810 additional housing units by the year 2035. The projected need to accommodate the targeted population growth was 2,772 housing units as determined by the Countywide Planning Policies. The land capacity analysis, combined with 40 Land Use the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan, indicate that the 2035 targets for population and employment can be accommodated by the City. A summary of historical growth and the 2035 population and housing targets is presented in Figure 10 and Table 6. The adopted 2035 employment target for Edmonds is 14,148, which represents an increase of 2,313 above the 11,835 people employed in the City in 2011. The 2012 Buildable Lands analysis showed a potential increased capacity of 2,820 employees by 2035, which has been increased to 3,522 using the same analysis employed in reviewing the housing and population capacity discussed above. The City should consider using incentives to achieve redevelopment and infill goals and zoning incentives or other measures to ensure that land adjacent to infrastructure facilities is utilized to maximize the economic benefits of that infrastructure. Given the extent to which future land use policies, regulations, demographics and market forces could affect land capacity estimates, however, it is important that development trends and remaining land supply within the city is regularly monitored in order to ensure the continued supply of adequate urban land throughout the 20-year GMA planning horizon. Implementation strategies should include development of a long-term program to monitor the city's progress towards goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan. As part of the monitoring process, the city should work with the public, environmental and business leaders, interest groups, cities and other agencies to develop detailed monitoring criteria or "benchmarks" that could be used to measure progress and identify the need for corrective action. Specific implementation measures should seek to reduce barriers or impediments to development. For example, measures that reduce the regulatory compliance burden of the private sector, if successful, would reduce the cost imposed by such regulations. Similarly, implementation measures that are designed to encourage flexibility could also help reduce compliance costs — at least on a case - by -case basis. Specific measures could include: provision of flexible development standards; density bonuses for site designs that provide public benefits; and fee waivers or expedited review that lower financial development risks Land Use 41 Figure 10: Edmonds Growth Targets ors. Historical Growth 6 IM 960 19M 1970 .960 199a 2CW MO 2020" 2OZr 2M' 1 Popula: n +GrawthTarget Souma Cc,nsus_20M&arrrdabroLarrdaRcpart2012 Table 6 City of Edmonds Existing and Projected Growth 2000 2010 2035 (Plan Target) Population 39,515 39,709 45,550 Nominal Change 8,771 194 5,841 % Change 28.50% 0.49% 14.71% Annual % Change 2.50% 0.05% 0.55% Housing Units 17,508 18,378 21,168 Nominal Change 4,563 870 2,790 % Change 35.20% 4.97% 15.18% Avg HH Size 2.32 2.26 2.2 Avg Persons/Unit 2.26 2.16 2.15 Gross Density 1 3.1 3.16 3.64 Source: Census 2010, Buildable Lands Report 2012 1 Gross Density = number of households per gross acre of land, city-wide. Note that this includes non-residential land, so the densityper gross residential acre is significantly higher. 42 Land Use Activity Centers Introduction. The VISION2040 regional plan establishes a growth management, transportation, environmental, and economic strategy for the Puget Sound region of urban growth areas (UGAs) framed by open space and linked by efficient, high capacity transit. The concepts developed in VISION 2040 are supported in the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The approach proposed in Edmonds is to strategically plan for future development in two activity centers located within the community. Activity Centers in Edmonds are intended to address the following framework goals: oo Pedestrian -oriented - Provide a pedestrian -oriented streetscape environment for residential and commercial activity. oo Mixed -use - Encourage mixed -use development patterns that provide a variety of commercial and residential opportunities, including both multi -family and small -lot single family development. oo Community character - Build on historical character and natural relationships, such as historic buildings, slopes with views, and the waterfront. oo Multimodal -Encourage transit service and access. oo Balanced (re)development - Strategically plan for development and redevelopment that achieves a balanced and coordinated approach to economic development, housing, and cultural goals. oo Concurrency -Coordinate the plans and actions of both the public and private sectors. oo Urban design - Provide a context for urban design guidelines that maximize predictability while assuring a consistent and coherent character of development. oo Adaptive reuse - Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. Land Use 43 Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center Plan Context. A number of public plans and projects have been taking shape in recent years, and these will have a profound impact on the future of the city's downtown/waterfront area. Some of these ongoing activities include: oo Increased concern about conflicts and safety issues related to the interaction of rail, ferry, vehicular and pedestrian traffic. oo Transportation planning and the Edmonds Crossing multimodal project which will move the existing ferry terminal at the base of Main Street to a new multimodal transportation center at Pt. Edwards. oo Continued development of the city's waterfront parks and walkways into an interconnected necklace of public spaces. oo The South County Senior Center is undertaking strategic planning to look at its facilities, programs, and services. oo Public access to the water and the natural beauty of the waterfront figures prominently in the Port of Edmonds' plans, including new plazas, improved walkways and public art. Public pedestrian/bicycle access across the railroad tracks to the waterfront, in the vicinity of the south end of the marina, near Marina Beach Park, should remain a high priority. oo Arts plans continue to be implemented throughout the downtown, including such projects as the Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Artworks facility, and the continued expansion of downtown festivals and events. oo Edmonds Community College has expanded its downtown presence through initiatives with the Edmonds Conference Center (formerly the Edmonds Floral Conference Center) and is working with the Edmonds Center for the Arts to enhance overall operations. Downtown/Waterfront Vision. Taken together, the goals and policies for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center present a vision for Edmonds downtown/waterfront. By actively pursuing the ferry terminal's relocation, the City has set upon an ambitious and exciting course. It is a course that holds promise for the downtown/waterfront, but it is one that will require concerted action by the entire community, including local, state and federal public officials, business groups and citizens. While the challenges presented in this effort are substantial, the possible rewards are even greater, for with its existing physical assets, future opportunities and the energy of its citizens, Edmonds has the potential to create one of the region's most attractive and vital city centers. Components of the overall vision for the downtown/waterfront area include: oc The Edmonds Crossing multimodal transportation center provides convenient transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto and bicycle riders and makes Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal reduces negative impacts to downtown Edmonds while still providing a link between the 44 Land Use terminal and downtown Edmonds. The project provides the community with varied transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community. oo Downtown is extended westward and connected to the shoreline by positive mixed -use development as well as by convenient pedestrian routes. Redevelopment of the holding lanes and SR-104 is pursued after the ferry terminal relocates to Point Edwards. oo The shoreline features a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, marina facilities, and supporting uses. oo There is a more efficient transportation system featuring commuter and passenger trains, increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas. oo There is a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by both nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and that attracts visitors from throughout the region. oo The downtown supports a mix of uses, including traditional commercial and multi family development with new mixed -use development types. Single family neighborhoods are a part of this mix of uses, and contribute to the choice of housing and character of downtown. oo Opportunities for new development and redevelopment reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian -oriented character. Pedestrian -scale building height limits are an important part of this quality of life, and remain in effect. oo Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. oo Auto traffic is rerouted to minimize impact to residential neighborhoods. Downtown/Waterfront Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the downtown/waterfront area: Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal A. Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region. A.1. Ensure that the downtown/waterfront area continues — and builds on — its function as a key identity element for the Edmonds community. A.2. Enhance Edmonds' visual identity by continuing its pedestrian -scale of downtown development, enhancing its shoreline character, and protecting and building on the strong visual quality of the "5th and Main" core. Land Use 45 A.3. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region. A.4. Enhance shoreline features to include a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, natural features (such as the Edmonds Marsh), and marina facilities. Improve public access to the shoreline and link waterfront features by establishing a continuous esplanade along the shoreline. The esplanade will be constructed over time through public improvements and Shoreline Master Program requirements placed on private development. A.5. Support the development and retention of significant public investments in the downtown/waterfront area, including government and cultural facilities that help draw residents and visitors to downtown. A.6. Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the downtown, especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal B. Continue to plan for and implement improvements in the downtown/waterfront area that resolve safety conflicts while encouraging multi -modal transportation and access to the waterfront. B.1. Future development along the waterfront should support the continuation and compatible design of three regional facilities: Edmonds Crossing at Pt. Edwards; the Port of Edmonds and its master plan; and the regional parks, beaches and walkways making up the public shoreline. B.2. Plan for improvements to resolve transportation and safety conflicts in the downtown/waterfront area. B.3. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring improved bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal C. Continue to plan for and implement the Edmonds Crossing multimodal transportation center at Pt. Edwards — pursuing the design, permitting, land acquisition and development of the project. The completion of Edmonds Crossing will help address the competing needs of three regional facilities (transportation, parks and open space — including the Edmonds Marsh, and the Port of Edmonds) while providing opportunities for redevelopment and linkage between downtown Edmonds and its waterfront. C.1. Utilize the Point Edwards site to its best community and regional potential by developing a multimodal transit center with compatible development in the surrounding area. In addition to the regional benefits arising from its multi modal transportation function, an essential community benefit is in removing intrusive ferry traffic from the core area which serves to visually and physically separate downtown from the waterfront. 46 Land Use C.2. Establish a Point Edwards multimodal transportation center which provides convenient transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto, pedestrians and bicycle riders and makes Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal should be planned to reduce negative impacts to downtown Edmonds — such as grade separation/safety concerns and conflicts with other regional facilities — while providing the community with unique transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community. C.3. Extend Downtown westward and connect it to the shoreline by encouraging mixed - use development and pedestrian -oriented amenities and streetscape improvements, particularly along Dayton and Main Streets. Development in this area should draw on historical design elements found in the historic center of Edmonds to ensure an architectural tie throughout the Downtown Area. Pursue redevelopment of SR-104 and the existing holding lanes once the ferry terminal moves to Point Edwards. CA. Improve traffic conditions by removing ferry traffic impacts from the downtown core. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal C. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity. C.1. Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character. Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. These historic structures are a key component of the small town character of Edmonds and it's economic viability. Height limits that reinforce and require pedestrian -scale development are an important part of this quality of life, and should be implemented through zoning regulations and design guidelines. C.2. Provide for the gradual elimination of large and inadequately landscaped paved areas. C.3. Provide pedestrian -oriented amenities for citizens and visitors throughout the downtown/waterfront area, including such things as: • Weather protection, • Street trees and flower baskets, • Street furniture, • Public art and art integrated into private developments, • Pocket parks, • Signage and other way -finding devices, • Restrooms. Land Use 47 CA. Strive for the elimination of overhead wires and poles whenever possible. C.5. Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation. C.6. Develop sign regulations that support the pedestrian character of downtown, encouraging signage to assist in locating businesses and public and cultural facilities while discouraging obtrusive and garish signage which detracts from downtown pedestrian and cultural amenities. C.7. Provide lighting for streets and public areas that is designed to promote comfort, security, and aesthetic beauty. C.8. Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere with pedestrian activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown area. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal D. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. Emphasize and plan for links between the retail core and these supporting areas. D.I. Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing, commercial, and cultural activities. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal E. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multi -family residential uses. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal F. Develop gateway/entrance areas into downtown which serve complementary purposes (e.g. convenience shopping, community activities). Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal G. Explore alternative development opportunities in the waterfront area, such as specifically encouraging arts -related and arts -complementing uses. G.1. Improve and encourage economic development opportunities by providing space for local businesses and cottage industries and undertaking supporting public improvement projects. Of particular significance is the enhancement of economic development opportunities resulting from the Edmonds Crossing project and the enhancement of Edmonds as an arts and water -oriented destination. Multi -modal Transportation. Primary goals of the City's Downtown Waterfront Plan include integrating the downtown core with the waterfront, improving pedestrian access and traffic circulation, and encouraging mixed -use development. Current conditions limit the city's ability to achieve these plan goals by making it difficult to move between the two areas, thereby minimizing the value of the shoreline as a public resource and amenity while adversely affecting the potential for redevelopment. A number of studies and public involvement projects have been completed to determine how to meet the variety of transportation needs that converge within Downtown Edmonds. Following an initial 48 Land Use 1992 Ferry Relocation Feasibility Study and a visioning focus group convened by Edmonds' Mayor in April 1992, the importance of the conflicting transportation needs culminated in the City of Edmonds, Washington State Ferries, and Community Transit signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in November 1993. The MOU called for the cooperative development of solutions to the conflicts between the City's growth plans and ferry traffic in particular. In response to that agreement, preliminary engineering and environmental analysis of alternatives began in late 1993. In 1994, the Edmonds City Council held public hearings on the possibility of relocating the existing ferry terminal and incorporating a new terminal within a larger multimodal project. As a result of the hearings, the Council expressed support for a regional multimodal facility. The Council also approved the 1994 Edmonds Downtown Waterfront Plan which specifically supported the facility's location at Pt. Edwards. Further environmental review and facility definition resulted in a recommendation that an alternative site (other than the existing Main Street location) should be developed as a multimodal facility serving ferry, rail, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle travel needs. Several alternative sites for the relocated ferry terminal and the proposed multimodal center were evaluated as part of the early environmental screening process. During this screening process, federal, state, regional, and local regulatory agencies —including affected Tribes— provided input regarding issues that could impact selecting reasonable alternatives. Based on this extensive screening process, two alternatives were recommended for further analysis in the Environmental Impact Statement process. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on February 25, 1998, and the Final EIS was issued on November 10, 2004. Pt. Edwards is the preferred alternative for a multimodal terminal site. In addition to the transportation benefits of moving the existing ferry terminal, a number of redevelopment opportunities will result within the downtown waterfront area. These range from park and public access improvements to opportunities for significant redevelopment and connections between the waterfront and downtown. Land Use 49 P U E r S0t)n0 0cmrrs5o Nof (Part of fxhlln9 d{1CkC'k'4 fanyFqMT) LOW �re Park (South ChM as -�i' � BfiatkhlY� Londrnp - Parh{Ha") .r iroMOOK -_ - j'�I y. strfan E S5 L P2tk p ..._ , Figure 11. Integration of the remaining ferry pier structure into surrounding parks will be a key public benefit and opportunity. Edmonds Crossing. Edmonds Crossing is a multimodal transportation center proposed to be constructed at Point Edwards, the former UNOCAL oil storage facility south of the Edmonds Marina. This multimodal transportation center will provide the capacity to respond to growth while providing improved opportunities for connecting various forms of travel, including rail, ferry, bus, bicycle, walking and ridesharing. The project is supported by local, regional, and state plans, including the Puget Sound Regional Council's Destination 2030 Metropolitan Transportation and VISION 2020 plan; Washington State Ferries' (WSF) System Plan for 1999-2018; Snohomish County's countywide Transportation Plan; the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan; and the Port of Edmonds Strategic Plan and Master Plan. Edmonds Crossing will provide: oo Intersection improvements at Pine Street and SR-104; oo Interconnection of Amtrak service to Chicago and Vancouver, B.C., Sounder commuter rail service between Everett and Seattle, and other regional transportation modes; oo Connections to the regional transit system with direct bus service to communities throughout the urban growth area; oo Enhanced ability for people to rideshare, bicycle and walk to connect with travel opportunities at the multimodal center; oo Improved safety and travel on Edmonds local streets and along SR-104 between the ferry terminal and 1-5. oo Linkage between Navy facilities at Everett and on the Kitsap peninsula. 50 Land Use Figure 11. Edmonds Crossing "preferred alternative "from the 2004 FEIS. Fe 4 9pnPr`. a5 i tigJ ■ y [} } PGIlcpr UPMAL F4& i to Ge - 0rvvw) Manna Beam5nonM park M SOR taL+TM+ar�hvran �.. w« C F � 7,+rtur[artf i imrtxq' 1 °rp °� i - wprm hwp #��•IY�+ Ao�t mJM1 ol. 8'd �eey Gy1 FauraS. E&norda ,koar4ig hlesyl! M1�J AISW" c MOO Few e tie' Land Use 51 The project includes: oo A ferry terminal; oo A train station; oo A transit center for bus and regional transit, as well as the opportunity for riders to connect to downtown businesses via a local circulator service; oo The flexibility to operate the facility to respond to changing travel demands; oo Safety features including grade separation of train traffic from other modes of travel, designated vehicle parking and holding areas, and improved passenger waiting areas. While the Edmonds Crossing project will directly benefit the transportation system, the project will also provide significant benefits to downtown Edmonds. Completion of the project provides an opportunity to redevelop the existing ferry terminal facilities and the related holding lanes in the downtown area. Providing a connection from the new multimodal terminal to downtown Edmonds will potentially bring more visibility and visitors to the downtown area. Plan Policies and Implementation Strategy. The vision and goals for Downtown Waterfront • Jej;oUleown ly Dovmt# n �'rdxfieAterrygWrfff d prd rAurm C�rtlrnr4 P�° Rnfr i*'. I J rYJRR JfaJAi rri �■or.#�1—i." Design Y+�rr,r AJXM,.ak4' ,� rr1FTl r F,r,. ra ri,ry 1'rrrpafrl� tn� 1m&, frlun rnmret7�oa., Wdirtrffuld f"rJrfrrJkfefl' ka }t "• IV t Dr�rr:asa+rr a � • i• .. � - ar s Trion iIxiprl # + wet I� .k ; ■_ ' � ,�a'x-,Slxlrimxfiaf ■ • , � Cerrone� T'+nfi+kr� + 5'ri4v' v ■ f re&T�ff % "�� { !��ra'� : „rrl �Yvt, • I�aI Wf I -Um r r•nx�urrur�rrr�+f ■ 3xjam ��reir.Ylriulru[ula' - += , k'rrx'{'rind+frx % #' i'�rPP ii+u�f,f A dx xrR p y ■ 4ru ('rmidor.' 3rn,7Fw,xa f �: #k+fifNrirlrt r'VrJr ect imi WfGO ftiSh4 ii:.2.-_.. !rl-ffArfAHr-Ceivoor' ner PIwr Orutrify ib, " � r�'rfyS[if�'7�d7f Gf "�17f7N 7Yf1'd ' 7`l II 52 Land Use Activity Center are designed to present a coherent vision for future development in the area. To implement this vision, a series of policies and an implementation strategy are intended to guide future public and private actions. Implementation Strategy. Key issues tied to the viability and health of the downtown waterfront area include using the Edmonds Crossing project to help resolve transportation issues, linking downtown with the waterfront, and taking advantage of redevelopment opportunities arising from emerging trends and public investments. The largest single factor affecting the downtown waterfront area is the timing and construction of the Edmonds Crossing project. Because of this, a two -phased downtown waterfront redevelopment strategy is envisioned. The first phase includes actions taken before the existing ferry terminal is relocated to the Pt. Edwards site, and is intended to include actions taken to support ongoing redevelopment and arts -related improvements downtown. This phase will also set the framework for subsequent redevelopment after the terminal's relocation. The second phase is aimed at comprehensive redevelopment to link the downtown with the waterfront, better utilize shoreline resources, increase economic viability and provide the setting for a broad range of community functions. Short Term Actions. Short term actions are those actions that can take place prior to construction of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 5-7 years. 1. Plan for the Edmonds Crossing project at Pt. Edwards which includes relocation of the existing ferry terminal. Planning should also include reuse of the current ferry terminal and related holding area. 2. Improve the existing downtown rail station between Dayton and Main Streets in order to better accommodate inter -city passenger and commuter rail service, including provisions for bus and commuter traffic as well as pedestrian connections to the waterfront and downtown. During the short term planning period, evaluate the feasibility of retaining a commuter rail presence downtown after the construction of Edmonds Crossing.. 3. Plan for future joint public/private development of the area between SR-104 and the railroad tracks. Planning activities could potentially include infrastructure planning, property acquisition, parking management, development incentives and guidelines or modifications to land use regulations (such as zoning or master planning). Although Amtrak and commuter rail service will be included as a part of the Edmonds Crossing project, the City and transit service providers should examine whether a commuter rail stop can be retained between Dayton and Main Streets in order to provide improved service and stimulate potential redevelopment of the surrounding area. 4. Upgrade secondary downtown streets for pedestrians. Implement the city's public urban design plan and street tree plan while expanding public amenities and streetscape improvements in areas where these do not already exist. These improvements are particularly needed along Main and Dayton Streets in the area between downtown and the waterfront in order to improve pedestrian connections between downtown and the waterfront area. Pedestrian improvements should be combined with traffic improvement projects where applicable. 5. Continue to promote shoreline management and public access to the city's beaches, parks, and walkways. Land Use 53 6. Continue implementing a continuous shoreline walkway (boardwalk/esplanade) from Brackett's Landing North to Point Edwards. Work with the Port of Edmonds to integrate recreation and marina functions into the long term plan. 7. Work with the Senior Center to plan for long term needs for the senior center facilities and programs. 8. Encourage a variety of housing to be developed as part of new development and redevelopment of downtown properties. Housing should be provided to serve a diverse community, including single family homes, multi family apartments and condominiums, housing as part of mixed use developments, and housing connected with live/work developments that could also encourage an arts - oriented community in the downtown area. A special focus for arts -supporting live/work arrangements could be in the corridor and nearby residential areas linking downtown with the Edmonds Center for the Arts. 9. Begin improvements to mitigate ferry terminal traffic (and other traffic) increases, as envisioned in the Edmonds Crossing project and the transportation element of the comprehensive plan. 10. Develop "gateways" at key entrances to the downtown area which enhance the identity and sense of place for downtown. Gateways should signal that visitors are entering downtown Edmonds, and should include elements such as public art, landscaping, signage and directional ("way -finding") aids. Long Term Actions. Long term actions are those actions that can take place during or after construction of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 7-20 years. Complete a multi modal transportation center at Point Edwards for: oo Rail (inter -city and commuter) oo Ferry oo Park & Ride/Auto oo Bus oo Pedestrian and shuttle connections to other features and amenities. 2. Complete redevelopment of the Point Edwards site consistent with an overall master plan that provides for commercial or mixed use development compatible with the Edmonds Crossing project. 3. Coordinate circulation and public parking with Port development. 4. Continue to protect and enhance existing wetlands and continue to develop supporting non - intrusive interpretive trails and exhibits. 5. Continue development of a "necklace" of shoreline parks with improvements, focusing on missing links in the park and walkway system. Retain and expand existing parks, providing linkages whenever property acquisitions or easements become available for public use. 6. Encourage the development of centralized parking facilities as part of redevelopment projects. Under the right circumstances, these types of facilities can provide an efficient mechanism for consolidating expensive parking improvements while freeing up land for more intensive and desirable uses that support local housing, commercial, and pedestrian activities. Public/private partnerships should be explored when the opportunity arises, both in private and public projects (e.g. the 54 Land Use commuter rail station downtown). Centralized parking facilities could be built as part of a master - planned mixed -use development. 7. Redevelop the existing ferry terminal site at the base of Main Street according to a master plan after the existing ferry terminal has been relocated to Point Edwards. This is a unique location, situated in the midst of a continuous park and beach setting, and provides opportunities for public/private partnerships. Ideas to be pursued include public "festival" entertainment or activity space, visitor moorage, park and public walkways, and other uses that would encourage this as to become a destination drawing people from south along the waterfront and eastward up into downtown. Redevelopment of this area should be done in a manner that is sensitive to and enhances the views down Main Street and from the adjoining parks and public areas. 8. Redevelop the area from the east side of SR-104 to the railroad tracks, from Harbor Square to Main Street, according to a mixed use master plan. This area could provide a significant opportunity for public/private partnerships. Under the right circumstances, consolidated parking or a pedestrian crossing to the waterfront could be possible as part of a redevelopment project. Every opportunity should be taken to improve the pedestrian streetscape in this area in order to encourage pedestrian activity and linkages between downtown and the waterfront. Uses developed along public streets should support pedestrian activity and include amenities such as street trees, street furniture, flowers and mini parks. Main and Dayton Streets should receive special attention for public art or art integrated into private developments to reinforce the visual arts theme for downtown. Redevelopment of this area should also take advantage of the ability to reconfigure and remove the ferry holding lanes paralleling SR-104 once the Edmonds Crossing project is developed. 9. Support redevelopment efforts that arise out of planning for the long term needs of the senior center. These plans should reinforce the center's place in the public waterfront, linking the facility to the walkways and parks along the shoreline. 10. New development and redevelopment in the downtown waterfront area should be designed to meet overall design objectives and the intent of the various "districts" described for the downtown area. Downtown Waterfront Districts. In addition to the goals and policies for the downtown waterfront area, the Comprehensive Plan Map depicts a number of districts in the downtown waterfront area. These districts are described below. Retail Core. The area immediately surrounding the fountain at 5t" and Main and extending along Main Street and Fifth Avenue is considered the historic center of Edmonds and building heights shall be pedestrian in scale and compatible with the historic character of this area. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses and the entry situated at street level. Uses are encouraged to be retail -compatible (i.e. retail or compatible service — e.g. art galleries, restaurants, real estate sales offices and similar uses that provide storefront windows and items for sale to the public that can be viewed from the street). The street front fagades of buildings must provide a high percentage of transparent window area and pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian -scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. Buildings Land Use 55 situated around the fountain square must be orientated to the fountain and its associated pedestrian area. Arts Center Corridor. The corridor along 4th Ave N between the retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Performing Arts. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses, with commercial entries being located at street level. Building design and height shall be compatible with the goal of creating a pedestrian oriented arts corridor while providing incentives for the adaptive reuse of existing historic structures. Building entries for commercial buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian - scale design features, differentiating the lower floor from the upper floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. The streetscape should receive special attention, using trees, landscaping, and public art to encourage pedestrian activity. Private development projects should also be encouraged to integrate art into their building designs. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow for "live -work" arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a residence as principal uses. Uses supporting the arts center should be encouraged — such as restaurants, cafes, galleries, live/work use arrangements, and B&Bs. Downtown Mired Commercial. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses., with commercial entries at street level. Buildings can be built to the property line. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development. The first floor of buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian -scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area that is located behind commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow for "live -work" arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a residence as principal uses. Downtown Mixed Residential. In this area, commercial uses would be allowed but not required (i.e. buildings could be entirely commercial or entirely residential, or anything in between). Height and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial District. Buildings facing the Dayton Street corridor should provide a pedestrian - friendly streetscape, providing pedestrian amenities and differentiating the ground floor from upper building levels. Downtown Master Plan. The properties between SR-104 and the railroad, including Harbor Square, the Edmonds Shopping Center (former Safeway site), and extending past the Commuter Rail parking area up to Main Street. This area is appropriate for design -driven master planned development which provides for a mix of uses and takes advantage of its strategic location between the waterfront and downtown. The location of existing taller buildings on the waterfront, and the site's situation at the bottom of "the Bowl," could enable a design that provides for higher buildings outside current view corridors. Any redevelopment in this area should be oriented to the street fronts, and provide pedestrian -friendly walking areas, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Development design should also not ignore the railroad side of the properties, since this is an area that provides a "first impression" of the city from railroad passengers and visitors to the 56 Land Use waterfront. Art work, landscaping, and modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project. Shoreline Commercial. The waterfront, west of the railroad tracks between the public beaches and the Port (currently zoned CW). Consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, this area should allow a mix of public uses, supporting commercial uses, and water -oriented and water -dependent uses. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development while providing incentives to encourage public view corridors. Roof and building forms should be an important consideration in design guidelines for this area, because of its high sensitivity and proximity to public open spaces. Redevelopment should result in singular, landmark buildings of high quality design which take advantage of the visibility and physical environment of their location, and which contribute to the unique character of the waterfront. Pedestrian amenities and weather protection must be provided for buildings located along public walkways and street fronts. Master Plan Development. The waterfront area south of Olympic Beach, including the Port of Edmonds and the Point Edwards and multi modal developments. This area is governed by master plans for the Port of Edmonds, Point Edwards, and the Edmonds Crossing project as described in an FEIS issued on November 10, 2004. These areas are also developed consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, as it applies. Downtown Convenience Commercial. This is the south end of 5th Ave, south of Walnut. Commercial uses would be required on the first floor, but auto -oriented uses would be permitted in addition to general retail and service uses. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses. Weather protection would still be required, but to a lesser degree than the retail core and only when the building was adjacent to the sidewalk. Height and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial District. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area that is located behind the commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use. Planned Residential -Office. Several properties lie along the railroad on the west side of Sunset Ave between existing commercial zoning and Edmonds Street. This area is appropriate for small- scale development which provides for a mix of limited office and residential uses which provide a transition between the more intensive commercial uses along Main Street and the residential uses along Sunset Ave. Because the area of this designation is located adjacent to commercial development to the south, the railroad to the west, and is near both multiple family and single- family residential development, this area should act as a transition between theses uses. Building design for this area should be sensitive to the surrounding commercial, multiple family and single-family character. Downtown Design Objectives. As a companion to the districts outlined above, general design objectives are included for the downtown waterfront area. These objectives are intended to encourage high quality, well designed projects to be developed in the downtown/waterfront area that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. These design objectives can be found in the Urban Design section of this document. Land Use 57 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor Medical/Highway 99 Vision. The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high -intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian -friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park -like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal A. Expand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal B. Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian -friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter -connected development. B.1. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region. B.2. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher -intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. B.3. Provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal C. Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets. C.1. Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center — and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor — should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. 58 Land Use Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal D. Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians. D.1. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high -capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal E.To provide a buffer between the high -intensity, high- rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West. E.1. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian -scale streetscape design. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal F.To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for both neighborhood conservation and targeted redevelopment that includes an appropriate mix of single family and multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities. F.1. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal G. To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. G.1. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. Land Use 59 Highway 99 Corridor Vision. Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential neighborhoods. Historically, the corridor has developed in a patchwork of uses, without a clear focus or direction. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City established a task force in 2003-2004, resulting in the Highway 99 Enhancement Report and a related economic analysis. During this process, local residents were contacted and asked to participate in two focus groups to identify current problems and future aspirations for the corridor. After this preliminary survey with the residents, the City invited business owners to participate in two charrette meetings to brainstorm ideas and evaluate possible ways to induce redevelopment in the area. After concepts were developed, Berk & Associates, an economics consultant, performed a market assessment of the enhancement strategy. The following diagram summarizes the general approach that resulted from this work: a series of focus areas providing identity and a clustering of activity along the corridor, providing opportunities for improved economic development while also improving linkages between the corridor and surrounding residential areas. Focus Areas along the Corridor Four thcntcs -Lnd four areas emerged as part icu]ardy iotercnt6tLIT ak0ng the corridur. Lich one ul'lkw areas rcpnr� cnts �-N sub sV"ICrn wII€r spcci fit tralfit, :iuce.;s and pcdesirian dumw leris t ici as well as dekelaprncitt gnak and Charaetcr_ 216" S1 Hospitaf Corr muoiry er7(1 Farndy Retail Center e2!}" St From the north to the south %w "lnferrra6onar Distrlcl" rccugnire the COI IOW in1 arcai: 'rhe Hospital crrntmunity And Vamil)- Rcl:til Center; 23T; St • T€ L "International District" -AmkL • T€ L Rusidential Area 2341• Sf RcNil CvPtt4•r: 2.361 Si — • Th L ['irIII nieruial RcdcvcIoilnlcn011ofeds 238' StA Improvement Area. ?4W' Sf 224" Sf 212" S1 Resoder;teal A rea Relari cerrfer Commercial Retie velopmenvHolets err P(Ovemenf Area 60 Land Use Highway 99 Corridor Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the Highway 99 Corridor. Highway 99 Corridor Goal A. Improve access and circulation. Access to businesses for both pedestrians and automobiles is difficult along major portions of the corridor. The inability of pedestrians to cross the street and for automobiles to make safe turns is a critical limitation on enhanced development of the corridor into a stronger economic area. Better pedestrian crossings are also needed to support transit use, especially as Highway 99 becomes the focus of future high capacity transit initiatives. A.1. Provide for pedestrian access and circulation within development focus areas, while coordinating with high -capacity transit along the Highway 99 corridor. A.2. Use traffic signals, access management, and rechannelization to facilitate pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic capacity along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with WSDOT on these issues, and to develop a circulation management plan. In some cases the impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by access management, rechannelization and other measures. A.3. Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian -friendly (e.g., add trees and landscaping) through a combination of development requirements and — when available — public investment. A.4. Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existing development while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Highway 99 Corridor Goal B. The City should consider the different sections along the corridor and emphasize their unique opportunities rather than view the corridor as an undifferentiated continuum. Street improvements and, in some cases regulatory measures can encourage these efforts. Focus on specific nodes or segments within the corridor. Identity elements such as signage should indicate that the corridor is within the City of Edmonds, and show how connections can be made to downtown and other Edmonds locations. B.1. New development should be high -quality and varied — not generic — and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. B.2. The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor. When these uses are proposed to be located within one of the corridor focus areas, these uses should also comply with the goals and policies outlined for each focus area. Land Use 61 B.3. Provide a system of "focus areas" along the corridor which provide opportunities for clusters of development, or themed development areas. Providing focus points for development is intended to help encourage segmentation of the long Highway 99 corridor into distinct activity nodes which will encourage an Edmonds character and identity for the corridor. Concepts for the different focus areas identified in the "Highway 99 Corridor Vision" include the following: The "Hospital Community and Family Retail Center" would be positioned to take advantage of its proximity to the many hospital and related medical services in the area and it would be easily reachable from the Interurban trail. The idea of an `International District" is organized around the international flavor of development in the area combined with the concepts of visibility and internal connection. Access to the "District" is marked by specific gateways, and the many focal points for activity in the area (and the new development in between) are connected with a strong pedestrian corridor. The "Residential Area Retail Center" concept allows for mixed use development while providing access and services to adjacent residential neighborhoods. Similar mixed use development, linked to surrounding neighborhoods, could occur in the "Commercial Redevelopment/Hotels Improvement Area. " In addition, this area has the potential to provide large sites suitable for larger commercial or mixed use development, such as hotels or large retail complexes. Internal circulation between sites is a key to development. 62 Land Use Highway 99 Corridor Goal C. Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. During the City's Highway 99 Task Force work, residents noted that they needed a number of services that are not presently provided along the corridor. This can provide an opportunity that might be part of a larger business strategy. At the same time, new development should contribute to the residential quality of the adjacent neighborhoods. C.1. Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses. C.2. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially -zoned properties Highway 99 Corridor Goal D. Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. For example, a tall hotel or large scale retail development may be an excellent addition to the south of the corridor while some small restaurants and convenience shops might cater to hospital employees, trail users and local residents near 216th Street SW. Where needed, the City should consider zoning changes to encourage mixed use or taller development to occur. D.1. Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor. Establish uniform signage regulations for all properties within the corridor area which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter and distraction to the public. D.2. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: D.2.a. Supported by adequate services and facilities; D.2.b. Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, articulated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. D.2.c. Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including automobile, transit and pedestrian access. D.2.d. Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. Land Use 63 Master Planned Development Master Planned Developments are areas dominated by a special set of circumstances which allow for a highly coordinated, planned development, with phasing over time. These master plans describe a special purpose and need for the facilities and uses identified, and provide a clear design which fits with the character of their surroundings. The master plans describe the land use parameters and relationships to guide future development on the sites (height, bulk, types and arrangements of uses, access and circulation). All development within areas identified in each master plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the master plan. When located within a designated activity center, development within a master plan area shall be consistent with the goals and policies identified for the surrounding activity center. The following Master Plans are adopted by reference: A. Edmonds-Woodway High School B. City Park C. Pine Ridge Park D. Southwest County Park hi addition to the master plans listed above, master plans can also be implemented through zoning contracts or other implementation actions, rather than being adopted as part of the plan. In these cases, the master plan must still be consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies for the area. Residential Development General. The City of Edmonds is unique among cities in Washington State. Located on the shores of Puget Sound, it has been able to retain (largely through citizen input) a small town, quality atmosphere rare for cities so close to major urban centers. The people of Edmonds value these amenities and have spoken often in surveys and meetings over the years. The geographical location also influences potential growth of Edmonds. Tucked between Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Puget Sound, the land available for annexation and development is limited. Living standards in Edmonds are high, and this combined with the limited development potential, provides the opportunity for constructive policy options to govern future development. This will ensure an even better quality of life for its citizens. Edmonds consists of a mixture of people of all ages, incomes and living styles. It becomes a more humane and interesting city as it makes room for and improves conditions for all citizens. When the City's first comprehensive plan completed under the State Growth Management Act was adopted in 1995, the City adopted plan designations for single family areas that were based in large measure on historical development patterns, which often recognized development limitations due to environmentally sensitive areas (slopes, landslide hazards, streams, etc.). In the years since the first GMA comprehensive plans were approved by local jurisdictions, there have been a number of cases brought before the State's GMA Hearings Boards. The direction 64 Land Use provided by the GMA and these subsequent "elaborations" via the Hearings Board challenges can be summarized as: The GMA requires 4 dwelling units per acre as the minimum urban residential density in urban areas such as Edmonds. 2. All land within the urban area must be designated at appropriate urban densities. Calculating average density across an entire subarea or city does not meet this test — for example you cannot use higher -density multi family areas in one part of a city to justify lower -density single family areas elsewhere in the city. The GMA Hearings Board decision in Bremerton, et al. v. Kitsap County, CPSGMHB Case #495-3-0039c (Final Decision and Order, October 6, 1995, p.35) includes this statement: The Board instead adopts as a general rule a "bright line " at four net dwelling units per acre. Any residential pattern at that density, or higher, is clearly compact urban development and satisfies the low end of the range required by the Act. Any larger urban lots will be subject to increased scrutiny by the Board to determine if the number, locations, configurations and rationale for such lot sizes complies with the goals and requirements of the Act, and the jurisdiction 's ability to meet its obligations to accept any allocated share of county -wide population. Any new residential land use pattern within a UGA that is less dense is not a compact urban development pattern, constitutes urban sprawl, and is prohibited. There are exceptions to this general rule. For example, 1- or 2.5- acre lots may be appropriate in an urban setting in order to avoid excessive development pressures on or near environmentally sensitive areas. However, this circumstance can be expected to be infrequent within the UGA and must not constitute a pattern over large areas. With this as background, the City's review and update of its comprehensive plan has attempted to combine an assessment of its large lot zoning (RS-12, RSW-12 and RS-20) with an update of its critical areas inventories and regulations. The inventories, based on data available from City and other sources, were not available to the City when the 1995 comprehensive plan was adopted. These inventories provide information necessary to refine the City's single family plan designations and comprehensive plan map. In preparing its updated comprehensive plan map, an overlay was done of the 2004 critical areas inventory with currently designated large lot single family areas. City staff analyzed the pattern of critical areas compared with land use designations, and applied the following logic to identify areas that could and could not be justified for continuing to be designated for large lot single family development. 1. Staff used the city's GIS system to overlay the preliminary critical areas inventory with existing zoning (which is consistent with the current comprehensive plan). 2. In reviewing the existing large -lot plan and zoning designations (plan designations of "Single Family — Large Lot" equate to RS-12, RSW-12, or RS-20 zoning), the location of large -lot designations was compared to patterns of critical areas. Land Use 65 Patterns of critical areas — i.e. where combinations of critical areas were present (e.g. slopes and habitat, or streams and wetlands, etc.) or where extensive areas were covered by critical areas — were considered sufficient justification to continue large -lot single family designations. Larger lot sizes provide more opportunity to avoid disturbance of existing natural features — particularly vegetative cover — and provide an opportunity to maintain linkages between critical areas and habitat. Larger lots sizes in areas subject to landslide hazard also reduce the need to disturb existing vegetation and slopes, and also reduce the probability that continued slide activity will harm people or residences. This approach is consistent with the logic and analysis contained in the City's Best Available Science Report (EDAW, November 2004) accompanying the adoption of the City's updated critical areas regulations. 4. Small, isolated critical areas were not considered sufficient to justify continued large -lot single family designations. 5. Lots where the designation is to be changed are grouped by subdivision or neighborhood segment, so that streets or changes in lot pattern define the boundaries. 6. In at least a couple of situations, areas were included for re -designation when the development pattern indicated that a substantial number of lots already existed that were smaller than 12,000 sq. ft. in area. 7. Where patterns of critical areas exist, at least a tier of lots (using similar groupings as those used in #5 above) is maintained bordering the critical areas. This is based on the following logic: As the Best Available Science Report and updated critical areas regulations indicate, the City's intent is to take a conservative approach to protecting critical areas. Relatively large buffers are proposed (consistent with the science), but these are balanced by the ability of existing developed areas to continue infill activity in exchange for enhancing critical areas buffers. The goal is to obtain enhanced protection of resources within the city, while recognizing infill development must continue to occur. However, a conservative approach to resource protection implies that the City be cautious in making wholesale changes in zoning that could result in more development impacts to critical areas. This is particularly true since the buffers proposed in the new regulations are substantial increases over previous regulations; without larger lot sizes in areas that are substantially impacted by critical areas, there would be little or no opportunity to mitigate critical areas impacts — especially when surrounding areas have already been developed. Caution is also needed considering that the mapped inventory is based on general sources from other agencies and is likely to underestimate the amount of steep slopes, for example. Following this work, a map of proposed changes was prepared which identified single family large lot zones that could not be justified based on the presence of critical areas. These areas (comprising over 500 acres) have been re -designated as either Single Family — Urban 3 or Single Family Master Plan in the updated comprehensive plan. 66 Land Use Current Plan Designation Proposed Plan Corresponding Designation Zoning Single Family — Small Lot ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 1 RS-6, RS-8 ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 2 RS-8 ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 3 RS-10* Single Family — Large Lot Single Family — Resource ............................. RS-12, RSW-12 RS-20 .............................................................................. Single Family Master Plan Single Family Master Plan * RS-10 would be anew zoning classification, providing for a minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft. The densities that correspond to these plan and zoning designations are summarized in the following table: Plan Designation Zoning Classification Maximum Density (Net Density) Single Family — Urban 1 RS-6 7.3 DU/Acre RS-8 5.5 DU/Acre Single Family — Urban 2 RS-8 5.5 DU/Acre Single Family — Urban 3 RS-10 4.4 DU/Acre Single Family — Urban RS-6 or RS-8 with Master 5.5 or 7.3 DU/Acre Master Plan Plan overlay Single Family — Resource RS-12, RSW-12 3.7 DU/Acre RS-20 2.2 DU/Acre The "Single Family — Urban Master Plan" designation would only apply to the area lying along the south side of SR-104 north of 228"' Street SW; properties seeking to develop at the higher urban density lot pattern would need to be developed according to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly indicated access and lot configurations that would not result in traffic problems for SR-104. Land Use 67 Residential Goal A. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options available to the City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be approached realistically in balancing economic and aesthetic considerations, in accordance with the following policies: A.I. Encourage those building custom homes to design and construct homes with architectural lines which enable them to harmonize with the surroundings, adding to the community identity and desirability. A.2. Protect neighborhoods from incompatible additions to existing buildings that do not harmonize with existing structures in the area. A.3. Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or additions to existing structures. AA Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds whenever it is economically feasible. A.5. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following principles: A.5.a. Residential privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local government. A.5.b. Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be discouraged. A.5.c. Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land use encroachments. A.5.d. Private property must be protected from adverse environmental impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc. AA Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage. Residential Goal B. A broad range of housing types and densities should be encouraged in order that a choice of housing will be available to all Edmonds residents, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Planned Residential Development. Provide options for planned residential development solutions for residential subdivisions. B.l.a. Encourage single-family homes in a PRD configuration where significant benefits for owner and area can be demonstrated (trees, view, open space, etc). B.l.b. Consider attached single-family dwelling units in PRD's near downtown and shopping centers as an alternative to multiple family zoning. 68 Land Use B.2. Multiple. The City's development policies encourage high quality site and building design to promote coordinated development and to preserve the trees, topography and other natural features of the site. Stereotyped, boxy multiple unit residential (RM) buildings are to be avoided. B.2. a. Location Policies. B.2.a.i. RM uses should be located near arterial or collector streets. B.2.b. Compatibility Policies. B.2. b. i. RM developments should preserve the privacy and view of surrounding buildings, wherever feasible. B.2. b. ii. The height of RM buildings that abut single family residential (RS) zones shall be similar to the height permitted in the abutting RS zone except where the existing vegetation and/or change in topography can substantially screen one use from another. B. 2. b. iii. The design of RM buildings located next to RS zones should be similar to the design idiom of the single family residence. B.2.c. General Design Policies. B.2.c.i. The nonstructural elements of the building (such as decks, lights, rails, doors, windows and window easements, materials, textures and colors) should be coordinated to carry out a unified design concept. B.2.c.ii. Site and building plans should be designed to preserve the natural features (trees, streams, topography, etc) of the site rather than forcing the site to meet the needs of the imposed plan. B.3. Mobile Homes. Update design standards to ensure quality parks heavily landscaped both for screening exterior and for appearance of interior. Commercial Land Use General. Past and present commercial development in the City of Edmonds has been oriented primarily to serving the needs of its citizens. It also has attempted to offer a unique array of personalized and specialty type shopping opportunities for the public. In the downtown area, the Milltown shopping arcade is an excellent example of this type of development. It is essential that future commercial developments continue to harmonize and enhance the residential small town character of Edmonds that its citizens so strongly desire to retain. By the same token, the City should develop a partnership with business, citizens and residents to help it grow and prosper while assisting to meet the various requirements of the City's codes and policies. The Highway 99 arterial has been recognized historically as a commercial district which adds to the community's tax and employment base. Its economic vitality is important to Edmonds and should be supported. Commercial development in this area is to be encouraged to its maximum potential. Commercial Development Goals and Plan Policies. The following sections describe the general Land Use 69 goals and policies for all commercial areas (commercial, community commercial, neighborhood commercial, Westgate Corridor, Edmonds Way Corridor, and sexually oriented businesses), followed by the additional goals and policies that specific commercial areas must also meet. Commercial Development Goal A. Commercial development in Edmonds shall be located to take advantage of its unique locational opportunities while being consistent and compatible with the character of its surrounding neighborhood. All commercial development should be designed and located so that it is economically feasible to operate a business and provide goods and services to Edmonds residents and tourists in a safe, convenient and attractive manner, in accordance with the following policies: A.1 A sufficient number of sites suited for a variety of commercial uses should be identified and reserved for these purposes. The great majority of such sites should be selected from parcels of land already identified in the comprehensive plan for commercial use and/or zoned for such use. A.2. Parcels of land previously planned or zoned for commercial use but which are now or will be identified as unnecessary, or inappropriate for such use by additional analysis, should be reclassified for other uses. A.3. The proliferation of strip commercial areas along Edmonds streets and highways and the development of commercial uses poorly related to surrounding land uses should be strongly discouraged. A.4. The design and location of all commercial sites should provide for convenient and safe access for customers, employees and suppliers. A.5. All commercial developments should be carefully located and designed to eliminate or minimize the adverse impacts of heavy traffic volume and other related problems on surrounding land uses. A.6. Special consideration should be given to major land use decisions made in relation to downtown Edmonds. Commercial Development Goal B. Community Commercial areas are comprised of commercial development serving a dual purpose: services and shopping for both local residents and regional traffic. The intent of the community commercial designation is to recognize both of these purposes by permitting a range of business and mixed use development while maintaining a neighborhood scale and design character. B.1. Permit uses in community commercial areas that serve both the local neighborhood and regional through -traffic. B.2. Provide for transit and pedestrian access in addition to the need to accommodate automobile traffic. B.3. Provide for the pedestrian -scale design of buildings that are two stories or less in height and that contain architectural features that promote pedestrian activity. 70 Land Use B.4. Provide pedestrian walkways and transit connections throughout the community commercial area, assuring connections to nearby residential neighborhoods. Commercial Development Goal C. Neighborhood Commercial areas are intended to provide a mix of services, shopping, gathering places, office space, and housing for local neighborhoods. The scale of development and intensity of uses should provide a middle ground between the more intense commercial uses of the Highway 99 Corridor/ Medical area and the Downtown Activity Area. Historically, many of the neighborhood commercial areas in Edmonds have developed as classically auto -oriented commercial "strip malls" with one- and two-story developments primarily including retail and service uses. Throughout the region, neighborhood commercial areas are departing from this historical model by being redeveloped as appealing mixed -use clusters, providing attractive new pedestrian -oriented development that expands the uses and services available to local residents. C.1. Neighborhood commercial development should be located at major arterial intersections and should be designed to minimize interference with through traffic. C.2. Permit uses in neighborhood commercial areas that are intended to serve the local neighborhood. Mixed use development should be encouraged within neighborhood commercial areas. C.3. Provide for transit and pedestrian access, with the provision of facilities for local automobile traffic. Provide for pedestrian connections to nearby residential neighborhoods. CA. Allow a variety of architectural styles while encouraging public art and sustainable development practices that support pedestrian activity and provide for appealing gathering places. C.5. Significant attention should be paid to the design of ground level commercial spaces, which must accommodate a variety of commercial uses, have street -level entrances, and storefront facades that are dominated by transparent windows. C.6. Encourage neighborhood commercial areas to reflect the identity and character of individual neighborhoods, thus are strengthening their importance as neighborhood centers. Neighborhood commercial areas may set additional specific goals for their community in order to further refine the specific identity they wish to achieve. Goals and policies for specific neighborhood centers are detailed below. C.6.a. Five Corners C.6.a.i. In the Five Corners neighborhood commercial area, development should be oriented to the street and respond to the unique character of the intersection, including a planned intersection improvement. Parking should be provided at the rear of development, where possible, or underground. C.6.a.ii. Development shall not be more than four stories in height, and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks, varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site. The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter commercial space. Land Use 71 C.6.a.iii. At a minimum, commercial uses should be located on the ground level of development. Commercial or residential uses may occupy upper levels. C.6.a.iv. As a major intersection, streetscape and way -finding design should create an attractive `gateway" to the downtown and other neighborhoods. (Link to streetscape plan update) Intersection and street design should accommodate and encourage pedestrian connections throughout the neighborhood commercial area. C.6.b. Firdale Village C.6.a.i. In the Firdale Village commercial area, development should include an attractive mix of uses that create a "neighborhood village " pedestrian -oriented environment. Commercial spaces shall be oriented toward the street in order to maximize visibility, and parking should be primarily accommodated either behind or underneath structures. C.6.a.ii. Development shall not be more than four stories in height, and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks, varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site. The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter commercial space. Commercial Development Goal D. The Westgate Corridor is generally located between the 100"' Avenue W (9th Avenue S)/Edmonds Way intersection and where Edmonds Way turns north to enter the downtown area. By virtue of this location, this corridor serves as both a key transportation corridor and as an entry into the downtown. Long-established neighborhoods lie near both sides of the corridor. The plan for this corridor is to recognize its multiple functions by providing opportunities for small-scale businesses while promoting compatible development that will not intrude into established neighborhoods. D.1. Development within the Westgate Corridor should be designed to recognize its role as part of an entryway into Edmonds and the downtown. The overall effect should be a corridor that resembles a landscaped boulevard and median. The landscaped median along SR-104 should remain as uninterrupted as possible in order to promote traffic flow and provide an entry effect. D.2. Permit uses in planned business areas that are primarily intended to serve the local neighborhood while not contributing significantly to traffic congestion. D.3. Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. DA. Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access shall not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. 72 Land Use D.S. Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped -down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Commercial Development Goal E. The Edmonds Way Corridor consists of portions of Edmonds Way between the 100th Avenue West intersection and Highway 99. This corridor serves as a key transportation corridor, and also provides a key link between Edmonds and Interstate 5. Established residential areas lie on both sides of the corridor. An established pattern of multiple family residential development lies along much of the corridor, while small-scale businesses can be found primarily near intersections. A major concern is that the more intensive development that occurs along the corridor should not interfere with the flow of through traffic or intrude into adjoining established communities. E.1. Permit uses in planned multiple family or small-scale business developments that are designed to minimize contributing significantly to traffic congestion. E.2. Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. E.3. Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access should not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. EA. Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped -down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Make use of natural topography to buffer incompatible development whenever possible. Commercial Development Goal F. Sexually Oriented Businesses are regulated by specific licensing and operating provisions in the City Code. However, land use and zoning regulations are also required to mitigate and reduce the adverse secondary effects of these uses. These secondary effects are detailed in the findings adopted by Ordinance No. 3117 on October 15, 1996. As commercial uses, sexually oriented businesses should be limited to areas which can support the traffic and site requirements of these businesses while also assuring that their adverse secondary effects are mitigated. The following policies apply to sexually oriented businesses: F.1. Provide for potential commercial locations within the City for sexually oriented businesses which will provide at least a minimum separation and buffering necessary to protect public health and safety. F.2. Separate the location of sexually oriented businesses from uses that are incompatible with the secondary effects associated with sexually oriented businesses. These incompatible uses include residential uses and uses such as public parks, public libraries, museums, public or private schools, community centers, and religious facilities. They also include bars and taverns. Land Use 73 F.3. Adopt specific development regulations, such as lighting, parking and access provisions, that are designed to reduce or mitigate the secondary effects of sexually oriented businesses. FA. Provide a mechanism to monitor, on an annual basis, the availability of potential sites for the location of sexually oriented businesses. Industrial Land Use General. Interestingly, industrial development played a major role in the early development of Edmonds. Sawmills, wharves, log ponds and other wood products industries lined the Edmonds waterfront at the turn of the twentieth century. However, as time passed, Edmonds developed into a very attractive residential community and its once thriving lumber industry faded into oblivion. Today, Edmonds still retains much of its residential, small town charm despite the large amount of urban development which has occurred in and around the City during the outward expansion of the Seattle metropolitan area during the past twenty-five years. Industrial development in the more traditional sense has not occurred in Edmonds to a significant degree since its early Milltown days. Most new industry which has located in the community since the 1950's has been largely of light manufacturing or service industry nature. Some examples include furniture manufacturing, printing and publishing, electronic components assembly and health care services. Future industrial development should be carefully controlled in order to insure that it is compatible with the residential character of Edmonds. Small scale, business -park oriented light industries and service related industries should be given preference over more intensive large scale industries. Great care should be given to carefully siting and designing all new industrial development in order to fully minimize or eliminate its adverse off -site impacts. Industrial Land Use Goal A. A select number of industrial areas should be located and developed which are reasonably attractive and contribute to the economic growth and stability of Edmonds without degrading its natural or residential living environment, in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Light industrial uses should be given preference over heavy industrial uses. A.2. The clustering of industrial uses in planned industrial parks should be required when the site is adequate. A.3. Adequate buffers of landscaping, compatible transitional land uses and open space should be utilized to protect surrounding land areas from the adverse effects of industrial land use. Particular attention should be given to protecting residential areas, parks and other public -institutional land uses. A.4. All industrial areas should be located where direct access can be provided to regional ground transportation systems (major State Highways and/or railroad lines). 74 Land Use Open Space General. In urban areas, a lack of open space has been one of the major causes of residential blight. This lack has contributed to the movement of people from older densely developed neighborhoods to peripheral areas still possessing open areas. Open space must be reserved now for assurance that future settled areas are relieved by significant open land, providing recreational opportunities as well as visual appeal. Not all vacant land in the City should be considered desirable or valuable for open space classification. Therefore, the following set of criteria -standards has been developed for determining those areas most important for this classification. Open Space Goal A. Open space must be seen as an essential element determining the character and quality of the urban and suburban environment, in accordance with the following policies. A.1. Undeveloped public property should be studied to determine its suitability and appropriate areas designed as open space. A.l.a. No city -owned property should be relinquished until all possible community uses have been explored. A.2. All feasible means should be used to preserve the following open spaces: A.2.a. Lands which have unique scientific or educational values. A.2.b. Areas which have an abundance of wildlife particularly where there are habitats of rare or endangered species. A.2.c. Natural and green belt areas adjacent to highways and arterials with the priority to highways classified as scenic. A.2.d. Areas which have steep slopes or are in major stream drainage ways, particularly those areas which have significance to Edmonds residents as watersheds. A.2.e. Land which can serve as buffers between residential and commercial or industrial development. A.2.f. Bogs and wetlands. A.2.g. Land which can serve as buffers between high noise environments and adjacent uses. A.21. Lands which would have unique suitability for future recreational uses both passive and active. A.2.i. Areas which would have unique rare or endangered types of vegetation. - A.3. Open space should be distributed throughout the urban areas in such a manner that there is both visual relief and variety in the pattern of development and that there is sufficient space for active and passive recreation. Provide views and open space in areas of high density or multiple housing by requiring adequate setback space and separation between structures. Land Use 75 Open Space Goal B. Edmonds possesses a most unique and valuable quality in its location on Puget Sound. The natural supply of prime recreational open space, particularly beaches and waterfront areas, must be accessible to the public, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Edmonds saltwater shorelines and other waterfront areas should receive special consideration in all future acquisition and preservation programs. B.2. Provide wherever possible, vehicular or pedestrian access to public bodies of water. Soils and Topography General. The natural topography of the city contributes to the environmental amenity of the community. Many of the remaining undeveloped areas of the city are located on hillsides or in ravines where steep slopes have discouraged development. These are frequently areas where natural drainage ways exist and where the second growth forest is still undisturbed. In some areas, soil conditions also exist which are severely limited for urban development. Based on soil and slope analysis for the city, several areas may be identified as potentially hazardous for urban development. (See report to Environmental Subcommittee on Soils and Topography, February 3, 1975.) Some areas which are limited for development are desirable for public recreation, open spaces, conservation of existing natural features, maintenance of valuable biological communities, and protection of natural storm drainage system. In some hillside areas, changes in existing soil characteristics because of development, grading, increased runoff and removal of vegetation may cause severe erosion, water pollution and flooding with subsequent damage to public and private property. Soils and Topography Goal A. Future development in areas of steep slope and potentially hazardous soil conditions should be based on site development which preserves the natural site characteristics in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Large lots or flexible subdivision procedures, such as PRD's, should be used in these areas to preserve the site and reduce impervious surfaces, cuts and fills. A.2. Streets and access ways should be designed to conform to the natural topography, reduce runoff and minimize grading of the hillside. Soils and Topography Goal B. Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Grading and Filling. B. I.a. Grading, filling, and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. B.1. b. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope, or of an adjacent property. 76 Land Use B.1. c. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 1 S% slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property. B.l.d. Fill and excavated dirt shall not be pushed down the slope. B.2. Building Construction. B.2.a. Buildings on slopes of 1 S% or greater shall be designed to cause minimum disruption to the natural topography. B.2. b. Retaining walls are discouraged on steep slopes. If they are used they should be small and should not support construction of improvements which do not conform to the topography. B.2. c. Water detention devices shall be used to maintain the velocity of runoff at predevelopment levels. B.3. Erosion Control. B.3.a. Temporary measures shall betaken to reduce erosion during construction. B.3.b. Natural vegetation should be preserved wherever possible to reduce erosion and stabilize slopes, particularly on the downhill property line. B.3.c. Slopes should be stabilized with deep rooted vegetation and mulch, or other materials to prevent erosion and siltation of drainage ways. Water Resources and Drainage Management General. The environmental amenity of the City of Edmonds is greatly enhanced by the numerous year round streams and the location of the City on Puget Sound. Lake Ballinger, besides being a well- known landmark, is an important environmental area because of its ecological benefits and open space quality. The storm drainage and stream systems in the Edmonds area are part of the Cedar River Drainage Basin. There are two sub -basins in the area: McAleer Creek, which drains to Lake Washington and the Upper Puget Sound sub -basin which drains to Puget Sound. Urban development in the past has interfered with natural storm drainage systems and greatly increased the area of impermeable surfaces. It has been necessary to install culverts, underground drainage courses and other major structures to accommodate runoff water. Because of climate, topography and soil conditions, severe erosion and drainage to stream banks may occur with future development. Urban runoff causes significant decreases in water quality because of the quantity of pollutants in the runoff water. The Urban Runoff and Basin Drainage Study conducted for the River Basin Coordinating Committee of the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle indicates that future development in the Puget Sound and Land Use 77 McAleer sub -basins will overburden existing systems. The water quality in Lake Ballinger is already an urgent and serious problem because the lake is shallow, contains a high level of nutrients and has seasonal oxygen deficiencies. The quality of water in Puget Sound is a less immediate problem but must be considered in the long term. Both Edmonds and Lynnwood dispose of effluent in the Sound which has received primary treatment only. Increased recreational use of the waterfront will have water quality impacts also. Some streams in the City have supported fish runs from the Sound in the past and many people in the community would like to see a restoration of these fisheries. The high costs both financially and environmentally of installation of structures and alteration of natural systems is an important consideration in planning for environmental management. Because environmental systems cross political boundaries a high degree of interlocal cooperation will be necessary to fully utilize funds available through the Water Pollution Control Act; however, the Act may provide substantial funds in the future for planning and improvement of facilities. Resources and Drain Management Goal A. The City should continue to upgrade the public storm drainage system in order to protect the man-made and natural environment. In the management of storm drainage and urban runoff, the City should utilize the natural drainage system where it is possible to do so without significantly altering the natural drainage ways, in accordance with the following policies: A.1. The natural drainage system (i.e., streams, ponds, and marshes) shall not be filled or permanently culverted except where no other alternative exists. Temporary culverting of streams shall be permitted during construction where site conditions present no other alternative. The natural condition should be restored immediately following construction. A.2. Earthmoving equipment shall not cause siltation or deterioration of water quality. Rechanneling of streams is permitted only when the stream bed location renders the site undevelopable. A.3. Imagination and care should be used in the design of retention ponds and other drainage facilities so that they will blend into the natural environment rather than detract from it. A.4. Riprapping of stream banks and gravelling of stream beds is permitted when the Engineering Department determines that stability or sediment retention is necessary. A.5. Decorative ponding, cascading, and building artificial waterfalls are permitted except in those streams where it would present a barrier to the migration of fish. A.6. Building foundation and footings shall be no closer than 15 feet to a stream bank and shall be sited to create minimum disruption to the drainage system. A.7. The quality and quantity of water leaving a site shall be the same as that entering the site. 78 Land Use A.B. Retention basins and other devices shall be used to encourage on -site runoff absorption and prevent overloading of existing drainage systems except in those areas where it is necessary to remove water from the site quickly due to unstable soil conditions to prevent earth slides and subsequent danger to life and property. A.9. Regional retention/detention is generally recognized as a more efficient and practical method of runoff control and will be given first consideration before individual on -site systems are allowed as part of development projects. [Ord. 2527, 1985.] Vegetation and Wildlife General. As Edmonds has urbanized, the natural vegetation has become increasingly scarce. The city's woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation provide an important resource which should be preserved. Woodlands help stabilize soils on steep slopes, and act as barriers to wind and sound. Natural vegetation provides habitat for wildlife. Plants replenish the soil with nutrients. They generate oxygen and clean pollutants from the air. The beauty of the natural growth provides pleasing vistas and helps to buffer one development from another. Areas where natural vegetation exists provide good sites for nature trails and for other recreational and educational opportunities. Wildlife is a valuable natural resource that greatly enhances the aesthetic quality of human life. City beaches, breakwaters and pilings represent unique habitats for marine organisms. "People pressure" continue to destroy many organisms and their habitats each year. The number and species of organisms is diminishing yearly. Streams, lakes and saltwater areas offer habitats for many species of migrating and resident bird life. Underdeveloped wooded areas and city parks provide habitats for many birds and mammals. Many birds and mammals are dependent upon both the upland and beach areas. Vegetation and Wildlife Goal A. The city should ensure that its woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation are preserved, in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available science pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172. A.2. The removal of trees should be minimized particularly when they are located on steep slopes or hazardous soils. Subdivision layouts, buildings and roads should be designed so that existing trees are preserved. A.3. Trees that are diseased, damaged, or unstable should be removed. A.4. Grading should be restricted to building pads and roads only. Vegetation outside these areas should be preserved. Land Use 79 Vegetation and Wildlife Goal B. The city should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed toward preserving the natural habitats (woodlands, marshes, streams and beaches) of the city's wildlife in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Establish and maintain a variety of educational and recreational programs and activities for all age levels. B.2. Erect and maintain an educational display that identifies some of the more common plants and animals and the ecology of major habitats, (i.e., sand, rock, piling and deepwater). B.3. Establish and publicize regulations prohibiting removal of non-food organisms from beach areas without collecting permit; permit for educational and research use only. BA. Encourage landscaping and site improvement on city -owned property which recognizes the dependency of some species upon certain types of vegetation for food and cover. B.5. City park property which serves as a habitat for wildlife should be left natural with minimum development for nature trail type of use. Air Pollution General. Air pollution is primarily a regional problem related to urbanization and meteorological conditions in the Puget Sound Basin. It is the result of activities in which most citizens participate. Air pollution can cause severe health effects and property damage under certain conditions. (See Facts on Air Pollution - Regional and Local: Report to Community Development Task Force.) Air Pollution Goal A. Clean air is a right to all citizens of the City of Edmonds and should be protected and maintained in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Discourage expansion of arterials which will substantially increase line sources of pollution. A.2. Encourage arrangement of activities which will generate the fewest necessary automobile trip miles while avoiding undue concentration of like uses. A.3. Support, through political action, strong enforcement policies and ordinances in the regional pollution control agency. A.4. Support, by political action and financial participation, the establishment of public transportation in the community as an alternative to dependence on individual vehicles. A.5. Encourage local referral center for car pooling. 80 Land Use Noise Pollution General. Although no area of human activity is free of sound, the modern urban environment is increasingly suffering from an overload of sound in the form of noise. The effects of noise may be severe. The most obvious effect is loss of hearing where levels of noise are very high and sustained. A less documented effect is stress from physiological and psychological impact of noise. Noise generally contributes to a loss of amenity and livability. The Edmonds Community is free, to a large extent, from the worst kinds of noise pollution and most residents believe that it is a quiet place to live. However, an environmental noise survey taken by the Building Department in 1974 indicates that there are some areas of concern. The main problems come from vehicular noise, particularly motorcycles. Some point source problems, refrigeration equipment in stores near residential areas, have also occurred in the city. Impulsive, high -intensity noises which occur only periodically may also be irritating in quiet suburban neighborhoods. Examples are airplanes, electronically amplified music, sirens, etc. Certain noise problems can be alleviated more easily than others. The noise of vehicular traffic, particularly on arterial streets is difficult to control. Point sources can be more easily regulated by requiring noise muffling equipment. Enforcement of noise standards can be a problem because of the training and skill involved in taking noise measurements. Cost of enforcement may be excessive if standards are too stringent. The federal government has passed legislation to deal with major sources of noise in commerce which require national conformity of treatment. The State Department of Ecology has adopted Motor Vehicle Noise Performance Standards and Environmental Noise Levels guidelines. Noise Pollution Goal A. Preserve the quiet residential environment of the city by limiting increases in noise and reducing unnecessary noise where it now exists in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Studies should be made to determine the existing noise environment in order to provide baseline data for assessment of the environmental impact of changes or increases in noise. A.2. The unique areas of quiet in the city should be identified and appropriate measures taken to preserve the quiet environment. A.3. The city should update the existing noise standards to meet State Standards in modest stages in order to maintain flexibility and benefit from improvements in technology and experience. Increases in manpower or training to enforce standards should be cautiously made as experience is gained in enforcement. A.4. Existing vehicular standards related to noise should be enforced to the greatest degree possible without excessive increases in manpower. A.5. The city should cooperate with adjacent cities in sharing the costs of expensive noise equipment and training persons in the use of the equipment. Land Use 81 A.6. Future street and arterial projects should be assessed for noise impacts, and structures such as berms, fences and other devices utilized wherever possible to reduce the noise impacts. A.7. Any ordinances adopted by the city should recognize the variety and quality of noise environments. Excessive regulations should not be imposed on areas of the city where higher noise levels are normal or necessary for essential activities and do not create environmental problems. A.8. It is the policy of the city to minimize noise created by the railroad. Urban Growth Areas General. The accompanying Urban Growth Areas map shows the City's urban growth area, which encompasses unincorporated areas adjacent to the current city limits. In general, development within the urban growth area is of interest to the City because the area will be annexed to the City in the future and development in the area can be expected to have an impact on the demand for and delivery of City services. Urban Growth Area Goal A. Plan for the logical extension of services and development within the City's urban growth area. A.I. To provide for orderly transitions, adopt comparable zoning and comprehensive plan designations for areas annexing into the City. A.2. Adopted plans and policies for the urban growth area shall be consistent and compatible with the general comprehensive plan goals and policies for the City. 82 Land Use City of Edmonds Urban Growth Area Map Land Use 83 Land Capacity Background The Growth Mangement Act (GMA) provides the framework for planning at all levels in Washington State. Under the mandate of the GMA (RCW 36.70A.215,), local Rovernements are required to evaluate the density and capacity for Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Edmonds has been allocated population, housing, and employment growth targets through County Planning Policies. Population projections are based on the official 20-year population projections for Snohomish County from the Office of Financial Management and distributed as represented in Puget Sound Regional Council's Vision 2040 Regional Growth Strategy. Edmonds is considered a Larger�City for regional growth strategy purposes. The Larger Cijy designation is applied to cities that have a combined population and employment total over 22,500. Currently, eighteen cities are grouped in the Larger City designation. As a group, these cities are expected to accommodate 14% of the re . ig on's projected population growth and 12% of the regional projected employment growth. The 2035 population target for Edmonds is 45,550 persons, up 14.4% from the 2011 population estimate of 39,800. To accommodate the targeted growth, Edmonds will require approximately 2,772 new housing units and 2,313 new jobs. The City was required io estimate the abilit-y of land within the City of Edmonds to aeeemmeda4e tafgeted pepulation an Plan was adopted in 1995. Tt of Land Supply (GTo A s) TWO DeveMped ;4ean)f Land se Aeres Aekes AeFes Re ide t' 1 Multi Famil 202.9 193.5 Business cmmer-eiai 296.9 284.7 Y�i Industfia1 -s" � 4" pis 3-54 3-5-..3 — Schools 4-3-" 4-3-" — Land Use 45 n..vs Q. Open e, aee- 349.2 349.2 - U 2" 2" - meets 867.9 867.9 - T-et=a4,743.3 4,540.9 232.4 Table 4-5 summarizes available GIS data on land supply in Edmonds as it existed in 49942014. Developed acres include the entire parcel boundaries that contained development, not just the building footprint. The Edmonds Marsh accounted for all vacant acres listed under Parks & Open Space rat on osidei#ia ,-ad eewAner-eial development i 1994 e shown i f Table 6 Table 4 City of Edmonds Land Supply (Gross Acres), 2014 Land Use Total Acres Developed Lands Acres % of Total Acres Vacant Lands Acres % of Total Acres Residential Single -Family 3428.9 3272.3 56.9% 156.6 2.7% Multi -Family 203.9 181.0 3.1% 22.9 0.4% Retirement/Special Needs 16.9 16.9 0.3% Business Commercial 209.7 209.7 3.6% Industrial 32.2 32.2 0.6% Medical 40.8 40.8 0.7% Mixed Use 62.8 39.3 0.7% 23.5 0.4% Public Facilities Government 14.0 14.0 0.2% Schools 171.5 171.5 3.0% Parks & Open Space 416.7 393.3 6.8% 23.4 0.4% Religious 41.6 41.6 0.7% Streets/Parking/Driveways 1093.9 1093.9 19.0% Utilities 13.8 13.8 0.2% Total 1 5746.7 5520.3 96.1% 1 226.4 3.9% Source: City of Edmonds GIS data, Nov-2014 Overall, ap-p - v:matel , nearly 95-4%pereeit of the City's lande-ity was vacantdevelepe in 49-942014. Approximately -779.3%pereerft of the �� „aevelepe vacant lands -(ap m.,44y� 226.4 acres) were designated for residential uses: 71per69.2% for single-family residences and 4per-e10.1% for multi -family residences. Of the remaining vacant lands, 25 pef 10.4% of 46 Land Use undeveloped l „a w aswas designated for ^ ^ ^' and in"stfial usesmixed use and 10.3% represented the Edmonds Marsh. While the GIS data is useful for evaluation of the distribution of land use in the city, it has limitations when analyzing vacant and/or under -developed lands for potential development as it accounts for a parcel's entire area without consideration of site development standards (e.g. setbacks), critical areas, or other parcel limitations. For a more in-depth study, the 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) developed Capae4�-build-out ca aci estimates wer-e develop for vacant and under -developed parcels. Using a process developed by Snohomish County Tomorrow, the BLR was prepared in 2012 and adopted by the Snohomish County Council in June 2013. This report provided the city with the necesSM information to complete a development capacity analysis. Table 6 Development and Capacity of Vacant Land T1994 **sting Deye opmeH Residential Gernrn rrial Resodentlal ��a-r cur++ '' II�„,,,yy,^, ur i.Y'F 4ts c�eY Vi"FmtS NC AGtmVmt �4 1 GS2 F 22 -32 Geele Highway 9 -337 558,912 49 �0 South 76th-5 and 196+h 5 -3- 6 i4 � tl , o�iS Cny f i S 8 �/9 7-3 RS 12 2 ?; 9 224 R C \i-cv�r2 54 — RS 29 362 64 Total 4�3 2,660, 7-62 1,351,333 Sot4FGe. City of E-dimend- S Planning Depa - me + loan Land Use 47 Table 5: Summary of Buildable Lands Report Additional Additional Housing Unit Additional Housing Unit Additional Population Employment Capacity (before reductions) Capacity (after reductions) Capacity (after reductions) Capacity (after reductions) SF I MF Sr. Apts Total SF MF Sr. Apts Total SF MF Sr. Apts Total Buildable Lands Report 561 2,381 482 3,424 444 1,868 334 2,646 1,236 3,437 393 5,065 2,820 Source: Buildable Lands Report, 2012 Given the limited supply of vacant land within the city, capacity estimates were not calculated strictly on the amount of vacant buildable land, but also on increased densities and intensity of redevelopment within various areas of the city. Two Different methods of development were targeted to provide additional residential capacity,-.- For example, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were one method of attemotiniz to suoolement capacity in single familv neighborhoods. while encourauiniz mixed use development in commercial areas provided for additional capacity in areas already experiencing a higher level of activity. Planned Residential Developments (PRDs) were also targeted as a way of assuring maximum buildout of single -family -zoned areas while bnaintainine the character of the ci . Al Following adoption of the 1995 comprehensive plan, the city embarked on an implementation program to achieve the goals identified in the plan. Many of these implementation measures are described in the Housing Element under the discussion of "reasonable measur-e strate ieg s to promote affordable housing." These measures were taken by the city to address issues related to both capacity and affordable housing. A key feature of Edmonds' ceomprehensive plan is its emphasis on mixed use development, which includes both commercial and residential uses on a single lot or combination of lots. For example, a mixed use development could include a two-story development with residential dwelling units on the second floor and offices, shops or other commercial uses on the ground floor, or it could consist of a mixture of uses arranged in proximity to each other. Edmonds is unique in relying to a signif4eant degree on mi*ed iise develepmei4 as a land tise pattem designed to address petepAial eapaeit-y. Mixed use development is allowed in both of the city's Activity Centers; and in the Corridor development areas. In the 1995 comprehensive plan, mixed use development was to be allowed under all the alternatives considered, but would only be encouraged under the adopted "Designed Infill" alternative. The encouragement of mixed use development continues as a basic assumption underlying the current comprehensive plan. The importance of mixed use in the city's land use pattern can be seen in Figure 9-7. 48 Land Use Figure 9: General Use Categories by % of City Land Area Singli Res 22 Singe Family Urban j9.74°A Source: City of Edmonds GIS, Nov-]4 Multi Family Mixed Use 5.89% Crammer€ial //f 0,8b Medical 0.32% Parks 5.27% Open Spaoe 0.93% J-111#les 0.24 Land Use 49 Figure 8 General Use Categories by % of City Land Area Open Space Master Plan 5.0% Piihlir leighborhood Commercial 0.4% Ilan ned-Neighborhood 0.2% lowntown Districts 1.2% ;ommunity Commercial 0.4% Edmonds Way Corridor 0.6% Mixed Use Commercial 2.4% Corridor Development 3.6% Single �. 40.5% ��.. Single Family Resource 21.1% E w--Population and Employment Capacity 877 -pea le wa 1,887 a The 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) showed an Edmonds housing capacity of an additional 2,646 units through the year 2035, which would accommodate a total population of 45,550 residents. Since the BLR was finalized in 2012, some of the assumptions reizarding buildable lands have changed. During the 2015 Comprehensive Plan update, city st considered how these changes affected capacity_ projections. For example. recent actions taken by the ON to encouralze mixed -use development in the Neighborhood Business areas of Westgate and Five Corners, plus the removal of restrictions on first and second floor residential development in CG and CG2 zones alongthe 99 corridor, should provide the city with buildable lands capacity not considered in the 2012 BLR. In total, the City conservatively estimates these actions can increase the buildable lands capacity bX annroximately 850 net housine units aoolvina the same methodolo2v used in the Buildable Lands Report. 50 Land Use With these adjustments, the City estimates a total capacity of 2,810 additional housing units by the year 2035. The projected need to accommodate the targeted population growth was 2,772 housing units as determined by the Countywide Planning Policies. The land capaci , analysis, combined with the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan, indicate that the 2035 targets for population and employment can be accommodated by the Cityi7^w eve the jobs eapaeity does not take it#o ^ „* . wee!�:�rr�e:rss!*:�:�rsnsss:�srss.�rerzrserr.�sss�:r:�ss. . rrr.E��se� UTPR 1 IINIMMINNION OWN, M. 1111.11111, Jill �M The Growth Management Act (GN4A) requires that jufisdictions plan to acconnnodate housing an employment for-eeasts for- the nex4 20 yeafs within the Urban Gr-E)NN4h Afea. SnOhOfnish GlEfflf4y and its eities have woAied togethet: with the Puget Sound Regional Couneil (PSR-G) to afFive 4 for-eeasts that eaeh eity will use to aeeammodate its fair- share of regional growth. The City of Edmonds' shafe > > � fe& �ts�Tl�y�'�5, t nn � t�en��peEtc to 880 ;dents -.-A �summary o additional popttla4ion historical rg owth and the 2025-2035 population and housing targets is presented in Figure 109 and Table 66. The city is able to eonsider a planning target within a range " growth lines in Figure 9). Based on histor4eal trends, the „ tafget appears to be the most reasonable for Edmonds particularly in light of the relatively high !an values in the eity. The !and eapaeity analysis, eambined with the goals and polieies in the eampr-ehensive plan, indie4es thM both the pr-ejeeted tafgets for- population and empleyment ean be Land Use 51 The adopted 2035 employment target for Edmonds is 14,148, which represents an increase of 2,313 above the 11,835 people employed in the City in 2011. The 2012 Buildable Lands analysis showed a potential increased capacity of 2,820 employeesv 2035, which has been increased to 3,522 using the same analysis employed in reviewing the housing and population capacity discussed above. The City should consider using incentives to achieve redevelopment and infill goals and zoning incentives or other measures to ensure that land adjacent to infrastructure facilities is utilized to maximize the economic benefits of that infrastructure. residential and employment growth under- the Proposed Aefien and eaeh of the !aad use altematives. Given the extent to which future land use policies, regulations, demographics and market forces could affect land capacity estimates, however, it is important that development trends and remaining land supply within the city is regularly monitored in order to ensure the continued supply of adequate urban land throughout the 20-year GMA planning horizon. Implementation strategies should include development of a long-term program to monitor the city's progress towards goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan. As part of the monitoring process, the city should work with the public, environmental and business leaders, interest groups, cities and other agencies to develop detailed monitoring criteria or "benchmarks" that could be used to measure progress and identify the need for corrective action. Specific implementation measures should seek to reduce barriers or impediments to development. For example, measures that reduce the regulatory compliance burden of the private sector, if successful, would reduce the cost imposed by such regulations. Similarly, implementation measures that are designed to encourage flexibility could also help reduce compliance costs — at least on a case - by -case basis. Specific measures could include: provision of flexible development standards; density bonuses for site designs that provide public benefits; and fee waivers or expedited review that lower financial development risks. 52 Land Use Figure 10. Edmonds Growth Targets vs. Historical Growth 6 1944 1994 19M 1970 1000 1990 2WC MO 2020' 2025` 2M' MPopulwfun +GrawthTarget Sawco: Consus 20YA SerildobroLorrdsficpert 2012 Figure 9 Edmonds Growth Targets vs. Historical Growth 50,000 Buildable Lands Capacity (45,207) 45,000 40,000 r 35,000 C p 30,000 VP r 3 25,000 Q d 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010* 2020* 2025* � Buildable Lands Capacity 0 Low Growth Target 0 Historical Growth High Growth Target Land Use 53 Table 6 City of Edmonds Existing and Projected Growth 2000 2010 2035 (Plan Target) Population 39,515 39,709 45,550 Nominal Change 8,771 194 5,841 % Change 28.50% 0.49% 14.71% Annual % Change 2.50% 0.05% 0.55% Housing Units 17,508 18,378 21,168 Nominal Change 4,563 870 2,790 % Change 35.20% 4.97% 15.18% Avg HH Size 2.32 2.26 2.2 Avg Persons/Unit 2.26 2.16 2.15 .Gross Density 1 3.1 3.16 3.64 Source: Census 2010, Buildable Lands Report 2012 54 Land Use 49N 2888 2025 (Plan Target) 30,744 339,515 44,990 3� Q c 4-� -2-� 475% 12,945 47,598 20,5g7 ''� 4,--%3 �9 2 1.0-07; 35.2 -07 � 1% 24-8 34 36 4-9 5:4 I Gross Density = number of households per gross acre of land, city-wide. Note that this includes non-residential land, so the densityper gross residential acre is significantly higher. -2 Alet Densio, — number of househoUs per net aere of land-, after Mtieal aretm and rights ef i�wy, aiv dedueted. C..,....,.,. TT C /',..,....... '7000 .,. ,J S,A,,,,...,,4q D7...,..,.:.,. Land Use 55 Land Use Activity Centers Introduction. The VISION 202-0-2040 regional plan establishes a growth management, transportation, environmental, and economic strategy for the Puget Sound region of turban growth areas UGAs framed by open space and linked by efficient, high capacity transit. Wile the history an ehar-aeter- of development in Edmonds does not suppe# its desigfia4i0fi as Ofle Of these feg�&� ^�sTthe concepts developed in VISION2820-2040 are supported in the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The approach proposed in Edmonds is to strategically plan for future development in two activity centers located within the community. based an the Activity Gmete r 11111W Mow WIN N Activity Centers in Edmonds are intended to address the following framework goals: A-.-ooPedestrian-oriented -.Provide a pedestrian -oriented streetscape environment for residential and commercial activity. &ooMixed-use - Encourage mixed -use development patterns that provide a variety of commercial and residential opportunities, including both multi -family and small -lot single family development. G..00Communite character - Build on historical character and natural relationships, such as historic buildings, slopes with views, and the waterfront. D,00Multimodal -Encourage transit service and access. RooBalanced (re)development - Strategically plan for development and redevelopment that achieves a balanced and coordinated approach to economic development, housing, and cultural goals. F7oo Concurrence -Coordinate the plans and actions of both the public and private sectors. Q.00Urban design - Provide a context for urban design guidelines that maximize predictability while assuring a consistent and coherent character of development. oo Adaptive reuse - Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. 56 Land Use Land Use 57 58 Land Use Downtown/ -Waterfront Activity Center Plan Context. A number of public plans and projects have been taking shape in recent years, and these will have a profound impact on the future of the city's downtown/ -waterfront area. Some of these ongoing activities include: oo Increased concern about conflicts and safety issues related to the interaction of rail, ferry, vehicular and pedestrian traffic. oo Transportation planning and the Edmonds Crossing multimodal project which will move the existing ferry terminal at the base of Main Street to a new multimodal transportation center at Pt. Edwards. oo Continued development of the city's waterfront parks and walkways into an interconnected necklace of public spaces. oo The South County Senior Center is undertaking strategic planning to look at its facilities, programs, and services. oo Public access to the water and the natural beauty of the waterfront figures prominently in the Port of Edmonds' plans, including new plazas, improved walkways and public art. Public pedestrian/bicycle access across the railroad tracks to the waterfront, in the vicinity of the south end of the marina, near Marina Beach Park, should remain a high priority. oo Arts plans continue to be implemented throughout the downtown, including such projects as the Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Artworks facility, and the continued expansion of downtown festivals and events. oo Edmonds Community College has expanded its downtown presence through initiatives with the Edmonds Conference Center (formerly Edmonds Floral Conference Center) and is working with the Edmonds Center for the Arts to enhance overall operations. 9—.Downtown/Waterfront Vision. Taken together, the goals and policies for the Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center present a vision for Edmonds downtown/ -waterfront. By actively pursuing the ferry terminal's relocation, the City has set upon an ambitious and exciting course. It is a course that holds promise for the downtown/ -waterfront, but it is one that will require concerted action by the entire community, including local, state and federal public officials, business groups and citizens. While the challenges presented in this effort are substantial, the possible rewards are even greater, for with its existing physical assets, future opportunities and the energy of its citizens, Edmonds has the potential to create one of the region's most attractive and vital city centers. Components of the overall vision for the downtown/ -waterfront area include: oo The Edmonds Crossing multimodal transportation center provides convenient transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto and bicycle riders and makes Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal reduces negative impacts to downtown Edmonds while still providing a link between the Land Use 59 terminal and downtown Edmonds. The project provides the community with varied transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community. oo Downtown is extended westward and connected to the shoreline by positive mixed -use development as well as by convenient pedestrian routes. Redevelopment of the holding lanes and SR-104 is pursued after the ferry terminal relocates to Point Edwards. oo The shoreline features a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, marina facilities, and supporting uses. oo There is a more efficient transportation system featuring commuter and passenger trains, increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas. oo There is a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by both nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and that attracts visitors from throughout the region. oo The downtown supports a mix of uses, including traditional commercial and multi family development with new mixed -use development types. Single family neighborhoods are a part of this mix of uses, and contribute to the choice of housing and character of downtown. oo Opportunities for new development and redevelopment reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian -oriented character. Pedestrian -scale building height limits are an important part of this quality of life, and remain in effect. oo Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. oo Auto traffic is rerouted to minimize impact to residential neighborhoods. Downtown/Waterfront Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework ,goals for the downtown/waterfront area: '".-�-Downtown/-Waterfront Area Goal A. Te aehi&ve this vision, Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region. A.1. Ensure that the downtown/waterfront area continues — and builds on — its function as a key identity element for the Edmonds community. 60 Land Use A.2. Enhance Edmonds' visual identity y continuing its pedestrian -scale of downtown development, enhancing its shoreline character, and protecting and building on the strong visual quality of the "5th and Main" core. A.3. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region. AA Enhance shoreline features to include a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, natural features (such as the Edmonds Marsh), and marina facilities. Improve public access to the shoreline and link waterfront features bX establishing a continuous esplanade along the shoreline. The esplanade will be constructed over time through public improvements and Shoreline Master Program requirements placed on private development. A.5. Support the development and retention of significant public investments in the downtown/waterfront area, including government and cultural facilities that help draw residents and visitors to downtown. 90 A.6. Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the downtown, especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal B. Continue to plan for and implement improvements in the downtown/waterfront area that resolve safety conflicts while encouraging multi -modal transportation and access to the waterfront. B.1. Future development along the waterfront should support the continuation and compatible design of three regional facilities: Edmonds Crossing at Pt. Edwards: the Port of Edmonds and its master plan: and the regional parks, beaches and walkways making up the public shoreline. B.2. Plan for improvements to resolve transportation and safety conflicts in the downtown/waterfront area. B.63. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring improved bus service, edestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal BC. Continue to plan for and implement the Edmonds Crossing multimodal transportation center at Pt. Edwards — pursuing the design, permitting, land acquisition and development of the project. The completion of Edmonds Crossing will help address the competing needs of three regional facilities (transportation, parks and open space — including the Edmonds Marsh, and the Port of Edmonds) while providing opportunities for redevelopment and linkage between downtown Edmonds and its waterfront. Land Use 61 14C.1. Utilize the Point Edwards site to its best community and regional potential by developing a multimodal transit center with compatible development in the surrounding area. In addition to the regional benefits arising from its multi modal transportation function, an essential community benefit is in removing intrusive ferry traffic from the core area which serves to visually and physically separate downtown from the waterfront. B73-.C.2. Establish a Point Edwards multimodal transportation center which provides convenient transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto, pedestrians and bicycle riders and makes Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal should be planned to reduce negative impacts to downtown Edmonds — such as ar�paration/safety concerns and conflicts with other regional facilities — while providing the community unique transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community. B4-.C.3. Extend Downtown westward and connect it to the shoreline encouraging mixed -use development and pedestrian -oriented amenities and streetscape improvements, particularly along Dayton and Main Streets. Development in this area should draw on historical design elements found in the historic center of Edmonds to ensure an architectural tie throughout the Downtown Area. Pursue redevelopment of SR-104 and the existingholding olding lanes once the ferry terminal moves to Point Edwards. B75-.C.4. Improve traffic conditions by removing ferry traffic impacts from the downtown core. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal C. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity. C.1. Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce Edmonds' attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character. Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. These historic structures are a key component of the small town character of Edmonds and it's economic viability. Height limits that reinforce and require pedestrian -scale development are an important part of this quality of life, and should be implemented through zoning regulations and design guidelines. C.2. Provide for the gradual elimination of large and inadequately landscaped paved areas. C.3. Provide pedestrian -oriented amenities for citizens and visitors throughout the downtown/waterfront area, including such things as: 62 Land Use • Weather protection, • Street trees and flower baskets, Street furni • Public art and art integrated into private developments, • Pocket parks, • Si.ngnage and other way -finding devices, • Restrooms. CA Strive for the elimination of overhead wires and poles whenever possible. C.5. Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation. C.6. Develop sign i regulations that support the pedestrian character of downtown, encouraging si rg_iage to assist in locating businesses and public and cultural facilities while discouraging obtrusive and garish signage which detracts from downtown pedestrian and cultural amenities. C.7. Provide lighting for streets and public areas that is designed to promote comfort, security, and aesthetic beauty. 90 C.8. Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere with pedestrian activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown area. Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal D. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. Emphasize and plan for links between the retail core and these supporting areas. 90 D.1. Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing, commercial, and cultural activities. ao Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal E. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multi -family residential uses. eo Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal F. Develop gateway/entrance areas into downtown which serve complementary purposes (e.g. convenience shopping, community activities). Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal G. Explore alternative development opportunities in the waterfront area, such as specifically encouraging arts -related and arts -complementing uses. Land Use 63 G.1. Improve and encourage economic development opportunities by providingspace pace for local businesses and cottage industries and undertaking supportingpublic improvement projects. Of particular significance is the enhancement of economic development opportunities resulting from the Edmonds Crossing project and the enhancement of Edmonds as an arts and water -oriented destination. Multi -modal D—.Transportation. Primary goals of the City's Downtown Waterfront Plan include integrating the downtown core with the waterfront, improving pedestrian access and traffic circulation, and encouraging mixed -use development. Current conditions limit the city's ability to achieve these plan goals by making it difficult to move between the two areas, thereby minimizing the value of the shoreline as a public resource and amenity while adversely affecting the potential for redevelopment. A number of studies and public involvement projects have been completed to determine how to meet the variety of transportation needs that converge within Downtown Edmonds. Following an initial 1992 Ferry Relocation Feasibility Study and a visioning focus group convened by Edmonds' Mayor in April 1992, the importance of the conflicting transportation needs culminated in the City of Edmonds, Washington State Ferries, and Community Transit signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in November 1993. The MOU called for the cooperative development of solutions to the conflicts between the City's growth plans and ferry traffic in particular. In response to that agreement, preliminary engineering and environmental analysis of alternatives began in late 1993. hi 1994, the Edmonds City Council held public hearings on the possibility of relocating the existing ferry terminal and incorporating a new terminal within a larger multimodal project. As a result of the hearings, the Council expressed support for a regional multimodal facility. The Council also approved the 1994 Edmonds Downtown Waterfront Plan which specifically supported the facility's location at Pt. Edwards. Further environmental review and facility definition resulted in a recommendation that an alternative site (other than the existing Main Street location) should be developed as a multimodal facility serving ferry, rail, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle travel needs. Several alternative sites for the relocated ferry terminal and the proposed multimodal center were evaluated as part of the early environmental screening process. During this screening process, federal, state, regional, and local regulatory agencies —including affected Tribes— provided input regarding issues that could impact selecting reasonable alternatives. Based on this extensive screening process, two alternatives were recommended for further analysis in the Environmental Impact Statement process. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued on February 25, 1998, and the Final EIS was issued on November 10, 2004. Pt. Edwards is the preferred alternative for a multimodal terminal site. In addition to the transportation benefits of moving the existing ferry terminal, a number of redevelopment opportunities will result within the downtown waterfront area. These range from park and public access improvements to opportunities for significant redevelopment and connections between the waterfront and downtown. 64 Land Use P U E r S0t)n0 0cmrrsao Nof (Part of fxhlln9 d{1CkC'k'4 fanyFqMT) LOW �re Park (South ChM as -�i' � BfiatkhlY� Londrnp - Parh{Ha") .r iroMOOK -_ - j'�I y. strfan E S5 L P2tk p Figure 110. Integration of the remaining ferry pier structure into surrounding parks will be a key public benefit and opportunity. Edmonds Crossing. Edmonds Crossing is a multimodal transportation center proposed to be constructed at Point Edwards, the former UNOCAL oil storage facility south of the Edmonds Marina. This multimodal transportation center will provide the capacity to respond to growth while providing improved opportunities for connecting various forms of travel, including rail, ferry, bus, bicycle, walking and ridesharing. The project is supported by local, regional, and state plans, including the Puget Sound Regional Council's Destination 2030 Metropolitan Transportation and VISION 2020 plan; Washington State Ferries' (WSF) System Plan for 1999-2018; Snohomish County's countywide Transportation Plan; the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan; and the Port of Edmonds Strategic Plan and Master Plan. Edmonds Crossing will provide: oo Intersection improvements at Pine Street and SR-104; oo Interconnection of Amtrak service to Chicago and Vancouver, B.C., Sounder commuter rail service between Everett and Seattle, and other regional transportation modes; oo Connections to the regional transit system with direct bus service to communities throughout the urban growth area; oo Enhanced ability for people to rideshare, bicycle and walk to connect with travel opportunities at the multimodal center; oo Improved safety and travel on Edmonds local streets and along SR-104 between the ferry terminal and 1-5. oo Linkage between Navy facilities at Everett and on the Kitsap peninsula. Land Use 65 4 Linkage between N., T f e l;ties .,t Ewr-ett ...a the K tsap pe „1 Figure 11. :+c' .05 ,seM 94Mw`r a5�: �� tigJ • ea w I U"GCAL F4& i to Ge 1 OrKww) Manna parkBea Park 5nonM � [ F � 7,+rtur[artf i imrtxq' hwp Ao�t mJM1 ��. I TM�C�� #��•IY�+ 8'd �eey Gy1� FauraS�Y E&nor % ,koar4ig hlesyl! M1�J f � w�rfe c MOZ FNErYw e tie' Edmonds Crossing preferred alternative " from the 2004 FEIS. 66 Land Use The project includes: oo A ferry terminal; oo A train station; oo A transit center for bus and regional transit, as well as the opportunity for riders to connect to downtown businesses via a local circulator service; oo The flexibility to operate the facility to respond to changing travel demands; oo Safety features including grade separation of train traffic from other modes of travel, designated vehicle parking and holding areas, and improved passenger waiting areas. While the Edmonds Crossing project will directly benefit the transportation system, the project will also provide significant benefits to downtown Edmonds. Completion of the project provides an opportunity to redevelop the existing ferry terminal facilities and the related holding lanes in the downtown area. Providing a connection from the new multimodal terminal to downtown Edmonds will potentially bring more visibility and visitors to the downtown area. R.-Plan Policies and Implementation Strategy. The vision and goals for Downtown Waterfront Downtowne fiPJr<r« hq�IJarJff d xwarq r%JMR M1 YJfrrrDesign rryrrti *'l�i—z- rw u. , ConcepU dr 67J�'C'fn"Arl;A ri,ry 1'rrrpJr�l l I tn� _ pr�d�rsfrlun rnJrJret7Joa., WdirtrflYild f"rJrftrJkfefl' � ka }t "• COMPPiturrir ar s Twioif �Ixiprj # • wet I� .k! ; ■_ ' F Y # ■ . i # # vC� # ■ ■ i#■ � ,�a'x-,Slxlrimxfiaf ■ , * * ■ COrwSnC� T'+11�JJr{j� „rr1 dYvt • Yri4� v ■ fre&Tar[ 'f S,r{Jfi({CJ4X1'r. i r " FLrq � - f fiJJr�rrrrf��iiJ1f � ■ Jir4 i �J[YJ<�.Ylf�fllrw[f11�' CfY'MR�p #' - rr! i'ir,Qtf+lfrp y ■ A4 to ('rwridor.' j - 3r/M7lHOka [.ololoer'Ofm —' — GeilelkaY.S' ' WnO rrph6� f �: � - #k+fifNriilrt i'VrJr ecY imi ii:.2.-_.. AV �-_' !rl-ffArfAtir fleivoor v�� '71lliFiE � i'sYAJ' PILM NFuflify ib, r�'rfyS[ifJ�'7�d7f Gf Jr+7fJN 7YN'd Land Use 67 Activity Center are designed to present a coherent vision for future development in the area. To implement this vision, a series of policies and an implementation strategy are intended to guide future public and private actions. Implementation Strategy. Key issues tied to the viability and health of the downtown waterfront area include using the Edmonds Crossing project to help resolve transportation issues, linking downtown with the waterfront, and taking advantage of redevelopment opportunities arising from emerging trends and public investments. The largest single factor affecting the downtown waterfront area is the timing and construction of the Edmonds Crossing project. Because of this, a two -phased downtown waterfront redevelopment strategy is envisioned. The first phase includes actions taken before the existing ferry terminal is relocated to the Pt. Edwards site, and is intended to include actions taken to support ongoing redevelopment and arts -related improvements downtown. This phase will also set the framework for subsequent redevelopment after the terminal's relocation. The second phase is aimed at comprehensive redevelopment to link the downtown with the waterfront, better utilize shoreline resources, increase economic viability and provide the setting for a broad range of community functions. Short Term Actions. Short term actions are those actions that can take place prior to construction of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 5-7 years. 1. Plan for the Edmonds Crossing project at Pt. Edwards which includes relocation of the existing ferry terminal. Planning should also include reuse of the current ferry terminal and related holding area. 2. Improve the existing downtown rail station between Dayton and Main Streets in order to better accommodate inter -city passenger and commuter rail service, including provisions for bus and commuter traffic as well as pedestrian connections to the waterfront and downtown. During the short term planning period, evaluate the feasibility of retaining a commuter rail presence downtown after the construction of Edmonds Crossing.. 3. Plan for future joint public/private development of the area between SR-104 and the railroad tracks. Planning activities could potentially include infrastructure planning, property acquisition, parking management, development incentives and guidelines or modifications to land use regulations (such as zoning or master planning). Although Amtrak and commuter rail service will be included as a part of the Edmonds Crossing project, the City and transit service providers should examine whether a commuter rail stop can be retained between Dayton and Main Streets in order to provide improved service and stimulate potential redevelopment of the surrounding area. 4. Upgrade secondary downtown streets for pedestrians. Implement the city's public urban design plan and street tree plan while expanding public amenities and streetscape improvements in areas where these do not already exist. These improvements are particularly needed along Main and Dayton Streets in the area between downtown and the waterfront in order to improve pedestrian connections between downtown and the waterfront area. Pedestrian improvements should be combined with traffic improvement projects where applicable. 5. Continue to promote shoreline management and public access to the city's beaches, parks, and walkways. 68 Land Use 6. Continue implementing a continuous shoreline walkway (boardwalk/esplanade) from Brackett's Landing North to Point Edwards. Work with the Port of Edmonds to integrate recreation and marina functions into the long term plan. 7. Work with the Senior Center to plan for long term needs for the senior center facilities and programs. 8. Encourage a variety of housing to be developed as part of new development and redevelopment of downtown properties. Housing should be provided to serve a diverse community, including single family homes, multi family apartments and condominiums, housing as part of mixed use developments, and housing connected with live/work developments that could also encourage an arts - oriented community in the downtown area. A special focus for arts -supporting live/work arrangements could be in the corridor and nearby residential areas linking downtown with the Edmonds Center for the Arts. 9. Begin improvements to mitigate ferry terminal traffic (and other traffic) increases, as envisioned in the Edmonds Crossing project and the transportation element of the comprehensive plan. 10. Develop "gateways" at key entrances to the downtown area which enhance the identity and sense of place for downtown. Gateways should signal that visitors are entering downtown Edmonds, and should include elements such as public art, landscaping, signage and directional ("way -finding") aids. Long Term Actions. Long term actions are those actions that can take place during or after construction of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 7-20 years. Complete a multi modal transportation center at Point Edwards for: oo Rail (inter -city and commuter) oo Ferry oo Park & Ride/Auto oo Bus oo Pedestrian and shuttle connections to other features and amenities. 2. Complete redevelopment of the Point Edwards site consistent with an overall master plan that provides for commercial or mixed use development compatible with the Edmonds Crossing project. 3. Coordinate circulation and public parking with Port development. 4. Continue to protect and enhance existing wetlands and continue to develop supporting non - intrusive interpretive trails and exhibits. 5. Continue development of a "necklace" of shoreline parks with improvements, focusing on missing links in the park and walkway system. Retain and expand existing parks, providing linkages whenever property acquisitions or easements become available for public use. 6. Encourage the development of centralized parking facilities as part of redevelopment projects. Under the right circumstances, these types of facilities can provide an efficient mechanism for consolidating expensive parking improvements while freeing up land for more intensive and desirable uses that support local housing, commercial, and pedestrian activities. Public/private partnerships should be explored when the opportunity arises, both in private and public projects (e.g. the Land Use 69 commuter rail station downtown). Centralized parking facilities could be built as part of a master - planned mixed -use development. 7. Redevelop the existing ferry terminal site at the base of Main Street according to a master plan after the existing ferry terminal has been relocated to Point Edwards. This is a unique location, situated in the midst of a continuous park and beach setting, and provides opportunities for public/private partnerships. Ideas to be pursued include public "festival" entertainment or activity space, visitor moorage, park and public walkways, and other uses that would encourage this as to become a destination drawing people from south along the waterfront and eastward up into downtown. Redevelopment of this area should be done in a manner that is sensitive to and enhances the views down Main Street and from the adjoining parks and public areas. 8. Redevelop the area from the east side of SR-104 to the railroad tracks, from Harbor Square to Main Street, according to a mixed use master plan. This area could provide a significant opportunity for public/private partnerships. Under the right circumstances, consolidated parking or a pedestrian crossing to the waterfront could be possible as part of a redevelopment project. Every opportunity should be taken to improve the pedestrian streetscape in this area in order to encourage pedestrian activity and linkages between downtown and the waterfront. Uses developed along public streets should support pedestrian activity and include amenities such as street trees, street furniture, flowers and mini parks. Main and Dayton Streets should receive special attention for public art or art integrated into private developments to reinforce the visual arts theme for downtown. Redevelopment of this area should also take advantage of the ability to reconfigure and remove the ferry holding lanes paralleling SR-104 once the Edmonds Crossing project is developed. 9. Support redevelopment efforts that arise out of planning for the long term needs of the senior center. These plans should reinforce the center's place in the public waterfront, linking the facility to the walkways and parks along the shoreline. 10. New development and redevelopment in the downtown waterfront area should be designed to meet overall design objectives and the intent of the various "districts" described for the downtown area. JON mom top -in "M ORTME -Mr. MIAMI .rrirs . .......... Wi�11111,11,111,11�iL!111,111�� ............. WON ON 70 Land Use h • ,/Mar , PI....ST.......... �!!f Land Use 71 it's Height limits that development eeeaemie viabilit-y. r-eiafer-ee a -ad r-equir-e pedestfia-a seale are an important this life, be iMpleMented tIIFOttgII part of design lehaes quality of and should zoning regulations an gtti ily t the ..1,,,n. ing , aeeemmed4e needs of a pepttWien. ..,to .F ,.,it ineluding sueh things . area, Ge Street trees and flower baskets-, Ge Pocket parks, ......... E.2 i. Pr-evide lighting for- stfeets and publie areas that is designed to pt:efnete ,seeufi> n,1 aesthetie l.ea+Ay Downtown Waterfront Districts. In addition to the goals and policies for the downtown waterfront area, the Comprehensive Plan Map depicts a number of districts in the downtown waterfront area. These districts are described below. Retail Core. The area immediately surrounding the fountain at 5t' and Main and extending along Main Street and Fifth Avenue is considered the historic center of Edmonds and building heights shall be pedestrian in scale and compatible with the historic character of this area. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses and the entry situated at street level. Uses are encouraged to be retail -compatible (i.e. retail or compatible service — e.g. art galleries, 72 Land Use restaurants, real estate sales offices and similar uses that provide storefront windows and items for sale to the public that can be viewed from the street). The street front fagades of buildings must provide a high percentage of transparent window area and pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian -scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. Buildings situated around the fountain square must be orientated to the fountain and its associated pedestrian area. Arts Center Corridor. The corridor along 4th Ave N between the retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Performing Arts. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses, with commercial entries being located at street level. Building design and height shall be compatible with the goal of creating a pedestrian oriented arts corridor while providing incentives for the adaptive reuse of existing historic structures. Building entries for commercial buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian - scale design features, differentiating the lower floor from the upper floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. The streetscape should receive special attention, using trees, landscaping, and public art to encourage pedestrian activity. Private development projects should also be encouraged to integrate art into their building designs. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow for "live -work" arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a residence as principal uses. Uses supporting the arts center should be encouraged — such as restaurants, cafes, galleries, live/work use arrangements, and B&Bs. Downtown Mired Commercial. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses., with commercial entries at street level. Buildings can be built to the property line. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development. The first floor of buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian -scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area that is located behind commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow for "live -work" arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a residence as principal uses. Downtown Mired Residential. In this area, commercial uses would be allowed but not required (i.e. buildings could be entirely commercial or entirely residential, or anything in between). Height and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial District. Buildings facing the Dayton Street corridor should provide a pedestrian - friendly streetscape, providing pedestrian amenities and differentiating the ground floor from upper building levels. Downtown Master Plan. The properties between SR-104 and the railroad, including Harbor Square, the Edmonds Shopping Center (former Safeway site), and extending past the Commuter Rail parking area up to Main Street. This area is appropriate for design -driven master planned development which provides for a mix of uses and takes advantage of its strategic location between the waterfront and downtown. The location of existing taller buildings on the waterfront, Land Use 73 and the site's situation at the bottom of "the Bowl," could enable a design that provides for higher buildings outside current view corridors. Any redevelopment in this area should be oriented to the street fronts, and provide pedestrian -friendly walking areas, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Development design should also not ignore the railroad side of the properties, since this is an area that provides a "first impression" of the city from railroad passengers and visitors to the waterfront. Art work, landscaping, and modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project. Shoreline Commercial. The waterfront, west of the railroad tracks between the public beaches and the Port (currently zoned CW). Consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, this area should allow a mix of public uses, supporting commercial uses, and water -oriented and water -dependent uses. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development while providing incentives to encourage public view corridors. Roof and building forms should be an important consideration in design guidelines for this area, because of its high sensitivity and proximity to public open spaces. Redevelopment should result in singular, landmark buildings of high quality design which take advantage of the visibility and physical environment of their location, and which contribute to the unique character of the waterfront. Pedestrian amenities and weather protection must be provided for buildings located along public walkways and street fronts. Master Plan Development. The waterfront area south of Olympic Beach, including the Port of Edmonds and the Point Edwards and multi modal developments. This area is governed by master plans for the Port of Edmonds, Point Edwards, and the Edmonds Crossing project as described in an FEIS issued on November 10, 2004. These areas are also developed consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, as it applies. Downtown Convenience Commercial. This is the south end of 5th Ave, south of Walnut. Commercial uses would be required on the first floor, but auto -oriented uses would be permitted in addition to general retail and service uses. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses. Weather protection would still be required, but to a lesser degree than the retail core and only when the building was adjacent to the sidewalk. Height and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial District. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially -designated property, floor area that is located behind the commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use. Planned Residential -Office. Several properties lie along the railroad on the west side of Sunset Ave between existing commercial zoning and Edmonds Street. This area is appropriate for small- scale development which provides for a mix of limited office and residential uses which provide a transition between the more intensive commercial uses along Main Street and the residential uses along Sunset Ave. Because the area of this designation is located adjacent to commercial development to the south, the railroad to the west, and is near both multiple family and single- family residential development, this area should act as a transition between theses uses. Building design for this area should be sensitive to the surrounding commercial, multiple family and single-family character. Downtown Design Objectives. As a companion to the districts outlined above, general design objectives are included for the downtown waterfront area. These objectives are intended to encourage high quality, well designed projects to be developed in the downtown/ -waterfront area 74 Land Use that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. These design i objectives can be found in the Urban Design section of this document. Land Use 75 MANOR W.I." MEN MEN "I'll mll . ......... . Pedestrian Aeeess and Conneetions o � � i a residential .pedestrian defining the Gfoss key inter-seetions b sidewalks, 0 Stu Boa by the and street edge. use materials, o f spoeia Sig walks a4 t-o,�,� .efAs shotild level to be directly ft-om maximized, enabling the sidewalk. d. Eneoufage the eaeh retail or commercial space tFaasit by at street to aceessed use of mass pr-oviding easy aeeess -pleasant waiting areas. 76 Land Use . ` TV 01i. � �OMM� r } r � '� L'. fi�/ �,f �►4sss�g hafge bttilding be in the downtown hafge a. masses shall a -voided waterfront building be her-izzontally to aetivity een�er-. the masses should subdivided ver-tieally aa&or- b. Reqttir-e litiman in building design that the differ-enee r-epliea4e smaller- se between seale elements r-einfor-ee e,lest,.:. a st,.eetseape and the upper- levels of a 1.,,ildi g different trim, to break building ifi4o wall materials with windows and up apparent When the does lead itself to masses smalle building elements. size of eonfigur-ation of a site not these teehfii"es be to vafying fFiendly altema4ive should employed obtain a pedestFian result. detailing to break the the ioter-est to its fefm. up t, Create and reinforce the Use fofms to identify over-all massing of t:E)of and add shape and L,,,,,,a scale of the building-. ing differ-ent funetional the building. e. r-oof ,l D-e,,:,le ways for- addt;l.na programs or- afeas within light to e,#e . the build;v,,. teffaees, > improve the view of buildings from above , well as from the st..eets, ape i - ------ - ------------ Land Use 79 rirwon w rur _ eyr i A. The materials that make up the &Eter-ior- faeades of a building also help Elope the s ale ra s,..ie of-t e st...,et -e .-re pr-ovie„ao . ; r ; the faeade to help r-edttee the bttlk of lafgef buildings. Rom the fo�adatioo to the r-oof eaves —,a 80 Land Use Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor 4—.Medical/Hi2hway 99 Vision. The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high -intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian -friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park -like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: ae Goals for- the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal A. Te-eExpand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center_ ,;e--Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal B. Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian -friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter- connected development_ B.1. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office. and service businesses, supported by nearbv residents and visitors from other parts of the region. KL.J-.a-B.2. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher -intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. ae—B.3. Provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a ag t�Y along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds.; Land Use 81 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal C. Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets_ C.1. Uses adioining the Hiehwav 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center — and adjoining focus areas alone the Highway 99 Corridor — should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal D. Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians_ D.1. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service_ pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high -capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. 99 ; Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal E.To provide a buffer between the high -intensity, high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West_ E.1. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering and pedestrian -scale streetscape design. Ge--Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal F.; To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for both neighborhood conservation and targeted redevelopment that includes an appropriate mix of single family and multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities_ F.1. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses. 9e ; 82 Land Use Ge To pr-evide a pleasant exper4enee for- pedestrians and meter-ists aleng fnajer- streets and in planned aetivity eenter-, a -ad provide a gateway aleng 212th St+eet SW iRtE) the City Of EdmeaE6MedicaI/Hh!hwaY 99 Activity Center Goal G. 14.2. To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. . _ . erarss�:�s�asress�eerseer.��rs�r:�se•rs 14.5. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. Land Use 83 14.7. Suppoi4 a mix of uses without ener-oftehing into single family neighbor -hoods. Uses adjoining single family neighbor -hoods should provide tr-a*sitioas between more intensive uses areas thr-ough a eombin4ioa of building design, landseaping a -ad visual bugafing, a -ad pedestrian seale streetscape design. - .. - - - ON OWN, III I 84 Land Use J� Goals for- the Highway 99 Corridor Vision. Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential neighborhoods. Historically, the corridor has developed in a patchwork of uses, without a clear focus or direction. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City established a task force in 2003-2004, resulting in the Highway 99 Enhancement Report and a related economic analysis. During this process, local residents were contacted and asked to participate in two focus groups to identify current problems and future aspirations for the corridor. After this preliminary survey with the residents, the City invited business owners to participate in two charrette meetings to brainstorm ideas and evaluate possible ways to induce redevelopment in the area. After concepts were developed, Berk & Associates, an economics consultant, performed a market assessment of the enhancement strategy. The following diagram summarizes the general approach that resulted from this work: a series of focus areas providing identity and a clustering of activity along the corridor, providing opportunities for improved economic development while also improving linkages between the corridor and surroundin 212" S1 Focus Areas along the Corridor FO r l} { [Rj jggUjh#r prridor aw Psrticularly inlCIVI,L 61g !31011u Ohs a," �F1'i L�L7r'4Sj�C,ifl]l ;i"SL "jai' 4t1�er ' 'r l>`hc CC1CYj �C�C�tI �CI'�{ry 1��.13 7 i�qC�,�� [�4'Lpy�lT7Lf F1ti rCjIT$s,UCS-)rIa�T]'�IS:i�rdCI{'rLS� & a!; we as I"'c�4 t c�ft i rtil l s` �4ii Chill-21CWT_ pcdesirian characleristic5 as well as 212" S1 a 1 6"" Sl Hospital Cof 114m y- 3}- and Fameiy Retail Hospital Cofr9rfluoiron% � and Famiiy Reta;l e2.,Y St center e29` St "Ck'TI'VlflryWk4mhIiJ'LN 19REff1Vc "Info ationa?Di1151, rec{aknife the folloWln;l UTCEIS: From the north to the south % -c "Inforfmationar District' rMILITkiZC the COI OWi11aTO,li: Thc hospital Crlrornunity and Vamily Ft IMI ['enter; 23T; St Tllo [ImI tal ['nnlmunily and Ilan �ih llr i�Yt1 Fl:il 1)istricl" 23T; St -Ark.t;: • ThL "International 1)istrie(" art.aj-l1L� Ri.sidentlal Area WHO CeptuLn • ThL Rt'rideotial ,area W04116-fWl4Niilerdal RC (i C %,' 14)1) nI a 11 VI I Ot el S 1,114r$Ylh%frii�gt Area. RC(iCvc1opnIC11011OtelS Improvement area. 234' Sf 2L h, St 23 Wos, St 24(Y' Sf 224" Sf Resodentoal A rlea Relari Center Resodentoal Area �x�ldfnfi efrraCZ116W om Rede velopmenllf-folets ComhWxui2&n&nf Area Rede velopmenllf-folets lmpmvemenf Area g residential areas. Land Use Focus Areas along the Corridor 16"Sl Highway 99 Corridor Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the Highway 99 Corridor. Highway 99 Corridor Goal A. Improve access and circulation. Access to businesses for both pedestrians and automobiles is difficult along major portions of the corridor. The inability of pedestrians to cross the street and for automobiles to make safe turns is a critical limitation on enhanced development of the corridor into a stronger economic area. Better pedestrian crossings are also needed to support transit use, especially as Highway 99 becomes the focus of future high capacity transit initiatives. A.1. Provide for pedestrian access and circulation within development focus areas, while coordinating with high -capacity transit alongthe he Highway 99 corridor. A.2. Use traffic sianals. access management. and rechannelization to facilitate pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic capacity along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with WSDOT on these issues, and to develop a circulation management plan. In some cases the impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by access management, rechannelization and other measures. A.3. Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian -friendly (e.g., add trees and landscaping,) through a combination of development requirements and — when available — public investment. A.4. Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existingdevelopment evelopment while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Highway 99 Corridor Goal B. The City should consider the different sections along the corridor and emphasize their unique opportunities rather than view the corridor as an undifferentiated continuum. Street improvements and, in some cases regulatory measures can encourage these efforts. Focus on specific nodes or segments within the corridor. Identity elements such as signage should indicate that the corridor is within the City of Edmonds, and show how connections can be made to downtown and other Edmonds locations. B.1. New development should be high -quality and varied — not generic — and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. B.2. The Citv will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor. When these uses are proposed to be located within one of the corridor focus areas. these uses should also comply with the goals and policies outlined for each focus area. 86 Land Use Land Use 87 B.3. Provide a system of "focus areas" along the corridor which provide opportunities for clusters of development, or themed development areas. Providing focus points for development is intended to help encourage segmentation of the long Highway 99 corridor into distinct activity nodes which will encourage an Edmonds character and identity for the corridor. Concepts for the different focus areas identified in -the "Highway 99 Corridor Vision" include the following: The "Hospital Community and Family WIN Iffl, WIMINIMMIN, M-7-p r M1,0- -a- WAIN W III M- 47t : � 88 Land Use ,;e—Highway 99 Corridor Goal C. Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. During the City's Highway 99 Task Force work, residents noted that they needed a number of services that are not presently provided along the corridor. This can provide an opportunity that might be part of a larger business strategy. At the same time, new development should contribute to the residential quality of the adjacent neighborhoods. C.1. Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses. C.2. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially -zoned properties Highway 99 Corridor Goal A Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. For example, a tall hotel or large scale retail development may be an excellent addition to the south of the corridor while some small restaurants and convenience shops might cater to hospital employees, trail users and local residents near 216th Street SW. Where needed, the City should consider zoning changes to encourage mixed use or taller development to occur. D.1. Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor. Establish uniform si�nage regulations for all properties within the corridor area which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter and distraction to the public. D.2. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: D.2.a. Supported by adequate services and facilities; D.2.b. Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, articulated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. D.2.c. Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including; automobile, transit and pedestrian access. D.2.d. Designedprovide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. Land Use 89 'NO.. .. . 90 Land Use ��Tbl! f AETA11 FE1'k7.�NM1ERr9 Elf15TIM[1 � NEW MXED USE RE9r�7FNTN1/, ' row-LEYf ALEW rRAFM tZHT WA 1. Fr�outs sPEEO, AlIPf2OH� TRAFFIC AeeFss , Y4 eV3m�E55 1 A wPEDEFTHJAR ENMROM mr Si q- PWstffm R€s1[1 ML CCWJ.kx Jmwftr k AREAS MTH AMROVED RAAFRG A PECEST m ARFEB&PROM SURP4WMMNG RE3i0ENTULAREAS Land Use 91 2381h St mu -moo 240th St 1"Matly �W" 92 Land Use • • . i -Ill qwA Eli r •ENTAW. . • •MOTMf•iIS.L� Land Use 93 Master Planned Development Master Planned Developments are areas dominated by a special set of circumstances which allow for a highly coordinated, planned development, with phasing over time. These master plans describe a special purpose and need for the facilities and uses identified, and provide a clear design which fits with the character of their surroundings. The master plans describe the land use parameters and relationships to guide future development on the sites (height, bulk, types and arrangements of uses, access and circulation). All development within areas identified in each master plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the master plan. When located within a designated activity center, development within a master plan area shall be consistent with the goals and policies identified for the surrounding activity center. The following Master Plans are adopted by reference: A. Edmonds-Woodway High School B. Stevens Hospital D EB. City Park D C. Pine Ridge Park E—D. Southwest County Park ! InM. er. r. .r�ns�rrr�:ee�ss!�s•�re!efrrz rN •-Mr. In addition to the master plans listed above, master plans can also be implemented through zoning contracts or other implementation actions, rather than being adopted as part of the plan. In these cases, the master plan must still be consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies for the area. 94 Land Use Residential Development & General. The City of Edmonds is unique among cities in Washington st-ateState. Located on the shores of Puget Sound, it has been able to retain (largely through citizen input) a small town, quality atmosphere rare for cities so close to major urban centers. The people of Edmonds value these amenities and have spoken often in surveys and meetings over the years. The geographical location also influences potential growth of Edmonds. Tucked between Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Puget Sound, the land available for annexation and development is limited. Living standards in Edmonds are high, and this combined with the limited development potential, provides the opportunity for constructive policy options to govern future development. This will ensure an even better quality of life for its citizens. Edmonds consists of a mixture of people of all ages, incomes and living styles. It becomes a more humane and interesting city as it makes room for and improves conditions for all citizens. When the City's first comprehensive plan completed under the State Growth Management Act was adopted in 1995, the City adopted plan designations for single family areas that were based in large measure on historical development patterns, which often recognized development limitations due to environmentally sensitive areas (slopes, landslide hazards, streams, etc.). hi the years since the first GMA comprehensive plans were approved by local jurisdictions, there have been a number of cases brought before the State's GMA Hearings Boards. The direction provided by the GMA and these subsequent "elaborations" via the Hearings Board challenges can be summarized as: The GMA requires 4 dwelling units per acre as the minimum urban residential density in urban areas such as Edmonds. 2. All land within the urban area must be designated at appropriate urban densities. Calculating average density across an entire subarea or city does not meet this test — for example you cannot use higher -density multi family areas in one part of a city to justify lower -density single family areas elsewhere in the city. The GMA Hearings Board decision in Bremerton, et al. v. Kitsap County, CPSGMHB Case #495-3-0039c (Final Decision and Order, October 6, 1995, p.35) includes this statement: The Board instead adopts as a general rule a "bright line " at four net dwelling units per acre. Any residential pattern at that density, or higher, is clearly compact urban development and satisfies the low end of the range required by the Act. Any larger urban lots will be subject to increased scrutiny by the Board to determine if the number, locations, configurations and rationale for such lot sizes complies with the goals and requirements of the Act, and the jurisdiction 's ability to meet its obligations to accept any allocated share of county -wide population. Any new residential land use pattern within a UGA that is less dense is not a compact urban development pattern, constitutes urban sprawl, and is prohibited. There are exceptions to this general rule. For example, 1- or 2.5- acre lots may be appropriate in an urban setting in order to avoid excessive Land Use 95 development pressures on or near environmentally sensitive areas. However, this circumstance can be expected to be infrequent within the UGA and must not constitute a pattern over large areas. With this as background, the City's review and update of its comprehensive plan has attempted to combine an assessment of its large lot zoning (RS-12, RSW-12 and RS-20) with an update of its critical areas inventories and regulations. The inventories, based on data available from City and other sources, were not available to the City when the 1995 comprehensive plan was adopted. These inventories provide information necessary to refine the City's single family plan designations and comprehensive plan map. In preparing its updated comprehensive plan map, an overlay was done of the 2004 critical areas inventory with currently designated large lot single family areas. City staff analyzed the pattern of critical areas compared with land use designations, and applied the following logic to identify areas that could and could not be justified for continuing to be designated for large lot single family development. 1. Staff used the city's GIS system to overlay the preliminary critical areas inventory with existing zoning (which is consistent with the current comprehensive plan). 2. In reviewing the existing large -lot plan and zoning designations (plan designations of "Single Family — Large Lot" equate to RS-12, RSW-12, or RS-20 zoning), the location of large -lot designations was compared to patterns of critical areas. Patterns of critical areas — i.e. where combinations of critical areas were present (e.g. slopes and habitat, or streams and wetlands, etc.) or where extensive areas were covered by critical areas — were considered sufficient justification to continue large -lot single family designations. Larger lot sizes provide more opportunity to avoid disturbance of existing natural features — particularly vegetative cover — and provide an opportunity to maintain linkages between critical areas and habitat. Larger lots sizes in areas subject to landslide hazard also reduce the need to disturb existing vegetation and slopes, and also reduce the probability that continued slide activity will harm people or residences. This approach is consistent with the logic and analysis contained in the City's Best Available Science Report (EDAW, November 2004) accompanying the adoption of the City's updated critical areas regulations. 4. Small, isolated critical areas were not considered sufficient to justify continued large -lot single family designations. 5. Lots where the designation is to be changed are grouped by subdivision or neighborhood segment, so that streets or changes in lot pattern define the boundaries. 6. In at least a couple of situations, areas were included for re -designation when the development pattern indicated that a substantial number of lots already existed that were smaller than 12,000 sq. ft. in area. 7. Where patterns of critical areas exist, at least a tier of lots (using similar groupings as those used in #5 above) is maintained bordering the critical areas. This is based on the following logic: 96 Land Use As the Best Available Science Report and updated critical areas regulations indicate, the City's intent is to take a conservative approach to protecting critical areas. Relatively large buffers are proposed (consistent with the science), but these are balanced by the ability of existing developed areas to continue infill activity in exchange for enhancing critical areas buffers. The goal is to obtain enhanced protection of resources within the city, while recognizing infill development must continue to occur. However, a conservative approach to resource protection implies that the City be cautious in making wholesale changes in zoning that could result in more development impacts to critical areas. This is particularly true since the buffers proposed in the new regulations are substantial increases over previous regulations; without larger lot sizes in areas that are substantially impacted by critical areas, there would be little or no opportunity to mitigate critical areas impacts — especially when surrounding areas have already been developed. Caution is also needed considering that the mapped inventory is based on general sources from other agencies and is likely to underestimate the amount of steep slopes, for example. Following this work, a map of proposed changes was prepared which identified single family large lot zones that could not be justified based on the presence of critical areas. These areas (comprising over 500 acres) have been re -designated as either Single Family — Urban 3 or Single Family Master Plan in the updated comprehensive plan. Current Plan Designation Proposed Plan Designation Corresponding Zoning Single Family — Small Lot ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 1 RS-6, RS-8 .................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 2 RS-8 .............................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single Family — Urban 3 RS-10* Single Family — Large Lot Single Family — Resource RS-12, RSW-12, RS-20 Single Family Master Plan Single Family Master Plan * RS-10 would be anew zoning classification, providing for a minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft. The densities that correspond to these plan and zoning designations are summarized in the following table: Plan Designation Zoning Classification Maximum Density (Net Density) Single Family — Urban 1 RS-6 RS-8 7.3 DU/Acre 5.5 DU/Acre Single Family — Urban 2 RS-8 5.5 DU/Acre Single Family — Urban 3 RS-10 4.4 DU/Acre Land Use 97 Single Family — Urban RS-6 or RS-8 with Master 5.5 or 7.3 DU/Acre Master Plan Plan overlay Single Family — Resource RS-12, RSW-12 3.7 DU/Acre RS-20 2.2 DU/Acre The "Single Family — Urban Master Plan" designation would only apply to the area lying along the south side of SR-104 north of 228"' Street SW; properties seeking to develop at the higher urban density lot pattern would need to be developed according to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly indicated access and lot configurations that would not result in traffic problems for SR-104. 98 Land Use Residential Goal A. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options available to the City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be approached realistically in balancing economic and aesthetic considerations, in accordance with the following policies: Ek4-. A.1. Encourage those building custom homes to design and construct homes with architectural lines which enable them to harmonize with the surroundings, adding to the community identity and desirability. Ek2-. A.2. Protect neighborhoods from incompatible additions to existing buildings that do not harmonize with existing structures in the area. Ek� A.3. Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or additions to existing structures. EA AA Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds whenever it is economically feasible. H-4-& A.5. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following principles: 114.b. A.S.a. Residential privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local government. 4.4. e. A.5.b. Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be discouraged. ,W 4 d, A.5. c. Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land use encroachments. Vie- A.5.d. Private property must be protected from adverse environmental impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc. A.6. Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage. Residential Goal B.Goal. A broad range of housing types and densities should be encouraged in order that a choice of housing will be available to all Edmonds residents, in accordance with the following policies: 1.4-. B.1. Planned Residential Development. Provide options for planned residential development solutions for residential subdivisions. fir- B.1.a. Encourage single-family homes in a PRD configuration where significant benefits for owner and area can be demonstrated (trees, view, open space, etc.). Land Use 99 B.I.b. Consider attached single-family dwelling units in PRD's near downtown and shopping centers as an alternative to multiple family zoning. B.2. Multiple. The City's development policies encourage high quality site and building design to promote coordinated development and to preserve the trees, topography and other natural features of the site. Stereotyped, boxy multiple unit residential (RM) buildings are to be avoided. 1. 2. a. B.2.a. Location Policies. 12.a-i. B.2. a. i. RM uses should be located near arterial or collector streets. B.2.b. Compatibility Policies. 12. b. i. B.2. b. iRM. RM developments should preserve the privacy and view of surrounding buildings, wherever feasible. 1,2.b.ti. B.2. b. ii. The height of RM buildings that abut single family residential (RS) zones shall be similar to the height permitted in the abutting RS zone except where the existing vegetation and/or change in topography can substantially screen one use from another. 1B.2. b. iii. The design of RM buildings located next to RS zones should be similar to the design idiom of the single family residence. A?E B.2.c. General Design Policies. 12.e.i. B.2.c.i. The nonstructural elements of the building (such as decks, lights, rails, doors, windows and window easements, materials, textures and colors) should be coordinated to carry out a unified design concept. 1, 2. e. i-i. B.2. c. ii. SSite and building plans should be designed to preserve the natural features (trees, streams, topography, etc) of the site rather than forcing the site to meet the needs of the imposed plan. B.3. Mobile Homes. Update design standards to ensure quality parks heavily landscaped both for screening exterior and for appearance of interior. Commercial Land Use General. Past and present commercial development in the City of Edmonds has been oriented primarily to serving the needs of its citizens. It also has attempted to offer a unique array of personalized and specialty type shopping opportunities for the public. In the downtown area, the Milltown shopping arcade is an excellent example of this type of development. It is essential that future commercial developments continue to harmonize and enhance the residential small town character of Edmonds that its citizens so strongly desire to retain. By the same token, the City should develop a partnership with business, citizens and residents to help it grow and prosper while assisting 100 Land Use to meet the various requirements of the City's codes and policies. The Highway 99 arterial has been recognized historically as a commercial district which adds to the community's tax and employment base. Its economic vitality is important to Edmonds and should be supported. Commercial development in this area is to be encouraged to its maximum potential. Commercial Development Goals and Plan Policies. The following sections describe the general goals and policies for all commercial areas (commercial, community commercial, neighborhood commercial, Westgate Corridor, Edmonds Way Corridor, and sexually oriented businesses), followed by the additional goals and policies that specific commercial areas must also meet. K-. CoalsfeiCommercial Development Goal A.: Commercial development in Edmonds shall be located to take advantage of its unique locational opportunities while being consistent and compatible with the character of its surrounding neighborhood. All commercial development should be designed and located so that it is economically feasible to operate a business and provide goods and services to Edmonds residents and tourists in a safe, convenient and attractive manner, in accordance with the following policies: K-.4-. A. l A sufficient number of sites suited for a variety of commercial uses should be identified and reserved for these purposes. The great majority of such sites should be selected from parcels of land already identified in the comprehensive plan for commercial use and/or zoned for such use. K72-. A.2. Parcels of land previously planned or zoned for commercial use but which are now or will be identified as unnecessary, or inappropriate for such use by additional analysis, should be reclassified for other uses. 1£4-. A.3. The proliferation of strip commercial areas along Edmonds streets and highways and the development of commercial uses poorly related to surrounding land uses should be strongly discouraged. I-.4 A.4. The design and location of all commercial sites should provide for convenient and safe access for customers, employees and suppliers. I� A.5. All commercial developments should be carefully located and designed to eliminate or minimize the adverse impacts of heavy traffic volume and other related problems on surrounding land uses. K-.-6-. A.6. Special consideration should be given to major land use decisions made in relation to downtown Edmonds. Commercial Development Goal B. G, 's e r C .mm u ni , C-onini,,, eial 4l e5 y. Community Coommercial areas are comprised of commercial development serving a dual purpose: services and shopping for both local residents and regional traffic. The intent of the community commercial designation is to recognize both of these purposes by permitting a range of business and mixed use development while maintaining a neighborhood scale and design character. Land Use 101 B.1. Permit uses in community commercial areas that serve both the local neighborhood and regional through -traffic. lam? B.2. Provide for transit and pedestrian access in addition to the need to accommodate automobile traffic. B.3. Provide for the pedestrian -scale design of buildings that are two stories or less in height and that contain architectural features that promote pedestrian activity. L.4. BA. Provide pedestrian walkways and transit connections throughout the community commercial area, assuring connections to nearby residential neighborhoods. Commercial Development Goal C. GeatsfLr AleighbaAaad Genmrerea A . Neighborhood Coommercial areas are intended to provide a mix of services, shopping, gathering places, office space, and housing for local neighborhoods. The scale of development and intensity of uses should provide a middle ground between the more intense commercial uses of the Highway 99 Corridor/ Medical area and the Downtown Activity Area. Historically, many of the neighborhood commercial areas in Edmonds have developed as classically auto -oriented commercial "strip malls" with one- and two-story developments primarily including retail and service uses. Throughout the region, neighborhood commercial areas are departing from this historical model by being redeveloped as appealing mixed -use clusters, providing attractive new pedestrian -oriented development that expands the uses and services available to local residents. 3Yrr Neighborhood commercial development should be located at major arterial intersections and should be designed to minimize interference with through traffic. Mz? C.2. Permit uses in neighborhood commercial areas that are intended to serve the local neighborhood. Mixed use development should be encouraged within neighborhood commercial areas. M-.3-. C.3. Provide for transit and pedestrian access, with the provision of facilities for local automobile traffic. Provide for pedestrian connections to nearby residential neighborhoods. M:4. C.4. Allow a variety of architectural styles while encouraging public art and sustainable development practices that support pedestrian activity and provide for appealing gathering places. M-.5-. C.5. Significant attention should be paid to the design of ground level commercial spaces, which must accommodate a variety of commercial uses, have street -level entrances, and storefront facades that are dominated by transparent windows. 102 Land Use M.5.a. C.6. Encourage neighborhood commercial areas to reflect the identity and character of individual neighborhoods, t4asthus are stren henin their importance as neighborhood centers. Neighborhood commercial areas may set additional specific goals for their community in order to further refine the specific identity they wish to achieve. Goals and policies for specific neighborhood centers are detailed below. C.6.a. Five Corners .5.b.i. C.6.a.i. In the Five Corners neighborhood commercial area, development should be oriented to the street and respond to the unique character of the intersection, including a planned intersection improvement. Parking should be provided at the rear of development, where possible, or underground. C.6.a.ii. Development shall not be more than four stories in height, and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks, varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site. The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter commercial space. C.6.a.iii. At a minimum, commercial uses should be located on the ground level of development. Commercial or residential uses may occupy upper levels. C.6.a.iv. As a major intersection, streetscape and way -finding design should create an attractive "gateway" to the downtown and other neighborhoods. (Link to streetscape plan update) Intersection and street design should accommodate and encourage pedestrian connections throughout the neighborhood commercial area. M. 5. e. C.6.b. Firdale Village C.6.a.i. In the Firdale Village commercial area, development should include an attractive mix of uses that create a "neighborhood village" pedestrian -oriented environment. Commercial spaces shall be oriented toward the street in order to maximize visibility, and parking should be primarily accommodated either behind or underneath structures. C.6.a.ii. Development shall not be more than four stories in height, and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks, varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site. The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter commercial space. M. Commercial Development Goal D. . The Westgate Corridor is generally located between the 100t" Avenue W (9th Avenue S)/Edmonds Way intersection and where Edmonds Way turns north to enter the downtown area. By virtue of this location, this corridor serves as both a key transportation corridor and as an entry into the downtown. Long-established neighborhoods lie near both sides of the corridor. The plan for this corridor is to recognize its Land Use 103 multiple functions by providing opportunities for small-scale businesses while promoting compatible development that will not intrude into established neighborhoods. l� D.1. Development within the Westgate Corridor should be designed to recognize its role as part of an entryway into Edmonds and the downtown. The overall effect should be a corridor that resembles a landscaped boulevard and median. The landscaped median along SR-104 should remain as uninterrupted as possible in order to promote traffic flow and provide an entry effect. D.2. Permit uses in planned business areas that are primarily intended to serve the local neighborhood while not contributing significantly to traffic congestion. N. 3-. D.3. Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. N.4 DA. Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access shall not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. D.5. Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped -down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Commercial Development Goal E. . The Edmonds Way Corridor consists of portions of Edmonds Way between the 100th Avenue West intersection and Highway 99. This corridor serves as a key transportation corridor, and also provides a key link between Edmonds and Interstate 5. Established residential areas lie on both sides of the corridor. An established pattern of multiple family residential development lies along much of the corridor, while small-scale businesses can be found primarily near intersections. A major concern is that the more intensive development that occurs along the corridor should not interfere with the flow of through traffic or intrude into adjoining established communities. E.1. Permit uses in planned multiple family or small-scale business developments that are designed to minimize contributing significantly to traffic congestion. QQ? E.2. Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. 9L. � E.3. Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access should not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. 104 Land Use 9.4 EA. Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped -down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Make use of natural topography to buffer incompatible development whenever possible. g Commercial Development Goal F. Geatsfs.r Seivua1-4 04&4ed Businesses.. ejtSexua11 Oriented Businesses are regulated by specific licensing and operating provisions in the City Code. However, land use and zoning regulations are also required to mitigate and reduce the adverse secondary effects of these uses. These secondary effects are detailed in the findings adopted by Ordinance No. 3117 on October 15, 1996. As commercial uses, sexually oriented businesses should be limited to areas which can support the traffic and site requirements of these businesses while also assuring that their adverse secondary effects are mitigated. The following policies apply to sexually oriented businesses: R4, F.1. Provide for potential commercial locations within the City for sexually oriented businesses which will provide at least a minimum separation and buffering necessary to protect public health and safety. Pam? F.2. Separate the location of sexually oriented businesses from uses that are incompatible with the secondary effects associated with sexually oriented businesses. These incompatible uses include residential uses and uses such as public parks, public libraries, museums, public or private schools, community centers, and religious facilities. They also include bars and taverns. P-.3-. F.3. Adopt specific development regulations, such as lighting, parking and access provisions, that are designed to reduce or mitigate the secondary effects of sexually oriented businesses. P-4. FA. Provide a mechanism to monitor, on an annual basis, the availability of potential sites for the location of sexually oriented businesses. Industrial Land Use Q-. General. Interestingly, industrial development played a major role in the early development of Edmonds. Sawmills, wharves, log ponds and other wood products industries lined the Edmonds waterfront at the turn of the twentieth century. However, as time passed, Edmonds developed into a very attractive residential community and its once thriving lumber industry faded into oblivion. Today, Edmonds still retains much of its residential, small town charm despite the large amount of urban development which has occurred in and around the City during the outward expansion of the Seattle metropolitan area during the past twenty-five years. Industrial development in the more traditional sense has not occurred in Edmonds to a significant degree since its early Milltown days. Most new industry which has located in the community since the 1950's has been largely of light manufacturing or service industry nature. Some examples include furniture manufacturing, printing and publishing, electronic components assembly and health care services. Land Use 105 Future industrial development should be carefully controlled in order to insure that it is compatible with the residential character of Edmonds. Small scale, business -park oriented light industries and service related industries should be given preference over more intensive large scale industries. Great care should be given to carefully siting and designing all new industrial development in order to fully minimize or eliminate its adverse off -site impacts. R-. Industrial Land Use Goal A. A select number of industrial areas should be located and developed which are reasonably attractive and contribute to the economic growth and stability of Edmonds without degrading its natural or residential living environment, in accordance with the following policies: R-.4-. A.1. Light industrial uses should be given preference over heavy industrial uses. lam? A.2. The clustering of industrial uses in planned industrial parks should be required when the site is adequate. R-.3, A.3. Adequate buffers of landscaping, compatible transitional land uses and open space should be utilized to protect surrounding land areas from the adverse effects of industrial land use. Particular attention should be given to protecting residential areas, parks and other public -institutional land uses. R-.4 A.4. All industrial areas should be located where direct access can be provided to regional ground transportation systems (major State Highways and/or railroad lines). Open Space S, General_ly lin urban areas, a lack of open space has been one of the major causes of residential blight. This lack has contributed to the movement of people from older densely developed neighborhoods to peripheral areas still possessing open areas. Open space must be reserved now for assurance that future settled areas are relieved by significant open land, providing recreational opportunities as well as visual appeal. Not all vacant land in the City should be considered desirable or valuable for open space classification. Therefore, the following set ofer-iter-ia s*,,, dar-ds hyeset of criteria -standards has been developed for determining those areas most important for this classification. Goal -.Open Space Goal A. Open space must be seen as an essential element determining the character and quality of the urban and suburban environment, in accordance with the following policies. A.1. Undeveloped public property should be studied to determine its suitability and appropriate areas designed as open space. Y1. a. A. 1. a. No city -owned property should be relinquished until all possible community uses have been explored. A.2. All feasible means should be used to preserve the following open spaces: 106 Land Use T 2.a. A.2.a. Lands which have unique scientific or educational values. Y� A.2.b. Areas which have an abundance of wildlife particularly where there are habitats of rare or endangered species. T 2. E. A.2.c. Natural and green belt areas adjacent to highways and arterials with the priority to highways classified as scenic. Y� A.2.d. Areas which have steep slopes or are in major stream drainage ways, particularly those areas which have significance to Edmonds residents as water sheds. Y� A.2.e. Land which can serve as buffers between residential and commercial or industrial development. �f A.2.f. Bogs and wetlands. TL.2-.g A.2.&_Land which can serve as buffers between high noise environments and adjacent uses. Wit. A.21. Lands which would have unique suitability for future recreational uses both passive and active. T2.i. A.2.i. Areas which would have unique rare or endangered types of vegetation. - A.3. Open space should be distributed throughout the urban areas in such a manner that there is both visual relief and variety in the pattern of development and that there is sufficient space for active and passive recreation. Provide views and open space in areas of high density or multiple housing by requiring adequate setback space and separation between structures. Open Space Goal B. Goal. Edmonds possesses a most unique and valuable quality in its location on Puget Sound. The natural supply of prime recreational open space, particularly beaches and waterfront areas, must be accessible to the public, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Edmonds saltwater shorelines and other waterfront areas should receive special consideration in all future acquisition and preservation programs. ice? B.2. Provide wherever possible, vehicular or pedestrian access to public bodies of water. Soils and Topography General. The natural topography of the city contributes to the environmental amenity of the community. Many of the remaining undeveloped areas of the city are located on hillsides or in ravines where steep slopes have discouraged development. These are frequently areas where natural drainage ways exist and where the second growth forest is still undisturbed. In some areas, soil conditions also exist which are severely limited for urban development. Based on soil and slope analysis for the city, several areas may be identified as potentially hazardous for urban development. (See report to Environmental Subcommittee on Soils and Topography, February 3, 1975.) Land Use 107 Some areas which are limited for development are desirable for public recreation, open spaces, conservation of existing natural features, maintenance of valuable biological communities, and protection of natural storm drainage system. In some hillside areas, changes in existing soil characteristics because of development, grading, increased runoff and removal of vegetation may cause severe erosion, water pollution and flooding with subsequent damage to public and private property. Soils and Topography Goal A. Future development in areas of steep slope and potentially hazardous soil conditions should be based on site development which preserves the natural site characteristics in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Large lots or flexible subdivision procedures, such as PRD's, should be used in these areas to preserve the site and reduce impervious surfaces, cuts and fills. A.2. Streets and access ways should be designed to conform to the natural topography, reduce runoff and minimize grading of the hillside. Soils and Topography Goal B. Gear Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Grading and Filling. X 1. a- B.1.a. Grading, filling, and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. X 1. lr. B.1. b. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope, or of an adjacent property. X 1. E B.1. c. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 1 S% slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property. B.l.d. Fill and excavated dirt shall not be pushed down the slope. B.2. Building Construction. X 2. a- B.2.a. Buildings on slopes of 1 S% or greater shall be designed to cause minimum disruption to the natural topography. X2. b.. B.2. b. Retaining walls are discouraged on steep slopes. If they are used they should be small and should not support construction of improvements which do not conform to the topography. �?E B.2. c. Water detention devices shall be used to maintain the velocity of runoff at predevelopment levels. B.3. Erosion Control. 108 Land Use X 3. a- B.3.a. Temporary measures shall be taken to reduce erosion during construction. B.3. b. Natural vegetation should be preserved wherever possible to reduce erosion and stabilize slopes, particularly on the downhill property line. X 3. E B.3.c. Slopes should be stabilized with deep rooted vegetation and mulch, or other materials to prevent erosion and siltation of drainage ways. Water Resources and Drainage Management General. The environmental amenity of the City of Edmonds is greatly enhanced by the numerous year round streams and the location of the City on Puget Sound. Lake Ballinger, besides being a well-known landmark, is an important environmental area because of its ecological benefits and open space quality. The storm drainage and stream systems in the Edmonds area are part of the Cedar River Drainage Basin. There are two sub -basins in the area: McAleer Creek, which drains to Lake Washington and the Upper Puget Sound sub -basin which drains to Puget Sound. Urban development in the past has interfered with natural storm drainage systems and greatly increased the area of impermeable surfaces. It has been necessary to install culverts, underground drainage courses and other major structures to accommodate runoff water. Because of climate, topography and soil conditions, severe erosion and drainage to stream banks may occur with future development. Urban runoff causes significant decreases in water quality because of the quantity of pollutants in the runoff water. The Urban Runoff and Basin Drainage Study conducted for the River Basin Coordinating Committee of the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle indicates that future development in the Puget Sound and McAleer sub -basins will overburden existing systems. The water quality in Lake Ballinger is already an urgent and serious problem because the lake is shallow, contains a high level of nutrients and has seasonal oxygen deficiencies. The quality of water in Puget Sound is a less immediate problem but must be considered in the long term. Both Edmonds and Lynnwood dispose of effluent in the Sound which has received primary treatment only. Increased recreational use of the waterfront will have water quality impacts also. Some streams in the City have supported fish runs from the Sound in the past and many people in the community would like to see a restoration of these fisheries. The high costs both financially and environmentally of installation of structures and alteration of natural systems is an important consideration in planning for environmental management. Because environmental systems cross political boundaries a high degree of interlocal cooperation will be necessary to fully utilize funds available through the Water Pollution Control Act; however, the Act may provide substantial funds in the future for planning and improvement of facilities. Land Use 109 Z, Resources and Drain Management Goal A. The City should continue to upgrade the public storm drainage system in order to protect the man-made and natural environment. In the management of storm drainage and urban runoff, the City should utilize the natural drainage system where it is possible to do so without significantly altering the natural drainage ways, in accordance with the following policies: A.1. The natural drainage system (i.e., streams, ponds, and marshes) shall not be filled or permanently culverted except where no other alternative exists. Temporary culverting of streams shall be permitted during construction where site conditions present no other alternative. The natural condition should be restored immediately following construction. A.2. Earthmoving equipment shall not cause siltation or deterioration of water quality. Rechanneling of streams is permitted only when the stream bed location renders the site undevelopable. A.3. Imagination and care should be used in the design of retention ponds and other drainage facilities so that they will blend into the natural environment rather than detract from it. ZAA AA Riprapping of stream banks and gravelling of stream beds is permitted when the Engineering Department determines that stability or sediment retention is necessary. A.S. Decorative ponding, cascading, and building artificial waterfalls are permitted except in those streams where it would present a barrier to the migration of fish. A.6. Building foundation and footings shall be no closer than 15 feet to a stream bank and shall be sited to create minimum disruption to the drainage system. A.7. The quality and quantity of water leaving a site shall be the same as that entering the site. A.B. Retention basins and other devices shall be used to encourage on -site runoff absorption and prevent overloading of existing drainage systems except in those areas where it is necessary to remove water from the site quickly due to unstable soil conditions to prevent earth slides and subsequent danger to life and property. A.9. Regional retention/detention is generally recognized as a more efficient and practical method of runoff control and will be given first consideration before individual on -site systems are allowed as part of development projects. [Ord. 2527, 1985.1 110 Land Use Vegetation and Wildlife General. As Edmonds has urbanized, the natural vegetation has become increasingly scarce. The city's woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation provide an important resource which should be preserved. Woodlands help stabilize soils on steep slopes, and act as barriers to wind and sound. Natural vegetation provides habitat for wildlife. Plants replenish the soil with nutrients. They generate oxygen and clean pollutants from the air. The beauty of the natural growth provides pleasing vistas and helps to buffer one development from another. Areas where natural vegetation exists provide good sites for nature trails and for other recreational and educational opportunities. Wildlife is a valuable natural resource that greatly enhances the aesthetic quality of human life. City beaches, breakwaters and pilings represent unique habitats for marine organisms. "People pressure" continue to destroy many organisms and their habitats each year. The number and species of organisms is diminishing yearly. Streams, lakes and saltwater areas offer habitats for many species of migrating and resident bird life. Underdeveloped wooded areas and city parks provide habitats for many birds and mammals. Many birds and mammals are dependent upon both the upland and beach areas. B43-.Ve2etation and Wildlife Goal A. The city should ensure that its woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation are preserved, in accordance with the following policies: BB. 1.A.1. Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available science pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172. BB-2. A.2. The removal of trees should be minimized particularly when they are located on steep slopes or hazardous soils. Subdivision layouts, buildings and roads should be designed so that existing trees are preserved. BB.3. A.3. Trees that are diseased, damaged, or unstable should be removed. BB.4. A.4. Grading should be restricted to building pads and roads only. Vegetation outside these areas should be preserved. GC —.Vegetation and Wildlife Goal B. Goal. The city should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed toward preserving the natural habitats (woodlands, marshes, streams and beaches) of the city's wildlife in accordance with the following policies: CC. 1. B.1. Establish and maintain a variety of educational and recreational programs and activities for all age levels. Cam2. B.2. Erect and maintain an educational display that identifies some of the more common plants and animals and the ecology of major habitats, (i.e., sand, rock, piling and deepwater). Land Use M CC. 3. B.3. Establish and publicize regulations prohibiting removal of non-food organisms from beach areas without collecting permit; permit for educational and research use only. CC. 4BA. Encourage landscaping and site improvement on city -owned property which recognizes the dependency of some species upon certain types of vegetation for food and cover. CC.5. B.5. City park property which serves as a habitat for wildlife should be left natural with minimum development for nature trail type of use. Air Pollution DD-. General. Air pollution is primarily a regional problem related to urbanization and meteorological conditions in the Puget Sound Basin. It is the result of activities in which most citizens participate. Air pollution can cause severe health effects and property damage under certain conditions. (See Facts on Air Pollution - Regional and Local: Report to Community Development Task Force.) Air Pollution Goal A. Clean air is a right to all citizens of the City of Edmonds and should be protected and maintained in accordance with the following policies: A.1. Discourage expansion of arterials which will substantially increase line sources of pollution. A.2. Encourage arrangement of activities which will generate the fewest necessary automobile trip miles while avoiding undue concentration of like uses. EE.3. A.3. Support, through political action, strong enforcement policies and ordinances in the regional pollution control agency. €E.4. A.4. Support, by political action and financial participation, the establishment of public transportation in the community as an alternative to dependence on individual vehicles. A.5. Encourage local referral center for car pooling. Noise Pollution F� General. Although no area of human activity is free of sound, the modern urban environment is increasingly suffering from an overload of sound in the form of noise. The effects of noise may be severe. The most obvious effect is loss of hearing where levels of noise are very high and sustained. A less documented effect is stress from physiological and psychological impact of noise. Noise generally contributes to a loss of amenity and livability. The Edmonds Community is free, to a large extent, from the worst kinds of noise pollution and most residents believe that it is a quiet place to live. However, an environmental noise survey taken by the Building Department in 1974 indicates that there are some areas of concern. 112 Land Use The main problems come from vehicular noise, particularly motorcycles. Some point source problems, refrigeration equipment in stores near residential areas, have also occurred in the city. Impulsive, high -intensity noises which occur only periodically may also be irritating in quiet suburban neighborhoods. Examples are airplanes, electronically amplified music, sirens, etc. Certain noise problems can be alleviated more easily than others. The noise of vehicular traffic, particularly on arterial streets is difficult to control. Point sources can be more easily regulated by requiring noise muffling equipment. Enforcement of noise standards can be a problem because of the training and skill involved in taking noise measurements. Cost of enforcement may be excessive if standards are too stringent. The federal government has passed legislation to deal with major sources of noise in commerce which require national conformity of treatment. The State Department of Ecology has adopted Motor Vehicle Noise Performance Standards and Environmental Noise Levels guidelines. G& Noise Pollution Goal A. Preserve the quiet residential environment of the city by limiting increases in noise and reducing unnecessary noise where it now exists in accordance with the following policies: GG. 1.A.1. Studies should be made to determine the existing noise environment in order to provide baseline data for assessment of the environmental impact of changes or increases in noise. GG.2.A.2. The unique areas of quiet in the city should be identified and appropriate measures taken to preserve the quiet environment. 66.3.A.3. The city should update the existing noise standards to meet State Standards in modest stages in order to maintain flexibility and benefit from improvements in technology and experience. Increases in manpower or training to enforce standards should be cautiously made as experience is gained in enforcement. FG.4.A.4. Existing vehicular standards related to noise should be enforced to the greatest degree possible without excessive increases in manpower. GG.S-A.5. The city should cooperate with adjacent cities in sharing the costs of expensive noise equipment and training persons in the use of the equipment. GGA..A.6. Future street and arterial projects should be assessed for noise impacts, and structures such as berms, fences and other devices utilized wherever possible to reduce the noise impacts. GG.7.A.7. Any ordinances adopted by the city should recognize the variety and quality of noise environments. Excessive regulations should not be imposed on areas of the city where higher noise levels are normal or necessary for essential activities and do not create environmental problems. CGS.A.8. It is the policy of the city to minimize noise created by the railroad. Land Use 113 Urban Growth Areas General. The accompanying Urban Growth Areas map shows the City's urban growth area, which encompasses unincorporated areas adjacent to the current city limits. In general, development within the urban growth area is of interest to the City because the area will be annexed to the City in the future and development in the area can be expected to have an impact on the demand for and delivery of City services. Urban Growth Area Goal A. Plan for the logical extension of services and development within the City's urban growth area. A.1. To provide for orderly transitions, adopt comparable zoning and comprehensive plan designations for areas annexing into the City. A.2. Adopted plans and policies for the urban growth area shall be consistent and compatible with the general comprehensive plan goals and policies for the City. 114 Land Use City of Edmonds Urban Growth Area Map Land Use 115 AI-7345 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 12/10/2014 Introduction to Utilities Element and related Elements Staff Lead/Author: Rob Chave, Planning Manager Department: Initiated By: Planning City Staff Information Subject/Purpose Introduction to Utilities Element and related Elements Staff Recommendation Provide feedback to staff. Previous Board Action W The Board has been reviewing and updating various elements of the Comprehensive Plan as part of the 2015 plan update. Narrative Attached are the Utilities and introductory portion of the Capital Facilities Elements. Staff will outline the approach being taken to updating these elements. Attachments Attachment 1: Current Utilities and Capital Facilities elements Utilities Element Water, Sewer and Stormwater Management A. General. Utility plans have been prepared by the City for coordinated water, sewer, and stormwater management systems. These plans are adopted by reference and provide level -of -service standards and capital project guidance for each of these systems. Solid Waste A. General. Solid waste disposal is becoming a major problem in urban areas. Landfill sites are filling and new environmentally acceptable ones will be hard to find. Landfills can only be considered as an interim measure. There is presently a technological explosion in solid waste management. Citizens are entitled to the most efficient and economical disposal methods. Citizens now recognize that our natural resources are limited and need to be reused. Recovery of resources and/or the production of energy from solid waste could help defray costs of solid waste collection. Backyard burning of garbage is a source of irritation to nearby residents and is a cause of air pollution. Littering is unsightly as well as unsanitary. The "throwaway" philosophy is a waste of natural resources and detracts from the natural beauty of our surroundings. B. Goal. A regional solid waste management authority should be established to coordinate solid waste disposal in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Regional sanitary landfills should be used only as an interim measure. B.2. The ultimate regional disposal system should be a resource/energy recovery system. B.3. Edmonds should work with Snohomish County and King County to establish recycling facilities that would be economically feasible. C. Goal. The City of Edmonds should strengthen local controls over collection of solid waste in accordance with the following policies: C.1. Mandatory city-wide garbage collection should be required to minimize dumping and to eliminate backyard burning and resultant air pollution. Utilities 101 C.2. Homeowners should be charged by the garbage can to encourage recycling and separation of wastes at home. Those who use fewer cans should pay less. C.3. Edmonds should conduct a city-wide educational campaign on solid waste telling citizens how they can minimize the problem. D. Goal. Edmonds should enforce litter control and encourage community litter pickups and prevention programs. E. Goal. Edmonds should encourage recycling to conserve natural resources and reduce energy consumption in accordance with the following policies: E.1. Continuous studies should be made of proposals for recycling solid waste. E.2. Edmonds should encourage the use of returnable bottles and cans and reusable shopping bags to save energy and resources. E.3. Edmonds should work toward the elimination of excess packaging. EA. Markets for recycled materials are fluctuating and their stabilization should be encouraged. E.S. Individuals and/or industry should be encouraged to set up recycling centers in the community. E.6. Demonstration programs should be used to determine acceptable methods of home separation of wastes, collection and recycling. Other Utilities A. New utility systems and technologies are constantly developing or evolving. Rather than being reactive, the City should seek to plan for these new services as they develop. A.1. New technologies should be planned and carefully researched prior to developing new regulations or reviewing siting proposals. The goal is to provide for public needs while protecting the character of the community and assuring consistency with other plan goals. A.2. Public and private utility plans should be encouraged that identify long-range system needs and that are coordinated with the City's comprehensive plan. All utility projects should be coordinated to provide opportunities for projects to address more than one system improvement or maintenance need. 102 Utilities A.3. Utility structures should be located whenever possible with similar types of structures to minimize impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. When such locations are not available, utility structures should be located or sited so that they are as unobtrusive as possible and are integrated with the design of their site and surrounding area. Free-standing structures should be discouraged when other siting opportunities are available. Utilities 103 Capital Facilities Element Capital Facilities A. General. The capital facilities element provides the goals and standards for meeting the community's needs for capital facilities. Capital facilities are those facilities support the delivery of public services to the community, as well as visitors making use of the City's resources and services. In addition to serving existing residents, capital facilities are also planned in order to meet the community's needs as new development occurs in the future. Because Edmonds is a mature city with a full complement of facilities and services, most capital facility planning is targeted to maintaining existing level of service standards and expanding the quality of life of its citizens with new or expanded facilities. Level -of -service (LOS) standards are described in the transportation, utility and parks elements. School facility needs and LOS standards are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan for Edmonds School District No. 15. These LOS standards are used to assist in developing both short and long range capital improvements projects. The capital facilities element identifies these projects and their funding sources for a six -year period. This schedule will be updated on an annual basis and integrated with the City's budget process. The element also identifies public facility needs for the 20-year planning period. Funding sources will vary as specific projects are developed, and will include a variety of public and private sources. The siting of essential public facilities is a common concern for jurisdictions within the county, and the City is actively participating in the development of a common siting process with its neighboring cities and the county. B. Goal. Establish level of service (LOS) standards for all city -provided services in order to provide public facilities and services that meet citizens' needs and enhance the community's quality of life according to the following policies: B.1. Provide capital facility improvements in order to meet or exceed established level -of -service standards. B.2. Coordinate and set level -of -service standards that meet the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. B.3. Evaluate and prioritize capital facility projects according to how they achieve established criteria and the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Examples of typical criteria include the following: B.3.a. Whether the project is needed to achieve or maintain a LOS standard. B.3. b. Whether the facility will contribute to the elimination of a public hazard. B.3. c. Whether the facility is financially feasible. 104 Capital Facilities B.3.d. The extent to which the facility will impact annual and long-term budgets. B.3. e. Whether the facility is consistent with future facility needs and site considerations. B.3.f. The extent to which the facility will impact natural and cultural resources. C. Goal. Evaluate and coordinate the provision of capital facility improvements with both annual budgeting and long-term financial planning consistent with the following policies: C.1. Capital budget decisions will be made consistent with the Edmonds comprehensive plan in accordance with RCW 36.70A.120. C.2. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, the comprehensive plan shall be re-examined to review how additional funding will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that established level of service standards will be met. C.3. Capital improvements will be planned to achieve fiscal responsibility, maintenance of existing facilities, and protect the quality of life of the community. CA The City will continue to adopt multi -year budgets and six -year capital improvement programs as part of its annual budget and planning process. C.S. Six -year capital improvement programs will be coordinated with long-term (at least 20-year) capital needs D. Goal. Seek to use a coordinated array of mechanisms and sources of revenue to fund needed capital facilities according to the following policies: D.1. Make use of the City's budget and structure of funds to identify adequate funding sources for capital facilities. D.2. Seek grants and cooperative funding agreements to supplement internal City funding of capital facilities that benefit the general public or that are required to meet needs not generated solely by Edmonds residents. D.3. Make use of regulatory and incentive programs to assist in achieving LOS standards for City services. E. Goal. Strategically locate new facilities to complement the delivery of services and provide for efficient and convenient access by the community consistent with the following policies: Capital Facilities 105 E.1. The location of new or improved capital facilities should take into account existing service delivery systems and the location and access of service populations. E.2. Ensure that the siting of essential public facilities is not precluded by the implementation of this Comprehensive Plan. F. Essential public facilities are necessary to support orderly growth and the delivery of public services. The City's goal is to ensure that these facilities are sited in an efficient, timely manner while acknowledging and mitigating any community impacts created by these facilities consistent with the following policies. F.1. Essential public facilities are those defined by state law, through the City's planning process or on application of a service provider. F.2. Sponsors of essential public facilities should be encouraged to consult with the City prior to choosing a site in order to seek information about potential sites, provide information concerning project proposals, identify potential community impacts, and propose possible siting incentives or mitigation measures. F.3. The City shall assure adequate public notice and participation in the siting of essential public facilities by reviewing these facilities through a conditional use process, allowing the identification of community impacts and mitigation measures. Because the City's normal notification requirements may not provide for adequate public notice to the project's impact area, the project sponsor shall develop a public participation plan designed to encourage early public involvement in the siting decision and identification of impacts and mitigation measures. F.4. The City shall develop decision criteria for the siting of essential public facilities which allow the sponsor to demonstrate: F.4.a. the need for the facility, F.4.b. its consistency with adopted plans and policies, F.4.c. its location is designed to serve its service population, F.4.d. its location criteria is compatible with the siting of other essential public facilities, F.4. e. the site is physically suitable for the facility, and F.4.f. the project is able to mitigate community impacts. F.5. City policies and procedures — including any conditional use process — shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the admonition contained in the Growth Management Act that no development plan or development regulation may preclude the siting of essential public facilities. 106 Capital Facilities G. Capital Improvements Program. The tables following this section summarize the six -year capital improvements program for the city. Concurrency Management A. Goal. Provide a system of concurrency management that will assure that the facilities needed to support city services are provided in a timely and coordinated manner according to the following policies: A.1. For transportation facilities, assure that the facilities or services needed to meet level -of -service standards are in place at the time of development, or assure that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. These facilities or services must be provided by either the City or the appropriate public or private developer. A.2. For all capital facilities, develop concurrency management systems to manage the provision of facilities and services in order to achieve and maintain level -of - service standards. Capital Facilities 107 AI-7347 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 12/10/2014 Administrative Reports: Review Extended Agenda Department: Initiated By: Planning Information Subject/Purpose Administrative Reports: Review Extended Agenda Staff Recommendation N/A Previous Board Action N/A Narrative Extended Agenda is attached. Attachments Extended Agenda 10. PLANNING BOARD Extended Agenda - December 10, 2014 �a c. 1 R90 Meeting Item Dec. 2014 Dec. 10 1. Continued discussion of Draft General Section & Draft Land Use Element 2. Introduction to Utilities Element of Comp. Plan & Related Elements Dec.24 CANCELLED Pending 1. Comprehensive Plan 2014 2. Community Development Code Re -Organization 3. Neighborhood Center Plans and zoning implementation, including: ✓ Five Corners 4. Further Highway 99 Implementation, including: ✓ Potential for "urban center" or transit -oriented design/development strategies 5. Update to Economic Development Plan 6. Exploration of incentives for sustainable development Current Priorities 1. Comprehensive Plan. 2. ECDC re -organization. 3. Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation. 4. Highway 99 Implementation. Recurring 1. Annual Adult Entertainment Report (January -February as necessary) Topics 2. Election of Officers (I It meeting in December) 3. Parks & Recreation Department Quarterly Report (January, April, July, October) 4. Quarterly report on wireless facilities code updates (as necessary) PLANNING BOARD Extended Agenda January 14, 2015 JANUARY 2015 Jan. 14 1. Discussion/Recommendation for Utilities Element of Comp. Plan & Related Elements 2. Parks & Rec Quarterly Report (tentative) Jan. 28 1. Discussion on Economic Development Element Update FEBRUARY 2015 Feb. 11 1 . Transportation Element: Draft Policies & LOS Feb. 25 1. Discussion on Draft Culture & Urban Design Element MARCH 2O15 March 11 1. Recommendation for Draft Culture & Urban Design Element 2. Introduction to Draft Street Tree Plan Update & Streetscape Update March 25 1. Transportation Element: Draft Project List 2. Recommendation on Draft Street Tree Plan Update & Streetscape Update 0RIL 2015 April 8 1. April 22 1. Recommendation for Draft Transportation Element 2. Discussion on 2015 — 2020 Capital Facilities Element MAY 2015 May 13 1. Recommendation for Draft Capital Facilities Element May 27 1. Review of Proposed 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update JUNE 2015 June 10 1. Public Hearing on Proposed 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update June 24