Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007.01.02 CC Agenda PacketAGENDA Edmonds City Council Meeting Council Chambers 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds January 02, 2007 7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Call to Order and Flag Salute     1.Approval of Agenda     2.Consent Agenda Items     A.Roll Call     B.Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of December 19, 2006.    C.Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Dan and Jane Hinrichs (amount undetermined), and Warren Sanders (amount undetermined).     D.Approval of 2007 Taxicab Operator's License for North End Taxi.    E.Proposed Resolution commending Council President Deanna Dawson for her service.    3.(5 Min)Selection of Council President for 2007.    4.(5 Min)Selection of Council President Pro Tem.    5.(5 Min)Appointment of Committee Representatives.    6.(5 Min) Proposed Resolution appointing a Councilmember to the Snohomish County Health District Board.    7. (5 Min) Proposed Resolution appointing Councilmembers to the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation Board of Directors.     8.(45 Min)  Continued deliberation and action on an ordinance adding a new Chapter 16.43 establishing BD-Downtown Business Zones and amending the City's Zoning Map to rezone certain property specified therein to BD categories. Public comment will be received.     9. (5 Min) Proposed Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 3608 establishing a moratorium within the City's central business district.     10. (20 Min)  Public hearing on the Planning Board recommendation regarding street setbacks and landscape standards in the CG and CG-2 Zone.     11.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*    *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.    12. (5 Min) Presentation of Resolution and Plaque to Councilmember Deanna Dawson for her service as Council President.     13.(5 Min)Mayor's Comments     14.(15 Min)Council Comments     15.Adjourn     AgendaQuick©2005 - 2006 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved Packet Page 1 of 121   AgendaQuick©2005 - 2006 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved Packet Page 2 of 121 AM-777 2.B. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of December 19, 2006. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council approve the draft minutes. Previous Council Action Not applicable. Narrative The December 19, 2006 Draft City Council Meeting Minutes are attached for the City Council's review. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Draft Minutes Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 03:17 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/22/2006 04:15 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 04:31 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 12/22/2006 03:15 PM Final Approval Date: 12/22/2006 Packet Page 3 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES December 19, 2006 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Deanna Dawson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember (via telephone) Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Kisa Nishimoto, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT David Stern, Chief of Police Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Debi Humann, Human Resources Manager Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Haakenson requested the addition of Item U (Approval of Findings of Fact regarding the Closed Record Review held on 10/17/06 on an appeal by Elisabeth Larman of the Architectural Design Board approval of the refurbishment of Old Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South) to the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA WITH THE ADDITION OF ITEM U TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. As there were a number of short presentations preceding the Consent Agenda and he anticipated several items would be pulled from the Consent Agenda, Mayor Haakenson suggested delaying approval of the Consent Agenda until following Item 6. Council President Dawson suggested first approving Consent Agenda Item T to allow presenting the Resolution to the Student Representative. COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEM T. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as follows: T. RESOLUTION NO. 1136 – THANKING STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE KISA NISHIMOTO FOR HER SERVICE 3. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION AND PLAQUE TO STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE KISA NISHIMOTO Council President Dawson read Resolution No. 1136 commending Student Representative Kisa Nishimoto for her service as Student Representative on the Council. She presented Ms. Nishimoto the resolution and a plaque. Ms. Nishimoto thanked the Council and the City for the opportunity to serve as Student Representative. Packet Page 4 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 2 4. UPDATE – EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS Edmonds Center for the Arts Executive Director Joe McIalwain thanked the Council for their support of the ECA. He noted a great deal had happened since he last spoke to the Council on June 23, 2006. At that time, there were only three ECA staff members in an office in City Hall; staff has since moved into the theater on October 2. The first performance was held October 23 by Cascade Symphony Orchestra to a sold-out audience of 710. Thirty events have been held including rehearsals, performances and other special events. ECA now employs five full time personnel, nine part-time personnel and two administrative volunteers. They also have a volunteer force of 173 community members who will serve as ushers, concessionaires, and administrative assistance and special events. To date 8,000 people have visited the Center and the gymnasium is occupied at least three hours every evening with basketball and indoor soccer practices. An 18 member, high quality 501c3 ECA Board has been established, and the grand opening celebration will be held in two weeks. Mr. McIalwain provided the ECA’s mission statement – a cultural resource for the entire region, Edmonds Center for the Arts inspires creativity, learning and growth through performing arts presentations, community partnerships and education outreach programs. He reviewed the vision for ECA that includes presenting a varied selection of performing artists from around the world; providing valuable performing arts education and outreach programs; being a Center for performance, dialogue and community celebration and their pledge to be a balance, stable, viable organization now and into the future. He described the impact of ECA including serving more than 80,000 people each year; an exciting entertainment alternative and anchor for tourism in the region; a significant cultural impact with theater, music, dance, comedy and lecture series; and a catalyst for economic growth in Edmonds. Mr. McIalwain reviewed plans for the grand opening celebration that will begin with a ribbon cutting ceremony on January 4 and the grand opening gala dinner and performance featuring Al Jarreau on January 6. A Coming Home presentation is planned for January 13 that will feature individual performances by Cascade Symphony Orchestra, Olympic Ballet and Sno-King Community Chorale as well as a combined performance. An open house and tours are planned for January 24 and community church choir performances will be held on January 30 and 31. Mr. McIalwain reviewed the ECA’s first season that includes a varied selection of artists, noting some had been combined with local groups such as the Edmonds Jazz Connection which is an ECA production; and the 3-day Frank DeMiero Jazz Festival, a partnership between the ECA, Edmonds Community College and DeMiero family. He advised sponsorship opportunities were available for each show of $1000 or $2000. Tickets are available at the ECA box office, 425-275-9595. Mr. McIalwain highlighted local groups that would be performing at ECA during the first season including four performances by Cascade Symphony Orchestra, three performances by Olympic Ballet Theater and performances by Sno-King Community Chorale. Edmonds Community College will present Cabaret on May 17-20. Mr. McIalwain described marketing efforts including the preview season brochure, the ECA website EdmondsCenterfortheArts.org, flyers and posters, direct mail, and press including articles and advertisements in the Beacon, Enterprise, Journal, Herald, Seattle PI and Seattle Times. Concluding, Mr. McIalwain provided a fundraising update, explaining the total project cost was $18.5 million; completed on time and on budget. Approximately $14.7 million has been raised to date. A $1 million Building for the Arts grant was allocated to the project, pending State budget approval. He encouraged the public to donate via the seat campaign and naming opportunities. Packet Page 5 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 3 Councilmember Plunkett inquired about operating costs. Mr. McIalwain responded an operating budget has been prepared; expenses are on track with that budget. Revenue has been slightly slow due to invoicing difficulties. He acknowledged it would be a learning process during the first year. Mayor Haakenson recognized Mr. McIalwain and his staff who were doing a marvelous job and expressed his appreciation for their hard work. 5. PRESENTATION OF THE 2007 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA FOR THE ASSOCIATION OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES & TOWNS. Mayor Haakenson advised representatives of the Association of Snohomish County Cities and Towns have been making presentations to City Councils regarding their legislative agenda. Mukilteo Councilmember Marko Liias explained the Association of Snohomish County Cities and Towns has existed for some time and under the leadership of Robert Amenn, Gold Bar Councilmember, were expanding the breadth of the organization to include a legislative committee, transportation committee and an economic development committee to strengthen the role of Snohomish County cities. The legislative issues committee was established by Edmonds Councilmember Olson to develop a legislative agenda of issues in the 2007 legislative session that Snohomish County Cities and Towns have in common and work in concert to coordinate the Cities and Town’s legislative agenda as well as coordinate trips to Olympia to lobby for those issues. Mukilteo Councilmember Jennifer Gregerson advised the goal was to gather feedback from cities throughout Snohomish County to establish a legislative agenda. She explained the legislative agenda had been divided into tiers. The first tier had two items, 1) expanding the potential use of REET funds to include park operations, and 2) increasing the penalty for auto theft. The concept of the second tier was to seek resolutions or letters of support from Councils on, 1) the Snohomish County RTID list and 2) clarifying and codifying issues with the Open Public Meetings Act as it relates to email. The third tier is to raise awareness and support for a 4-year college in Snohomish County. She urged Councilmembers to contact Mr. Liias, Councilmember Olson or her regarding issues they wanted Cities and Towns to pursue on the legislative agenda. Mayor Haakenson advised the input from all cities and towns would be used to develop a combined legislative agenda. He invited Councilmembers to inform Councilmember Olson of any other issues they wanted considered. 6. PRESENTATION OF HOUSING HALO AWARD TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY THE HOUSING CONSORTIUM OF EVERETT AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY. June Robertson, Executive Director, Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County, advised their mission was to provide strategic leadership in crafting affordable housing policies and programs in Snohomish County. Their members are a diverse group of organizations and individuals who develop affordable housing, provide services for residents of affordable housing and are committed to providing everyone in Snohomish County with an affordable place to live. Ms. Robertson presented a Housing Halo Award to the City Council in appreciation of the housing policy on behalf of local citizens, recognizing the Council as community heroes for enacting an ordinance on November 6 that requires developers to pay $500 in relocation assistance to low-income tenants displaced by condominium conversion. She thanked the Council for its actions on behalf of those in the community whose housing situation was tenuous and threatened by condominium conversions. She also thanked the Council for being a partner in helping to identify solutions for the affordable housing crisis. Packet Page 6 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 4 Council President Dawson thanked the Housing Consortium for their work. She commented this was an important issue to her personally and one of her primary tasks in her role at Snohomish County. She recognized the work being done in Snohomish County. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Moore requested Items K and U be removed from the Consent Agenda, Councilmember Marin requested Item E be removed, Councilmember Wambolt requested Item R be removed and Councilmember Orvis requested Item S be removed. Mayor Haakenson relayed Public Works Director Noel Miller’s request that Item N be removed and indicated Item T had been approved under Agenda Item 1. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 12, 2006. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #92836 THROUGH #93002 FOR DECEMBER 14, 2006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $334,043.72. D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM SANDY CALLENDER (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED). F. CONFIRMATION OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR THE LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR 2007. G. RATIFY INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #1. H. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS. I. APPROVAL OF THREE YEAR SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING, INC. J. APPROPRIATION OF $40,183 ADDITIONAL FUNDS AND AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 3 FOR 2006 CITYWIDE STORM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. L. APPROVAL OF ANNUAL AWARD BY THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION OF BUDGETED CULTURAL TOURISM PROMOTION CONTRACTS TO LOCAL ARTS ORGANIZATIONS TO PROMOTE EVENTS THAT BRING VISITORS TO EDMONDS. M. ORDINANCE NO. 3617 - GRANTING TO CLEARWIRE, LLC A RIGHT-OF-WAY USE PERMIT, TO INSTALL, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN COMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN A CERTAIN DESIGNATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. O. ORDINANCE NO. 3618 – UTILITY TAX RATE INCREASE. Packet Page 7 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 5 P. ORDINANCE NO. 3619 – AMENDING THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REPEAL EXISTING CHAPTER 16.77 MPOR ZONE AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 16.77 OR-OFFICE-RESIDENTIAL Q. ORDINANCE NO. 3620 – ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, CAPITAL FACILITIES, SANITARY SEWERS, PORT OF EDMONDS STRATEGIC AND MASTER PLAN, NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS, STREETSCAPES AND LAND USE ELEMENT AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP. ITEM N: ORDINANCE NO. 3621 – GRANTING TO T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION, A RIGHT-OF-WAY USE PERMIT, TO INSTALL, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN COMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN A CERTAIN DESIGNATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Public Works Director Noel Miller explained after the agenda memo was prepared, T-Mobile contacted staff with minor revisions in regard to the automatic renewal of the agreement. The revisions would provide additional flexibility for T-Mobile based on changing technology. He advised City Attorney Scott Snyder reviewed and approved the ordinance. Staff recommended approval as revised. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM N. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM E: APPROVAL OF LIST OF EDMONDS BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD Councilmember Marin wished to abstain from the vote on this matter. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO APPROVE ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER MARIN ABSTAINED. ITEM K: APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD 10/17/06 ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL ON A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FOR JENNIFER MANTOOTH, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 97TH AVENUE WEST AND 231ST PLACE SOUTHWEST. (FILE NO. CDC-05-3 AND R-06-67) Councilmember Moore advised she pulled this to vote no as she had originally voted to approve the application. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM K. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS MARIN, OLSON, AND WAMBOLT AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT, MOORE AND ORVIS OPPOSED. ITEM U: APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE CLOSED RECORD REVIEW HELD ON 10/17/06 ON AN APPEAL BY ELISABETH LARMAN OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD APPROVAL OF THE REFURBISHMENT OF OLD MILLTOWN, LOCATED AT 201 5TH AVENUE SOUTH Councilmember Moore advised she pulled this to vote no as she did not agree with the Findings of Fact. Packet Page 8 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 6 COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM U. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, AND COUNCILMEMBERS WAMBOLT, PLUNKETT, AND ORVIS IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBERS OLSON, MOORE AND MARIN OPPOSED. ITEM R: PROPOSED ORDINANCE ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 16.43 RELATING TO BD- DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONING, AMENDING THE CITY'S ZONING MAP TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY SPECIFIED THEREIN TO BD CATEGORIES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE Council President Dawson explained at the end of last week’s meeting, it appeared everything had been completed and that City Attorney Scott Snyder did not need to attend tonight’s meeting. Several issues arose today for which it may have been helpful to have Mr. Snyder at tonight’s meeting but he was not here. She suggested either acting on this item and amending it in the future or delaying approval until Mr. Snyder was present. Councilmember Wambolt recommended postponing this item to a future meeting, possibly before the end of the year. After further consideration, he realized there were consequences of the changes made to the step-back in the BD1 zone. Council President Dawson asked Councilmember Wambolt to identify the issues that precluded Council adoption and why action was required before the end of the year. Planning Manager Rob Chave advised the Comprehensive Plan ordinance was the only required ordinance. This was a zoning ordinance that could be adopted at any time although sooner was better. Councilmember Wambolt explained the reason for postponing approval was there had not been adequate time to consider the consequences of the amendments the Council made. Councilmember Marin suggested pulling that specific section from the document and postponing discussion until 2007 and approving the remainder. Councilmember Wambolt advised that was his original intent but additional issues have arisen. Councilmember Moore agreed with postponing this item, expressing concern with amendments proposed at the last minute that lacked written background, staff discussion and public input. She noted there were also unintended consequences as a result of those amendments that needed to be examined. Councilmember Orvis agreed with Councilmember Wambolt’s suggestion to postpone this item, advising after considering the issues Councilmember Wambolt raised, he prepared a presentation late today. It was the consensus of the Council to postpone this item to a public hearing on January 2, 2007: Council President Dawson requested any amendments be submitted to staff in time to be included in the Council packet. ITEM S: PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 3608 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM WITHIN THE CITY'S CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE Council President Dawson advised that due to the postponement of Item R, this item would also be postponed to January 2, 2007. She advised the moratorium on buildings over 25 feet would remain in place. Packet Page 9 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 7 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Al Rutledge, Edmonds, expressed his pleasure at seeing Mayor Haakenson at a recent Planning Board meeting. He commented on the Council’s recent approval of height changes on Hwy. 99 and on Edmonds Way, suggesting the Council give consideration to establishing districts that would develop their own zoning. Joan Bloom, Edmonds, advised she was responding to Mayor Haakenson’s request for input regarding the waterfront project. She suggested the project be a combination of Grandville Island in Vancouver BC that has shops and restaurants; Third Place Books in Lake Forest Park that has a large chess game, stage and place to dance; and Pike Place Market. Although she appreciated the opportunity to provide input, she expressed concern that there was no central place for providing information other than Council meetings and many people, including she, were uncomfortable with speaking in front of the City Council. She requested the Council devise many ways for people to provide input on the waterfront project such as a web blog, tours of the waterfront led by Councilmembers with a staff member present to record ideas, neighborhood gatherings and a survey. She favored a project that met everyone’s needs and that not only drew tourists but served the community of Edmonds. Rick Utt, Edmonds, ADB Chair Pro Tem, expressed concern with the Council’s decision regarding Old Milltown. He asked whether it was appropriate to speak in this stage of the process. Mayor Haakenson answered yes as Council had adopted Findings of Fact tonight. Mr. Utt commented from reviewing the notes, it appeared there was disagreement between the design review and the Council and that the decision was based on subjective interpretation of the design guidelines. He was concerned the Council’s action was in violation of Washington State law as defined in 1993 by Anderson v. Issaquah. Mayor Haakenson cautioned Mr. Utt he was reluctant to have him discuss legal cases when the City Attorney was not present. He requested Mr. Utt return on January 2, 2007 when Mr. Snyder would be present; Mr. Utt agreed. Mayor Haakenson advised Ms. Bloom he would pass her comments on to the Port Commissioners as the Port was leading that effort. He urged Ms. Bloom and others to email their thoughts with regard to the waterfront project to Port Commissioners. He explained once the redevelopment committee, likely comprised of the Port Commissioners and the property owners, developed a proposed project, they would present it at an informal gathering to the public for input. Another opportunity for input would be at the informal neighborhood meetings he planned to hold next year. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson wished everyone Happy Holidays. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Dawson expressed her sympathy to those in the City who lost their power, particularly those who were without power for a considerable amount of time. She described their experience without power through Sunday evening, explaining because their house is not well insulated, they stayed at the Travel Lodge in South Edmonds. She expressed her thanks to the staff there who very nice and when their power was restored Sunday evening, for refunding half her money for the day. She was hopeful everyone in the City and Snohomish County would have their power restored soon. She wished everyone a Happy Holiday and Happy New Year and looked forward to working with everyone next year. Councilmember Olson wished everyone Happy Holidays and expressed hope that the weather would be calm for the remainder of 2006. Packet Page 10 of 121 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 19, 2006 Page 8 Councilmember Plunkett reported the Historic Preservation Commission met last week in response to the direction given to them by the Council. He noted there was a member of the Commission interested in investigating historic districts. He anticipated the Commission would present their ideas to the Council with regard to design guidelines within 30 days. He advised the Commission was utilizing Mark Hinshaw’s expertise as well as the specific expertise of several members. He advised once the design guidelines were drafted, they would be reviewed by City Attorney Scott Snyder and Planning Manager Rob Chave before presenting them to the Council. Councilmember Marin reported he attended the unveiling of the first light rail vehicle in Seattle and yesterday taught King County Councilmember Phillips how to drive it. He summarized the region was close to a solution for the future and the package that would be presented to the voters. With regard to the redevelopment of Harbor Square, Councilmember Wambolt reported the effort was moving forward quickly; there were meetings scheduled tomorrow and Thursday. He suggested members of the public interested in providing input attend a Port meeting which they may find less intimidating. The Port meets on Monday nights at 7:00 p.m. at the Port Commission offices. Their agenda is available on Channel 21 and their website. He advised the property owners were trying to do the right thing and will be soliciting the public’s input. He wished everyone a Merry Christmas and prosperous 2007. Councilmember Orvis advised he would be participating in the Hearing Examiner interview process and invited anyone with a question to ask to forward it to him. He wished everyone a Merry Christmas. Councilmember Moore thanked Council President Dawson, Mayor Haakenson and City Clerk Chase for allowing her to participate in the meeting via telephone. She expressed her thanks to the Council for postponing the BD1 zoning issue, commenting the Council could do a better job with more time. She expressed her thanks to Ms. Bloom for her ideas and for responding to Mayor Haakenson’s column in the newspaper. She suggested this as a topic for the Community Outreach Committee, noting it was not a Council issue, it was up to the property owners including the Port. She encouraged Ms. Bloom and others to contact the Port with their ideas. Mayor Haakenson expressed his pleasure at having Kisa Nishimoto serve as Student Representative. Ms. Nishimoto reported December 14 was the last day of the Edmonds-Woodway High School food drive. They filled two school buses, collecting 11,000 cans. As school was cancelled Friday due to the power outage, there was no total available for cash donations. Mayor Haakenson provided a brief storm update, advising the City escaped unscathed other than power outages, down trees and road blockages; there were no injuries. He recognized the Police, Fire and Public Works Departments for the awesome job they did. He noted a care facility on Edmonds Way had to be evacuated because a tree fell, breaking their sprinkler line and flooding the building. He summarized it had been an interesting November and December and winter had not yet arrived. 10. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Packet Page 11 of 121 AM-775 2.C. Claim for Damages Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Linda Hynd, City Clerk's Office Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Dan and Jane Hinrichs (amount undetermined), and Warren Sanders (amount undetermined). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claims for Damages. Previous Council Action Not applicable. Narrative Claims for Damages have been received from the following individuals: Dan and Jane Hinrichs 23327 Friar Tuck Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 (Amount undetermined) Warren Sanders 23214 Humber Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 (Amount undetermined) Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Hinrichs Claim for Damages Link: Sanders Claim for Damages Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/20/2006 12:14 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/20/2006 12:17 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/21/2006 03:32 PM APRV Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 12/20/2006 10:22 AM Final Approval Date: 12/21/2006 Packet Page 12 of 121 Packet Page 13 of 121 Packet Page 14 of 121 Packet Page 15 of 121 Packet Page 16 of 121 AM-776 2.D. North End Taxi License Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Approval of 2007 Taxicab Operator's License for North End Taxi. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council approve the 2007 Taxicab Operator's License for North End Taxi. Previous Council Action The City Council last approved the license for North End Taxi on February 21, 2006. Narrative Edmonds City Code Chapter 4.60 requires that the City Council approve Taxicab Operator's Licenses. A copy of the application submitted by North End Taxi is attached as Exhibit 1. The Police Department has reviewed and approved the application. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: North End Taxi Application Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 08:54 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/22/2006 08:59 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 09:29 AM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 12/21/2006 04:53 PM Final Approval Date: 12/22/2006 Packet Page 17 of 121 Packet Page 18 of 121 Packet Page 19 of 121 Packet Page 20 of 121 Packet Page 21 of 121 AM-780 2.E. Resolution Commending Council President Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Jana Spellman, City Council Time:Consent Department:City Council Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Proposed Resolution commending Council President Deanna Dawson for her service. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Proposed Resolution commending Council President Deanna Dawson for her service. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Dawson Resolution Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 11:39 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/27/2006 01:17 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:46 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 12/27/2006 10:03 AM Final Approval Date: 12/27/2006 Packet Page 22 of 121 City of Edmonds Incorporated 1890 Resolution No. 1137 Whereas? Deanna Dawson has served as Council President from January to December 2006 and during her tenure as President has presided over many extremely long meetings with poise making sure the audience has a good grasp of all of the difficult and hard-to- understand issues; and Whereas, Ms. Dawson was elected to the Council in November of 2001 and graciously agreed to fill Council Position #2 on November 27, 2001 as the position was vacant; and Whereas, Councilmember Dawson? in addition to carrying out her countless and varied duties as Council President as well as fulfilling a number of very laudable, outside responsibilities and interests, has sat on the following Committees and/or Boards: Finance, SNOCOM, Long-Range Task Force, Public Safety Committee (Chair), Disability, Snohomish County Tomorrow, Edmonds Crossing Project, and Economic Development; and Whereas, Ms. Dawson, while performing her duties as Council President, also made some career changes and did so with much equanimity while doing due diligence as Council President all with an eye towards the betterment of the City and its citizens; Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved, that Deanna Dawson be commended and thanked for serving as Council President. The Council looks forward to her continued dedication and service to the citizens of Edmonds. Passed, Approved, and Adopted this 2nd day of January, 2007. Gary Haakenson, Mayor Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Attest: City Clerk Dave Orvis, Councilmember Packet Page 23 of 121 AM-778 6. Health District Board Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:5 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Proposed Resolution appointing a Councilmember to the Snohomish County Health District Board. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council announce the appointment of the Councilmember to serve on the Health District Board and adopt the attached resolution. Previous Council Action The City Council appoints a Councilmember to serve on the Snohomish County Health District Board each January. Narrative The Snohomish County Health District Board requires formal designation of its City representative. The Councilmember designated to serve on this Board will be announced at this evening's meeting. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Health District Resolution Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 03:56 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/22/2006 04:15 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 04:31 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 12/22/2006 03:52 PM Final Approval Date: 12/22/2006 Packet Page 24 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. ___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, APPOINTING A COUNCILMEMBER TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Health District Board requires formal designation of its City representative, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the appointment of ____________________ to such Board would be in the best interest of the City, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby appoints ____________________ as its appointee to the Snohomish County Health District Board for the calendar year 2007 and thereafter until such time as the Council shall make a new appointment. RESOLVED this 2nd day of January, 2007. APPROVED: _______________________________ MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ____________________________ CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Page 25 of 121 AM-779 7. Community Transit Board Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:5 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Proposed Resolution appointing Councilmembers to the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation Board of Directors. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council announce the appointment of the Councilmembers to serve on the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation Board of Directors and adopt the attached resolution. Previous Council Action The City Council appoints Councilmembers to serve on this Board each January. Narrative The Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation Board requires formal designation of its City representatives. The name of the Councilmember appointed to this Board, along with an alternate, will be announced at this evening's meeting. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Transportation Board Resolution Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 04:05 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/22/2006 04:15 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/22/2006 04:31 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 12/22/2006 03:58 PM Final Approval Date: 12/22/2006 Packet Page 26 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, APPOINTING __________________ AS THE CITY OF EDMONDS REPRESENTATIVE TO SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND __________________ AS ALTERNATE. WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation requires formal designation of its City representative, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the appointment of __________________ to such Board would be in the best interest of the City, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. __________________ is hereby appointed as the representative of the City of Edmonds on the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation Board of Directors for calendar year 2007 or until a new representative is named. Section 2. In the event that __________________ is unwilling or unable to serve, __________________ is hereby appointed as an alternate to serve on behalf of the City for calendar year 2007 or until a new alternate is named. RESOLVED this 2nd day of January, 2007. APPROVED: _______________________________ MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: ____________________________ CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Page 27 of 121 AM-782 8. BD-Downtown Business Zones Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Rob Chave, Planning Submitted For:Rob Chave Time:45 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Continued deliberation and action on an ordinance adding a new Chapter 16.43 establishing BD-Downtown Business Zones and amending the City's Zoning Map to rezone certain property specified therein to BD categories. Public comment will be received. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve one of the proposed ordinances (Exhibit 1, or the alternate ordinance in Exhibit 3). Previous Council Action City Council held a public hearing on the recommendation from the Planning Board on October 3, 2006, and completed initial deliberations on December 12, 2006. On December 19, 2006, Council deferred adoption of a final ordinance pending further discussion. Narrative The ordinance contained in Exhibit 1 is the ordinance which was on the Council's consent agenda for approval on December 19, 2006. The ordinance in Exhibit 1 would apply the same step-back rules to the BD1 zone as would apply in other downtown zones -- i.e. a step-back would generally be required above 25 feet (see the text on page 10 of the ordinance, and the illustrations on page 11). Just prior to the December 19th meeting, Councilmember Wambolt raised a question concerning the step-back rules that would apply in the BD1 (Downtown Retail Core) zone. In response, staff drafted a modified ordinance ("alternate 1" which is attached as Exhibit 3). The alternate ordinance would require a step-back if the "average level" height rules raised the building more than 30 feet above the street rather than the 25 feet applicable to other BD zones. This would make sense if it is the intent of Council to allow building heights within the BD1 zone to be 30 feet above the street level at the street front in order to accommodate a 15-foot ground floor with a potential for a second story retail floor above (12-foot second story with an allowance for a 3+ foot building cornice). Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: Proposed Ordinance Link: Exhibit 2: Ordinance Exhibit A Link: Exhibit 3: Ordinance alternate 1 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:36 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/27/2006 02:44 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:46 PM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 12/27/2006 11:41 AM Final Approval Date: 12/27/2006 Packet Page 28 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 12/14/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 16.43 RELATING TO BD-DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONING, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY SPECIFIED THEREIN TO BD CATEGORIES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of its Planning Board and held public hearings regarding draft BD zone proposals on September 18, 2006 and deliberated regarding those amendments on October 3 and December 12, 2006, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the amendment enacting new BD- Downtown Business zones complies with the criteria of the Edmonds Community Development Code in consideration of criteria or in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Edmonds, and WHEREAS, the City Council has also received the recommendation of the Planning Board and held public hearings regarding amendments to the City’s zoning map to enact certain changes to the zoning of properties within the BD-Downtown business zone, and WHEREAS, following public hearings on the aforementioned dates and the deliberation of City Council, the Council adopts the recommendation of its Planning Board, finding that the amendment of the City’s zoning map and the rezone of the properties specified therein in the attached Exhibit A are in conformance with the requirements and decisional criteria of the Edmonds Community Development Code, are consistent with the City’s Packet Page 29 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - Comprehensive Plans and are in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Edmonds, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by the enactment of a new Chapter 16.43 BD-Downtown Business zone to read as follows: Chapter 16.43 BD – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS Sections: 16.43.000 Purposes. 16.43.010 Sub-districts. 16.43.020 Uses. 16.43.030 Site development standards. 16.43.040 Operating restrictions. 16.43.000 Purposes. The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC. 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. B. 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. 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. D. 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. 16.43.010 Sub-districts. The “Downtown Business” zone is subdivided into five (5) distinct sub-districts, each intended to implement specific aspects of the Comprehensive Plan that pertain to the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. Each sub-district contains its own unique mix of uses and zoning regulations, as described in this chapter. The five sub-districts are: Packet Page 30 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - BD1 – Downtown Retail Core BD2 – Downtown Mixed Commercial BD3 – Downtown Convenience Commercial BD4 – Downtown Mixed Residential BD5 – Downtown Arts Corridor 16.43.020 Uses. A. Table 16.43-1. Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Commercial Uses Retail stores or sales A A A A A Offices A A A A A Service uses A A A A A Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage areas, such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of a new car sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment storage, sales or services X X X X X Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with and on the same property as an art studio, art gallery, restaurant or food service establishment that also provides an on-site retail outlet open to the public A A A A A Automobile sales and service X A A X X Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only nonflammable and nonexplosive cleaning agents C A A A X Printing, publishing and binding establishments C A A A C Community-oriented open air markets conducted as an outdoor operation and licensed pursuant to provisions in the Edmonds City Code A A A A A Packet Page 31 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Residential Uses Single family dwelling A A A A A Multiple dwelling unit(s) A A A A A Other Uses Bus stop shelters A A A A A Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020 A A A A A Primary and high schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R) A A A A A Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050 C C C A C Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 A A A A A Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use B B B B B Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility otherwise permitted in this zone B B B B X Commercial parking lots C C C C X Wholesale uses X X C X X Hotels and motels A A A A A Amusement establishments C C C C C Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions C C C C C Drive-in businesses C C A C X Laboratories X C C C X Packet Page 32 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 - Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed as a permitted use X X C X X Day-care centers C C C A C Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes, sanitariums X C C A X Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 A A A A A Zoos, and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 C C C C A Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current alcoholics and drug abusers X C C A X Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 C C C C C Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use D D D D D Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC D D D D D A=Permitted Primary Use B=Permitted Secondary Use C=Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit D=Secondary Uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit X=Not Permitted Packet Page 33 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 - For Conditional Uses listed in Table 16.43-1, above, the use may be permitted if the proposal meets the criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the following criteria are met: 1. Access and parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular access shall be only be provided consistent with Chapter 18.80.060 ECDC. When a curb cut is necessary, it shall be landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and shall be located and designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. 2. Design and landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the street and contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four (4) feet in height along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50% open, such as a lattice pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable due to the nature of the use, shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the following: a. architectural features or details; b. artwork; c. landscaping. 16.43.030 Site development standards. A. Table 16.43-2. Site Development Standards BD1 5 BD2 5 BD3 5 BD4 3 5 BD5 5 Minimum Lot Area 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Lot Width 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Street Setback 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Side Setback 1 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Rear Setback 1 0 0 0 0 0 Maximum Height 2 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ Minimum Height of Ground Floor 4 15’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R) zoned property. 2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in Chapter 16.43.030.C ECDC. 3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building contains a ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 60 feet measured from the street front of the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial space requirement (e.g. an entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. See ECDC 16.43.030.B.4 for further detail. Packet Page 34 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 - 4 “Minimum height of ground floor” means the height measured from the base of the ground floor to the top of the ground floor ceiling plate, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the ‘finished’ ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height so long as the addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by more than 25%. 5 Site development standards for single family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-6 zone. Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground floor of buildings in the BD zones. 1. When a commercial use is located on the ground floor, the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within 7 inches of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. “Grade” shall be as measured at the entry location. 2. When the street frontage of a building is on a slope which does not allow both the elevation of the entry and ground floor to be entirely within 7 inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, the building may be designed so that either: a. The entry for the commercial portion of the ground floor is located within 7 inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the commercial portion of the ground floor is within 7 inches of the grade level of the entry; or, Packet Page 35 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 8 - b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground floor combination is within 7 inches of the grade of the sidewalk. c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice for the primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the BD5 zone, the primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue. 3. Within the BD1 zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses. Within the BD2, and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses to a minimum building depth of 60 feet, as measured from the street front of the building. 4. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a building. One option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in ECDC 16.43.030.B.3, above. As a second option, if more residential space is provided so that the ground floor does not meet the commercial use requirements described in Chapter 16.43.030.B.3, above, then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street setback shall be landscaped and no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four (4) feet in height above sidewalk grade unless it is at least 50% open, such as in a lattice pattern. 5. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in ECDC 16.43.030.B.3, above. When development of the ground floor does not conform to these requirements, then development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following requirements: a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. “Orientation to 4th Avenue” shall mean that: i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue. ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add interest at the pedestrian (i.e. ground floor) level. iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be located between the building and the street front. b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone, and potential live/work space is required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on-site. i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to enable building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or art/fabrication use. Live/work space means a structure or portion of a structure that combines a commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household. The live/work space shall be designed so that a commercial or fabrication or home occupation use can be established within the space. Packet Page 36 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 9 - Figure 16.43-_: BD5 Development Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street. Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry oriented to the street. 6. Exceptions and clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in ECDC 16.43.030.B.1-5 (above) apply with the following exceptions or clarifications. a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is allowed as a permitted secondary use. b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single-family use is the only permitted primary use located on the property. c. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the ground floor commercial use requirement (i.e. when the first 60 feet of the building, as measured perpendicular to the street, is required to be in commercial use, parking may not be located within that 60 feet). However, for properties with less than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front, parking may be located in the rear-most 30 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first 60 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet. d. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 60 feet of the building as measured perpendicular to the street consists only of commercial uses and permitted secondary uses, then permitted multiple family residential unit(s) may be located behind the commercial uses. e. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. This provision does not apply to any residential uses located behind commercial uses. Packet Page 37 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 10 - f. Within the BD1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk. C. Building Height Regulations. 1. The basic height limit is 25 feet (see definition of “height” detailed in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC). 2. Step-back rules. The following rules apply when calculating the maximum building height for any building in the BD1, BD2, BD3, or BD4 zones (see Figures 16.43-2 and 16.43-3 for illustrated examples). a. An additional 5 feet of building height, not to exceed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is designed to meet all of the following conditions: i. A building step-back is provided within 15 feet of any street front. Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above grade at the property line (e.g. normally the back of sidewalk) or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC. For corner lots, a 15-foot step-back is required along both street fronts. If a building located on a corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e. less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it to provide the required step- back on both street fronts, then the step-back may be waived facing the secondary street. This waiver may not be granted for building step-backs required from Fifth Avenue, Dayton, or Main Streets. ii. A 15-foot step-back is provided from the property line opposite the street front. Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above grade or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC. For corner lots for which a 15-foot step-back is required on more than one street front, there is no 15-foot step-back required from the property line opposite each street front. For the purpose of determining step-back requirements, alleys are not considered to be streets. iii. A building setback, in which the entire building is set back from the property line, may be substituted on a foot-for-foot basis for the required building step-back. For example, a 5-foot building setback can be combined with a 10-foot building step-back to meet the 15-foot step-back requirement. Packet Page 38 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 11 - Packet Page 39 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 12 - 3. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building meets one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15 feet of the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from the upper portions of the building through the use of differences in materials, windows, and/or architectural forms. a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the pitch of all portions of the roof are at least 6-in-12 and the roof includes architectural features, such as dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the roof line into distinct segments. b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in (a), above, step backs shall be required the same as for the BD2 zone, as described in ECDC 16.43.030.C.2. 4. Height exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC, the following architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in this Chapter. a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower, may extend a maximum of 5 feet above the specified height limit if it is designed as an integral architectural feature of the roof and/or façade of the building. The decorative architectural element shall not cover more than 5% of the roof area of the building. D. Off-Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here apply specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the requirements of this Chapter and the provisions contained in ECDC 17.50 – Off-Street Parking Regulations, the provisions of this Chapter shall apply. 1. No parking is required for any permitted uses located within the BD1 zone. Within the BD1 zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main Street. 2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within the BD2, BD4, and BD5 zones. 3. No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint of less than 4,800 square feet. E. Open Space Requirements 1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least 5% of the lot area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions to existing buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10%. Open space shall be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space may be provided as any combination of: a. outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for restaurants or food service establishments); b. public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public; c. landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public. [Note: minimum % or sq. ft. requirement?] Packet Page 40 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 13 - 2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story. 3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75% of the depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e. width is measured parallel to the street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line). F. Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings. 1. If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the staff may modify or waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise apply to the expansion, remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff shall be processed as a Staff decision – Notice required, as provided for in ECDC 20.95.050. a. Building step backs required under ECDC 16.43.030.C.2. b. Open space required under ECDC 16.43.030.E. 2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions involving building expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in 17.50.070.C. Packet Page 41 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 14 - 3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings is retained on site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses located on the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to the City shall be recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic building and ensuring that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and appearance so long as the additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the property. The easement shall continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or any interest in the property is sold. G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units. H. Screening. The required setback from R zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback, except for that portion of the BD zone that is in residential use. I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign standards shall be the same as those that apply within the BC zone. [Note: update of sign code is required] J. Satellite Television Antennas. Satellite television antennas shall be regulated as set forth in ECDC 16.20.050 and reviewed by the architectural design board. [Note: update required to 16.20.050 to reflect 2 meters for commercial antennas.] 16.50.030 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except: 1. Public uses such as utilities and parks; 2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots; 3. Drive-in businesses; 4. Plant nurseries; 5. Seasonal farmers’ markets; 6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC. 7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.70.040 ECDC. 8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. Section 2. The official zoning map of the City of Edmonds is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown on the attached Exhibit A, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Such incorporated changes amend the zoning of certain downtown properties to rezone such properties in conformance with the attached Exhibit A. The Development Services Packet Page 42 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 15 - Director or his designee is hereby authorized to effectuate such changes to the official zoning map of the City. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 43 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 16 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 16.43 RELATING TO BD-DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONING, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY SPECIFIED THEREIN TO BD CATEGORIES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 44 of 121 3RD AVE N 2ND AVE N MAGNOLIA LN 6TH AVE N SUNSET AVE N 4TH AVE N JAMES ST R AIL R O A D A V E 5TH AVE N HEMLOCK WAY HOWELL WAY SUNS ET AVE S GLEN ST HOLLY DR 2ND AVE N 2ND AVE 3RD AVE N CAROL WAY 3RD AVE N BELL ST MAIN ST 6TH AVE N DAYTON ST HOMELAND DR SATER LANE W D A Y T O N S T 3RD AVE S 4TH AVE S EDMONDS WY/SR 104 6TH AVE S 5TH AVE S WALNUT ST 5TH AVE S HEMLOCK WAY SEAMONT LN ERBEN DR 3RD AVE S R AIL R O A D S T GILTNER LANE DURBIN ST ALOHA WAY 2ND AVE S EDMONDS ST 6TH AVE S ALDER ST A D M IR A L W A Y 2ND AVE S 3RD AVE S 4TH AVE S PINE ST 4TH AVE S EDMONDS WAY/SR 104 4TH AVE S MAPLE ST DAYTON ST ALDER ST MAIN ST BELL ST EDMONDS ST DALEY ST SPRAGUE ST 5TH AVE S BELL ST MAIN ST Planning Board Recommendation 7/26/2006 BD1 = Downtown Retail Core BD2 = Downtown Mixed Commercial BD3 = Downtown Convenience Commercial BD4 = Downtown Mixed Residential BD5 = Downtown Arts Corridor RM-1.5 = Multi Family RM-1.5 BD1BD2 BD2 BD2 BD2BD4 BD3 BD5 BD2 BD2 BD4 Proposed New Downtown Zones RM-1.5 BD2 BD2 Packet Page 45 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 12/14/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 16.43 RELATING TO BD-DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONING, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY SPECIFIED THEREIN TO BD CATEGORIES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of its Planning Board and held public hearings regarding draft BD zone proposals on September 18, 2006 and deliberated regarding those amendments on October 3 and December 12, 2006, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the amendment enacting new BD- Downtown Business zones complies with the criteria of the Edmonds Community Development Code in consideration of criteria or in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and are in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Edmonds, and WHEREAS, the City Council has also received the recommendation of the Planning Board and held public hearings regarding amendments to the City’s zoning map to enact certain changes to the zoning of properties within the BD-Downtown business zone, and WHEREAS, following public hearings on the aforementioned dates and the deliberation of City Council, the Council adopts the recommendation of its Planning Board, finding that the amendment of the City’s zoning map and the rezone of the properties specified therein in the attached Exhibit A are in conformance with the requirements and decisional criteria of the Edmonds Community Development Code, are consistent with the City’s Packet Page 46 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - Comprehensive Plans and are in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Edmonds, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by the enactment of a new Chapter 16.43 BD-Downtown Business zone to read as follows: Chapter 16.43 BD – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS Sections: 16.43.000 Purposes. 16.43.010 Sub-districts. 16.43.020 Uses. 16.43.030 Site development standards. 16.43.040 Operating restrictions. 16.43.000 Purposes. The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC. 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. B. 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. 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. D. 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. 16.43.010 Sub-districts. The “Downtown Business” zone is subdivided into five (5) distinct sub-districts, each intended to implement specific aspects of the Comprehensive Plan that pertain to the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. Each sub-district contains its own unique mix of uses and zoning regulations, as described in this chapter. The five sub-districts are: Packet Page 47 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - BD1 – Downtown Retail Core BD2 – Downtown Mixed Commercial BD3 – Downtown Convenience Commercial BD4 – Downtown Mixed Residential BD5 – Downtown Arts Corridor 16.43.020 Uses. A. Table 16.43-1. Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Commercial Uses Retail stores or sales A A A A A Offices A A A A A Service uses A A A A A Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage areas, such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of a new car sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment storage, sales or services X X X X X Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with and on the same property as an art studio, art gallery, restaurant or food service establishment that also provides an on-site retail outlet open to the public A A A A A Automobile sales and service X A A X X Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only nonflammable and nonexplosive cleaning agents C A A A X Printing, publishing and binding establishments C A A A C Community-oriented open air markets conducted as an outdoor operation and licensed pursuant to provisions in the Edmonds City Code A A A A A Packet Page 48 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 - Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Residential Uses Single family dwelling A A A A A Multiple dwelling unit(s) A A A A A Other Uses Bus stop shelters A A A A A Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020 A A A A A Primary and high schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R) A A A A A Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050 C C C A C Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 A A A A A Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use B B B B B Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility otherwise permitted in this zone B B B B X Commercial parking lots C C C C X Wholesale uses X X C X X Hotels and motels A A A A A Amusement establishments C C C C C Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions C C C C C Drive-in businesses C C A C X Laboratories X C C C X Packet Page 49 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 - Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed as a permitted use X X C X X Day-care centers C C C A C Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes, sanitariums X C C A X Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 A A A A A Zoos, and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 C C C C A Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current alcoholics and drug abusers X C C A X Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 C C C C C Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use D D D D D Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC D D D D D A=Permitted Primary Use B=Permitted Secondary Use C=Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit D=Secondary Uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit X=Not Permitted Packet Page 50 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 - For Conditional Uses listed in Table 16.43-1, above, the use may be permitted if the proposal meets the criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the following criteria are met: 1. Access and parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular access shall be only be provided consistent with Chapter 18.80.060 ECDC. When a curb cut is necessary, it shall be landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and shall be located and designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. 2. Design and landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the street and contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four (4) feet in height along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50% open, such as a lattice pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable due to the nature of the use, shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the following: a. architectural features or details; b. artwork; c. landscaping. 16.43.030 Site development standards. A. Table 16.43-2. Site Development Standards BD1 5 BD2 5 BD3 5 BD4 3 5 BD5 5 Minimum Lot Area 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Lot Width 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Street Setback 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Side Setback 1 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Rear Setback 1 0 0 0 0 0 Maximum Height 2 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ 25’ Minimum Height of Ground Floor 4 15’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 12’ 1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R) zoned property. 2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in Chapter 16.43.030.C ECDC. 3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building contains a ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 60 feet measured from the street front of the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial space requirement (e.g. an entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. See ECDC 16.43.030.B.4 for further detail. Packet Page 51 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 - 4 “Minimum height of ground floor” means the height measured from the base of the ground floor to the top of the ground floor ceiling plate, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the ‘finished’ ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height so long as the addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by more than 25%. 5 Site development standards for single family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-6 zone. Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground floor of buildings in the BD zones. 1. When a commercial use is located on the ground floor, the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within 7 inches of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. “Grade” shall be as measured at the entry location. 2. When the street frontage of a building is on a slope which does not allow both the elevation of the entry and ground floor to be entirely within 7 inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, the building may be designed so that either: a. The entry for the commercial portion of the ground floor is located within 7 inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the commercial portion of the ground floor is within 7 inches of the grade level of the entry; or, Packet Page 52 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 8 - b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground floor combination is within 7 inches of the grade of the sidewalk. c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice for the primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the BD5 zone, the primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue. 3. Within the BD1 zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses. Within the BD2, and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses to a minimum building depth of 60 feet, as measured from the street front of the building. 4. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a building. One option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in ECDC 16.43.030.B.3, above. As a second option, if more residential space is provided so that the ground floor does not meet the commercial use requirements described in Chapter 16.43.030.B.3, above, then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street setback shall be landscaped and no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four (4) feet in height above sidewalk grade unless it is at least 50% open, such as in a lattice pattern. 5. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in ECDC 16.43.030.B.3, above. When development of the ground floor does not conform to these requirements, then development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following requirements: a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. “Orientation to 4th Avenue” shall mean that: i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue. ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add interest at the pedestrian (i.e. ground floor) level. iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be located between the building and the street front. b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone, and potential live/work space is required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on-site. i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to enable building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or art/fabrication use. Live/work space means a structure or portion of a structure that combines a commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household. The live/work space shall be designed so that a commercial or fabrication or home occupation use can be established within the space. Packet Page 53 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 9 - Figure 16.43-_: BD5 Development Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street. Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry oriented to the street. 6. Exceptions and clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in ECDC 16.43.030.B.1-5 (above) apply with the following exceptions or clarifications. a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is allowed as a permitted secondary use. b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single-family use is the only permitted primary use located on the property. c. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the ground floor commercial use requirement (i.e. when the first 60 feet of the building, as measured perpendicular to the street, is required to be in commercial use, parking may not be located within that 60 feet). However, for properties with less than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front, parking may be located in the rear-most 30 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first 60 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet. d. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 60 feet of the building as measured perpendicular to the street consists only of commercial uses and permitted secondary uses, then permitted multiple family residential unit(s) may be located behind the commercial uses. e. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. This provision does not apply to any residential uses located behind commercial uses. Packet Page 54 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 10 - f. Within the BD1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk. C. Building Height Regulations. 1. The basic height limit is 25 feet (see definition of “height” detailed in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC). 2. Step-back rules. The following rules apply when calculating the maximum building height for any building in the BD1, BD2, BD3, or BD4specified zone(s) (see Figures 16.43-2 and 16.43-3 for illustrated examples). a. Within the BD2, BD3, or BD4 zones, An an additional 5 feet of building height, not to exceed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is designed to meet all of the following conditions: i. A building step-back is provided within 15 feet of any street front. Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above grade at the property line (e.g. normally the back of sidewalk) or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC. For corner lots, a 15-foot step-back is required along both street fronts. If a building located on a corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e. less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it to provide the required step- back on both street fronts, then the step-back may be waived facing the secondary street. This waiver may not be granted for building step-backs required from Fifth Avenue, Dayton, or Main Streets. ii. A 15-foot step-back is provided from the property line opposite the street front. Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above grade or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC. For corner lots for which a 15-foot step-back is required on more than one street front, there is no 15-foot step-back required from the property line opposite each street front. For the purpose of determining step-back requirements, alleys are not considered to be streets. iii. A building setback, in which the entire building is set back from the property line, may be substituted on a foot-for-foot basis for the required building step-back. For example, a 5-foot building setback can be combined with a 10-foot building step-back to meet the 15-foot step-back requirement. b. Within the BD1 zone, an additional 5 feet of building height, not to exceed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is designed to meet all of the conditions specified under ECDC 16.43.030.C.2.a.(i-iii), except that within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 30 feet above grade at the property line (e.g. normally the back of sidewalk) or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC.: Packet Page 55 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 11 - Packet Page 56 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 12 - 3. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building meets one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15 feet of the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from the upper portions of the building through the use of differences in materials, windows, and/or architectural forms. a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the pitch of all portions of the roof are at least 6-in-12 and the roof includes architectural features, such as dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the roof line into distinct segments. b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in (a), above, step backs shall be required the same as for the BD2 zone, as described in ECDC 16.43.030.C.2. 4. Height exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in Chapter 21.40.030 ECDC, the following architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in this Chapter. a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower, may extend a maximum of 5 feet above the specified height limit if it is designed as an integral architectural feature of the roof and/or façade of the building. The decorative architectural element shall not cover more than 5% of the roof area of the building. D. Off-Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here apply specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the requirements of this Chapter and the provisions contained in ECDC 17.50 – Off-Street Parking Regulations, the provisions of this Chapter shall apply. 1. No parking is required for any permitted uses located within the BD1 zone. Within the BD1 zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main Street. 2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within the BD2, BD4, and BD5 zones. 3. No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint of less than 4,800 square feet. E. Open Space Requirements 1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least 5% of the lot area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions to existing buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10%. Open space shall be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space may be provided as any combination of: a. outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for restaurants or food service establishments); b. public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public; c. landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public. [Note: minimum % or sq. ft. requirement?] Packet Page 57 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 13 - 2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story. 3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75% of the depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e. width is measured parallel to the street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line). F. Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings. 1. If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the staff may modify or waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise apply to the expansion, remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff shall be processed as a Staff decision – Notice required, as provided for in ECDC 20.95.050. a. Building step backs required under ECDC 16.43.030.C.2. b. Open space required under ECDC 16.43.030.E. 2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions involving building expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in 17.50.070.C. Packet Page 58 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 14 - 3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Buildings is retained on site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses located on the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to the City shall be recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic building and ensuring that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and appearance so long as the additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the property. The easement shall continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or any interest in the property is sold. G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units. H. Screening. The required setback from R zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback, except for that portion of the BD zone that is in residential use. I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign standards shall be the same as those that apply within the BC zone. [Note: update of sign code is required] J. Satellite Television Antennas. Satellite television antennas shall be regulated as set forth in ECDC 16.20.050 and reviewed by the architectural design board. [Note: update required to 16.20.050 to reflect 2 meters for commercial antennas.] 16.50.030 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except: 1. Public uses such as utilities and parks; 2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots; 3. Drive-in businesses; 4. Plant nurseries; 5. Seasonal farmers’ markets; 6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC. 7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.70.040 ECDC. 8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. Section 2. The official zoning map of the City of Edmonds is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown on the attached Exhibit A, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Such incorporated changes amend the zoning of certain downtown properties to rezone such properties in conformance with the attached Exhibit A. The Development Services Packet Page 59 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 15 - Director or his designee is hereby authorized to effectuate such changes to the official zoning map of the City. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 60 of 121 {WSS648055.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 16 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 16.43 RELATING TO BD-DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONING, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY SPECIFIED THEREIN TO BD CATEGORIES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 61 of 121 AM-783 9. Repeal Ordinance No. 3608 - Moratorium in the Central Business District Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Rob Chave, Planning Submitted For:Rob Chave Time:5 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Proposed Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 3608 establishing a moratorium within the City's central business district. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the proposed ordinance (Exhibit 1). Previous Council Action The City Council adopted Ordinance #3530 which established a moratorium on new building approvals exceeding 25 feet in height within the BC zone. The council most recently extended the moratorium by adopting Ordinance #3608. Narrative On December 12, 2006, with approval of the new BD - Downtown Business zones, the City Council voted to remove the current moratorium on buildings exceeding 25 feet within the existing BC zone. The draft ordinance included in Exhibit 1 has been drafted by the City Attorney to implement this action. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: Proposed Ordinance Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:40 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/27/2006 02:44 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:46 PM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 12/27/2006 12:16 PM Final Approval Date: 12/27/2006 Packet Page 62 of 121 {WSS648051.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 12/14/06 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 3608 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM WITHIN THE CITY’S CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, pursuant to series of ordinances, the City Council established and has maintained a moratorium on construction in certain designated downtown business districts above 25 feet in order to resolve building height calculations, and WHEREAS, by the enactment of a contemporary ordinance, the City Council has amended the City Code to clarify height restrictions, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance No. 3608 is hereby repealed. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON Packet Page 63 of 121 {WSS648051.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 64 of 121 {WSS648051.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 3 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2006, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 3608 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM WITHIN THE CITY’S CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2006. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 65 of 121 AM-784 10. Street Setbacks and Landscape Standards in the CG and CG-2 Zone Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Rob Chave, Planning Time:20 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Action Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Public hearing on the Planning Board recommendation regarding street setbacks and landscape standards in the CG and CG-2 Zone. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the proposed code language changes as shown in Exhibit 1. Previous Council Action City Council approved an amendment to the CG and CG2 zones on November 6, 2006, but directed the Planning Board to review the provisions regarding street setbacks and landscaping (see the City Council minutes contained in Attachment 3 of Exhibit 2). Narrative After a public hearing, the City Council approved an amendment to the CG and CG2 zones on November 6, 2006, but directed the Planning Board to review the provisions regarding street setbacks and landscaping. The packet of material prepared for the Planning Board (Exhibit 2) summarizes the issues and the staff's recommendations. The Planning Board held a public hearing on December 13, 2006, and after deliberating, recommended that the code language amendments suggested by staff be approved by the City Council. Exhibit 1 shows how the Council-approved CG and CG2 language would be modified to implement the Planning Board's recommendation. The only changes recommended by the Planning Board are on pages 5 and 6 of Exhibit 1, and essentially establish a 4-foot landscaped street setback within the CG and CG2 zones. Note that larger setbacks would still be required when CG or CG2 properties abut residentially zoned property. The recommended changes would address the street setback and landscaping issues raised during the City Council's November 6, 2006, public hearing. Exhibit 3 contains the Planning Board minutes, while Exhibit 4 is a handout received by the Planning Board during their hearing. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: CG Zone setback changes Link: Exhibit 2: Planning Board hearing packet Link: Exhibit 3: Planning Board minutes Link: Exhibit 4: PB Magic Toyota handout Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:45 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/27/2006 02:46 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:47 PM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 12/27/2006 01:27 PM Final Approval Date: 12/27/2006 Packet Page 66 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 1 Chapter 16.60 CG – GENERAL COMMERCIAL: CG AND CG2 ZONES Sections: 16.60.000 CG and CG2 zones. 16.60.005 Purposes. 16.60.010 Uses. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. 16.60.020 Site development standards – General. 16.60.030 Site development standards – Design Standards. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. 16.60.000 CG and CG2 zones. This chapter establishes the general commercial zoning district comprised of two distinct zoning categories which are identical in all respects except as specifically provided for in ECDC 16.60.020(A). [Ord. 2527 § 7, 1985]. 16.60.005 Purposes. The CG and CG2 zones have the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Encourage the development and retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city. Mixed use and transit-oriented developments are encouraged which provide significant commercial uses as a component of an overall mixed development scheme. B. Improve access and circulation for people by encouraging a development pattern that supports transit and pedestrian access. Improve vehicular circulation and access to support business and economic development. C. Provide and encourage the opportunity for different sections along the Highway 99 corridor to emphasize their unique characteristics and development opportunities rather than require the corridor to develop as an undifferentiated continuum. New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. 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. Where designated in the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning should encourage mixed use or taller high-rise development to occur. E. Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. 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. F. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities Packet Page 67 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 2 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. G. 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. 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. H. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes designated in the Comprehensive Plan should provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: • Supported by adequate services and facilities; • Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, differentiated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. • Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including automobile, transit and pedestrian access. • Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. 16.60.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. All permitted or conditional uses in any other zone in this title, except as specifically prohibited by subsection C of this section or limited by subsection D of this section; 2. Any additional use except as specifically prohibited by subsection C of this section or limited by subsection D of this section; 3. Halfway houses; 4. Sexually oriented businesses, which shall comply with the location standards set forth in ECDC 16.60.015">16.60.015, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and the licensing regulations set forth in Chapter 4.52 ECC. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use. 2. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas secondary or integral to a permitted primary use, such as storage or display areas for automobile sales, building materials or building supply sales, or garden/nursery sales. Such outdoor storage or display areas shall be designed and organized to meet the design standards for parking areas for the CG zone, contained in this Chapter. Packet Page 68 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 3 C. Prohibited Uses. 1. Residential Uses located within the first or second story of any structure, in areas designated “Highway 99 Corridor” or “High-rise Node” on the comprehensive plan map. There are two exceptions to this prohibition: a. Residential uses may be allowed as part of large-scale mixed use developments, as described in Section 16.60.020.B; and, b. Residential uses are allowed on the second floor of buildings that are not located in areas designated as “High-rise Node” on the comprehensive plan map and which are not located on lots that have frontage on Highway 99. 2. Mobile Home parks. 3. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas intended as a primary use, not secondary to a permitted commercial or residential use. Automobile wrecking yards, junk yards, or businesses primarily devoted to storage or mini storage are examples of this type of prohibited use. D. Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC; 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. All sexually oriented businesses shall comply with the requirements of this section, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and Chapter 4.52 ECC. The standards established in this section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit the following activities or products: (a) expressive dance; (b) plays, operas, musicals, or other dramatic works; (c) classes, seminars, or lectures conducted for a scientific or educational purpose; (d) printed materials or visual representations intended for educational or scientific purposes; (e) nudity within a locker room or other similar facility used for changing clothing in connection with athletic or exercise activities; (f) nudity within a hospital, clinic, or other similar medical facility for health-related purposes; and (g) all movies and videos that are rated G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 by the Motion Picture Association of America. A. Separation Requirements. A sexually oriented business shall only be allowed to locate where specifically permitted and only if the following separation requirements are met: 1. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected zones whether such protected zone is located within or outside the city limits: a. A residential zone as defined in Chapter 16.10 ECDC; b. A public use zone as defined in Chapter 16.80 ECDC. 2. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected uses whether such protected use is located within or outside the city limits: a. A public park; b. A public library; c. A nursery school or preschool; Packet Page 69 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 4 d. A public or private primary or secondary school; e. A church, temple, mosque, synagogue, or other similar facility used primarily for religious worship; and f. A community center such as an amusement park, public swimming pool, public playground, or other facility of similar size and scope used primarily by children and families for recreational or entertainment purposes; g. A permitted residential use located in a commercial zone; h. A museum; and i. A public hospital or hospital district. 3. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet to any bar or tavern within or outside the city limits. B. Measurement. The separation requirements shall be measured by following a straight line from the nearest boundary line of a protected zone specified in subsection (A) of this section or nearest physical point of the structure housing a protected use specified in subsection (A) of this section, to the nearest physical point of the tenant space occupied by a sexually oriented business. C. Variance From Separation Requirements. Variances may be granted from the separation requirements in subsection (A) of this section if the applicant demonstrates that the following criteria are met: 1. The natural physical features of the land would result in an effective separation between the proposed sexually oriented business and the protected zone or use in terms of visibility and access; 2. The proposed sexually oriented business complies with the goals and policies of the community development code; 3. The proposed sexually oriented business is otherwise compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses; 4. There is a lack of alternative locations for the proposed sexually oriented business; and 5. The applicant has proposed conditions which would minimize the adverse secondary effects of the proposed sexually oriented business. D. Application of Separation Requirements to Existing Sexually Oriented Businesses. The separation requirements of this section shall not apply to a sexually oriented business once it has located within the city in accordance with the requirements of this section. [Ord. 3117 § 16, 1996]. Packet Page 70 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 5 16.60.020 Site development standards – General. A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side/Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Floor Area CG None None 154′2 None1 60′3 None CG2 None None 154′2 None1 75′3 None 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property regardless of the setback provisions established by any other provision of this code. 2 Street setback area shall be fully landscaped. 3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the Comprehensive Plan map. B. Mixed Use Developments. 1. A mixture of commercial and residential uses, including residential uses located on the first or second floors of buildings, may be permitted for developments meeting the following requirements: a. The proposed development’s combined site area is at least two (2) acres. b. Floor area equivalent to the combined total leaseable area of the first (ground) floor for all buildings located on the site is devoted to commercial use. This commercial floor area may be provided in any manner desirable on-site, except that for all buildings oriented to and facing frontage streets, the street-facing portions of the ground floor shall be occupied by commercial uses. Parking area(s) are excluded from this calculation. This requirement is not intended to require commercial uses facing service drives, alleys, or other minor access easements that are not related to the main commercial streets serving the site. 16.60.030 Site development standards – Design Standards. Design review by the Architectural Design Board is required for any project that includes buildings exceeding 60 feet in height in the CG zone or 75 feet in height in the CG2 zone. Projects not exceeding these height limits may be reviewed by staff as a staff decision. Regardless of what review process is required, all projects proposed in the CG or CG2 zone must meet the design standards contained in this section (16.60.030). A. Screening and Buffering 1. General a. Screen all parking from view from public walkways with grills, fences, lattice, etc. or Type I vegetation 36 inches high. ba. Retaining walls facing adjacent property or public rights-of-way shall not exceed seven feet in height. A minimum of four feet of planted terrace is required between stepped wall segments. cb. Landscape buffers are not required in land use zones with no required building setback. Packet Page 71 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 6 d.c Tree landscaping may be clustered to block the view of a parking lot, yet allow visibility to signage and building entry. ed. Landscape buffers shall be integrated into the design and layout of water detention and treatment elements, to minimize the physical and visual impacts of the water quality elements. f. Type III shall be used between parking and the street for commercial or mixed use projects. ge. All parking lots are required to provide Type V interior landscaping. hf. Type I landscaping is required for commercial, institutional and medical uses adjacent to single-family or multi-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of ten feet in width and continuous in length. ig. Type I is required for residential parking areas adjacent to single-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and continuous in length. jh. Type I landscaping is required for office and multi-family projects adjacent to single-family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and ten feet in height and continuous in length. ki. If there is a loading zone and/or trash compactor area next to a single- family or multi-family zone, there shall be a minimum of a six-foot high concrete wall plus a minimum width of five feet of Type I landscaping. Trash and utility storage elements shall not be permitted to encroach within street setbacks or within setbacks adjacent to single family zones. Mechanical equipment, including heat pumps and other mechanical elements, shall not be placed in the setbacks. lj. Landscape buffers, Type I, shall be used in parking areas adjacent to single-family zones. mk. When no setback is otherwise required, Type III landscaping three feet in width and continuous in length is required between uses in the same zone. 2. Parking Lots Abutting Streets. a. Type IV landscaping, minimum four feet wide, is required along all street frontages. b. All parking located under the building shall be completely screened from the public street by one of the following methods: i. Walls, ii. Type I planting and a grill that is 25 percent opaque, iii. Grill work that is at least 80 percent opaque, or iv. Type III landscaping. B. Access and Parking 1. Not more than 50% of total project parking spaces may be located between the building’s front facade and the primary street. 2. Parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets. 3. Paths within Parking Lots Packet Page 72 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 7 a. Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that are approved by federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors as well as landscape barriers. b. Pedestrian access routes shall be provided at least every 180 feet within parking lots. These shall be designed to provide access to on-site buildings as well as pedestrian walkways that border the development. c. Pedestrian pathways shall be six feet in width and have two feet of planting on each side or have curb stops at each stall in the parking lot on one side and four feet of planting on the second side. i. Parking lots shall have pedestrian connections to the main sidewalk at a minimum of every 100 feet. 4. Bonus for Parking Below Grade a. For projects where at least 50% of the parking is below grade or under the building, the following code requirements may be modified for the parking that is provided below-grade or under-building. – The minimum drive aisle width may be reduced to 22 feet. – The maximum ramp slope may be increased to 20%. – A mixture of full- and reduced-width parking stalls may be provided without meeting the ECDC requirement to demonstrate that all required parking could be provided at full-width dimensions. 5. Drive-through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores, espresso stands, etc., shall comply with the following: a. Drive-through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the building that face a street. b. Drive-through speakers shall not be audible off-site. c. Only one direct entrance or exit from the drive-through shall be allowed as a separate curb cut onto an adjoining street. All remaining direct entrances/exits to the drive-through shall be internal to the site. 6. Pedestrian and Transit Access a. Pedestrian building entries must connect directly to the public sidewalk and to adjacent developments if feasible. b. Internal pedestrian routes shall extend to the property line and connect to existing pedestrian routes if applicable. Potential future connections shall also be identified such that pedestrian access between developments can occur without walking in the parking or access areas. c. When a transit or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the transit stop directly to the new development are required. C. Site Design and Layout 1. General. If a project is composed of similar building layouts that are repeated, then their location on the site design should not be uniform in its layout. If a project has a uniform site layout for parking and open spaces, then the buildings shall vary in form, materials, and/or identity. The following Packet Page 73 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 8 design elements should be considered, and a project shall demonstrate how at least 5 of the elements were used to vary the design of the site: a. building massing and unit layout, b. placement of structures and setbacks, c. location of pedestrian and vehicular facilities, d. spacing from position relative to adjoining buildings, e. composition and types of open space, plant materials and street trees, f. types of building materials and/or elements h. roof variation in slope, height and/or materials. 2. Individuality for Particular Structures a. If a project contains several new or old buildings of similar uses or massing, incorporate two of the following options to create identity and promote safety and feeling of ownership: i. Individual entry design for each building. ii. Create variety in arrangement of building forms in relation to site, parking, open spaces, and the street. iii. Create variety through facade materials and organization. iv. Create variety through roof forms. v. Vary the size/mass of the buildings so they are not uniform in massing and appearance. 3. Lighting a. All lighting shall be shielded and directed away from adjacent parcels. This may be achieved through lower poles at the property lines and/or full “cut off” fixtures. b. Parking lots shall have lighting poles with a maximum of 25 feet in height. c. Pedestrian ways shall have low height lighting focused on pathway area. Pole height shall be a maximum of 14 feet although lighting bollards are prefered. d. Entries shall have lighting for safety and visibility integrated with the building/canopy. D. Building Design and Massing 1. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct ‘base’ and ‘top’. A ‘base’ and ‘top’ can be emphasized in different ways, such as masonry pattern, more architectural detail, step backs and overhangs, lighting, recesses, visible ‘plinth’ above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination thereof. They can also be emphasized by using architectural elements not listed above, as approved, that meet the intent. 2. In buildings with footprints of over 10,000 square feet, attention needs to be given to scale, massing, and façade design so as to reduce the effect of large single building masses. Ways to accomplish this can include articulation, changes of materials, offsets, setbacks, angles or curves of facades, or by the use of distinctive roof forms. This can also be accomplished by using architectural elements not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. Note that façade offsets or step-backs Packet Page 74 of 121 Planning Board Recommendation Highway 99 CG & CG2 Zones Page 9 should not be applied to the ground floor of street-front facades in pedestrian-oriented zones or districts. 3. Alternatives to massing requirements may be achieved by: a. Creation of a public plaza or other open space may substitute for a massing requirement if the space is at least 1,000 sq. ft. in area. In commercial zones, this public space shall be a public plaza with amenities such as benches, tables, planters and other elements. b. Retaining or re-using an historic structure listed on the National Register or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. Any addition or new building on the site must be designed to be compatible with the historic structure. 4. To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting streets or residential properties, walls or portions of walls abutting streets or visible from residentially-zoned properties shall have architectural treatment applied by incorporating at least four of the following elements into the design of the façade: a. Masonry (except for flat concrete block) b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall c. Belt courses of a different texture and color d. Projecting cornice e. Projecting metal canopy f. Decorative tilework g. Trellis containing planting h. Medallions i. Artwork or wall graphics j. Vertical differentiation k. Lighting fixtures m. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except the following: 1. Public utilities; 2. Off-street parking and loading areas; 3. Drive-in business; 4. Secondary uses permitted under ECDC 16.60.010.B; 5. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC. 6. Community-oriented Open Air Markets or Seasonal Farmers Markets. 7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC. Packet Page 75 of 121 Packet Page 76 of 121 Packet Page 77 of 121 Packet Page 78 of 121 Packet Page 79 of 121 Packet Page 80 of 121 Packet Page 81 of 121 Packet Page 82 of 121 Packet Page 83 of 121 Packet Page 84 of 121 Packet Page 85 of 121 Packet Page 86 of 121 Packet Page 87 of 121 Packet Page 88 of 121 Packet Page 89 of 121 Packet Page 90 of 121 Packet Page 91 of 121 Packet Page 92 of 121 Packet Page 93 of 121 Packet Page 94 of 121 Packet Page 95 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 6 flowing discussions. In fact, the optimal situation would be for the Board to conduct their discussions seated around a table. If the meetings were televised, Board Members might be more hesitant to share their comments and suggestions. Vice Chair Dewhirst agreed that televising the meetings would change the dynamics of the Board’s brainstorming discussions. Many times, the Board Members don’t have answers to the complex questions that come before them. After listening to each other speak freely, they have been able to form consensus recommendations. This type of process requires the ability to have free flowing discussions amongst the members. On the other hand, he also pointed out that the more the City is able to educate the public, the better informed the citizens would become on issues that impact them. However, he said he cannot imagine the citizens would be all that interested in listening to the Board meetings since they rarely attend the meetings. Vice Chair Dewhirst expressed his concern that the Planning Board Meetings could become a “bully pulpit” for some people to raise their issues. If the meetings are recorded and televised, he suggested that the public comment period be placed at the end of the agenda to discourage these types of situations. Another option would be to televise public hearings, but not workshop sessions. He said that in his experience working in other jurisdictions, it was very apparent that the dynamics of the individual members was different when meetings were televised. Board Member Guenther suggested the City figure out how many hits the website receives from people who are seeking Planning Board Minutes. If there is a huge demand for the minutes, then perhaps they should record and televise the meetings. Board Member Young recalled that the Board met numerous times to carefully discuss the Downtown Plan and make an appropriate recommendation to the City Council. However, when the City Council considered the issue, they did not even make reference to the concerns discussed by the Board. Perhaps if the meetings were televised, the public would be able to see the genesis of the ideas that are discussed and understand how the Board arrives at their recommendations. Chair Freeman agreed that televising the meetings would help to educate the interested public on various topics and help them understand that issues are typically more complex than what they originally assumed. At the request of the Board, Mr. Chave indicated that the estimated cost of recording and televising the Architectural Design Board and Planning Board Meetings would be about $10,000 per year. The Board agreed that the monetary side of the issue should also be part of the City Council’s consideration. They further agreed that the City Council should consider how many people actually look at the Planning Board Minutes that are posted on the City’s Website. Chair Freeman encouraged as many Board Members as possible to attend the meeting on November 14th. DISCUSSION ON REMANDED ITEM FROM THE CITY COUNCIL RELATED TO THE CG AND CG2 ZONING PROPOSAL Mr. Chave reported that the City Council approved the CG/CG2 Zoning Ordinance by a vote of 5-2. However, they did indicate one issue that was remanded back to the Board for additional review and recommendation. At the City Council hearing, testimony was provided by car dealership representatives who pointed out that the new language would require a 15-foot landscaped setback on the street frontage. They expressed concern that their situation was different than standard businesses within the CG and CG2 zones because they must be able to display their merchandise close to the front of the property. The new setback requirement, in addition to the challenging depth of the properties on Highway 99, would reduce their opportunities to redevelop or change their properties. The City Council has referred this issue back to the Board for additional review of what the setback should be and whether or not it should be applied equally to all business types, including car dealerships. Mr. Chave pointed out that, historically, the setback has been 15 feet, but the new ordinance missed the fact that the landscape section talks about a 4-foot landscape buffer rather than a 15-foot buffer. He suggested that perhaps a 4-foot landscape buffer would be adequate for businesses that require displays within the 15-foot setback, but only if larger landscaped areas were interspersed along the street frontage. The other option would be to only require a 4-foot landscaped buffer for all businesses within the CG and CG2 zone. Packet Page 96 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 7 Chair Freeman suggested the Board Members watch the City Council meeting at which the CG/CG2 Zoning Ordinance was discussed. She noted that the car dealers did not come before the Board during their hearings. Instead, they waited until the issue was before the City Council to raise their concerns. Mr. Chave pointed out that the car dealership owners were not aware of the setback issue until one of them came in with a redevelopment proposal. At that time, staff informed them that the issue was being considered by the City Council, and that is why they attended the public hearing. Mr. Chave suggested staff be allowed to draft some options for the Board to consider and then schedule a public hearing on December 13th. The Board concurred. Mr. Chave advised that the Highway 99 Task Force would meet on November 13th, and the car dealership owners have been invited to attend and provide their comments. On December 13th, staff would provide a report to the Board regarding the task force’s discussion and recommendation. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Chave referred to the extended agenda for December 13th and announced that Item 3 (Shoreline Master Program) and Item 4 (Neighborhood Business District Zoning) have been postponed until the first meeting in January. Therefore, the agenda for December 13th would include the following: • A public hearing on code updates required to integrate design guidelines and the revised design review process into the development code. • A public hearing on proposed changes to the CG/CG2 Zoning Ordinance as remanded by the City Council to address street front setback requirements. • A discussion with staff and the City Attorney regarding the Non-Conforming Regulations. • A presentation by Mayor Haakenson regarding decision making processes. • The election of 2007 Planning Board Officers. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Freeman did not provide any comments during this portion of the meeting. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Dewhirst asked that his work number be deleted from the Planning Board Member Roster. Vice Chair Dewhirst reported that he asked the City Engineer about the option of creating a policy for using an in-lieu-of fund for sidewalk construction. It appears as though the Engineering Department would be open to considering this type of process, and Mr. Bowman has also agreed to explore the opportunity. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Packet Page 97 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes December 13, 2006 Page 2 position. People who read the minutes of the meeting will want to know each of the Board Members’ thoughts. Therefore, when voting, Board Members should make sure everyone puts something in the record to indicate why they voted the way they did. It would be helpful to hear from everyone. • When Board Members vote in opposition to a motion, it is important that they explain why as part of the record. Otherwise, the Board’s decisions would be open to a lot of interpretation. They should be very clear about why they are voting for or against a motion. • If any decisions are left open to interpretation, the issues would come back before the Board at some point in the future. It is very important to clearly explain the rationale for each decision. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Al Rutledge asked that the City hold public hearings and offer ample opportunity for the public to comment next time a skate park is considered. He recalled that the City considered their first skate park in 1996 and 1997, but the record that was established at that time was not considered when the new skate park was reviewed and approved. While he is in favor of park facilities for children, the City should use a better process that includes more public participation. PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR CG AND CG2 ZONES Mr. Chave reported that the City Council approved a revised set of standards for the CG and CG2 zones on November 6, 2006. During their hearing, representatives from two auto dealerships noted that the 15-foot landscaped setback requirement would create difficulties in redeveloping their properties. They expressed concern that a 15-foot landscape buffer would require a significant portion of their land to be removed from active use. In addition, a concern was expressed that the required landscaping would obscure their outdoor display area, which is traditionally placed adjacent to the street front of the property. The City Council agreed that the Planning Board should take another look at the setback issue. Mr. Chave explained that the 15-foot landscaped buffer requirement is an old zoning standard. Since the current code was adopted in 1980, substantial changes have occurred on the Highway 99 corridor, most notably the substantial corridor improvements (including sidewalks) completed during the late 1990s. The new landscape provisions included in the CG/CG2 update were developed as part of the 2001 draft design guidelines and were intended to provide adequate landscape and buffer standards for development. They require more internal landscaping within large parking lots, so it makes sense to allow property owners to compensate for some of the increase in land devoted to internal landscaping by requiring less at the perimeter of the property. This would also be consistent with the idea of encouraging more landscaping coverage to be spread throughout parking areas rather than clustered at the perimeter. Mr. Chave advised that, combined with the other City design standards, most notably the reasonably restrictive sign code, it seems that the 15-foot landscaped buffer requirement is outdated and counter productive—especially when the City’s expressed goal is to encourage significant economic development along the Highway 99 Corridor. Staff is recommending changes to the table and footnotes in ECDC 16.60.020 and ECDC 16.60.030.A.2.a to indicate that a minimum 4-foot setback would be required along all street frontages. Mr. Chave said staff has also identified other provisions of concern. ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.a would require that all parking be screened from view from public walkways with grills, fences, lattice, etc. He noted that this would be in appropriate along Highway 99, particularly for auto dealerships that must display their product near the street front. ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.f would require that Type III Landscaping must be provided between parking and the street for commercial or mixed use projects, but this provision would not allow people to see the cars that are set out on display. Board Member Young asked if there are any other commercial zones in the City that require a 15-foot front setback. Mr. Chave answered that the Neighborhood Business (BN) zones have similar setback requirements, but the Commercial Business (BC) zones do not because the properties are developed lot-line-to-lot-line. In the BC zones, the lot lines vary Packet Page 98 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes December 13, 2006 Page 3 depending on the location. Board Member Young suggested that the 15-foot front setback requirement appears to be an anomaly on Highway 99. Mr. Chave agreed and noted that Highway 99 is much different than the BN zone. Board Member Reed referred to a letter dated November 1, 2006 from Magic Toyota asking that the City consider an exemption to allow them to display their merchandise near the street front. He asked if the current zoning code could be modified to provide an exception that would allow auto dealerships to display their merchandise. Mr. Chave agreed that the Board could consider this option, but if the City were to allow auto dealerships increased use of their property, other businesses along Highway 99 should be allowed the same thing. Board Member Reed recalled that at the City Council hearing, one individual suggested this issue could be handled with a conditional use permit requirement. Mr. Chave agreed that is one option the Board could consider, but a conditional use permit process would be unpredictable and could take three to four months to complete. This would result in uncertainty for the businesses. Peter Chung, General Manager, Magic Toyota, said he spoke at the City Council hearing regarding the setback issue. Although he would like the City to just grant the setback exception to just his business, he recognizes that the issue is much larger for the City. The City must create something for all auto dealerships to keep them in the area to promote economic development and provide tax revenue to the City. Mr. Chung explained that his group has made a significant investment in Bellevue as part of the redevelopment of Sunset Village. They are also involved in the redevelopment of the existing Magic Toyota site in Edmonds. He advised that they originally purchased property in Lynnwood in order to relocate their business. However, they were later approached by Mayor Haakenson and the City’s Economic Development Director, asking what the City could do to keep the business within Edmonds. They explained that there was no adjacent property that could be purchased to meet the manufacturer’s requirements for redevelopment. The City’s Economic Development Director worked with them to acquire an adjacent property, but the proposed 15-foot landscaped setback requirement would definitely create a problem for them. Mr. Chung advised that he has been working Mayor Haakenson and Mr. Bowman to figure out something that would work for both the City and for Magic Toyota. He provided a handout to outline Toyota’s requirements for every dealership. The document also provides a design overview of the buildings that are being proposed for the Edmonds site. He noted that the development would be fairly substantial as far as facilities and land requirements. He specifically pointed out that, with the addition of the new property, they would still be about 100,000 square feet short of the manufacturer’s requirements unless the 15-foot setback requirement were significantly reduced. Secondly, he pointed out that the manufacturer requires a certain percentage of landscaping within the parking area based on the total square footage of land. The Edmonds site would require about 42,000 square feet of landscaped area. Not only would they have to put landscaping in the front, but throughout the parking area, as well. Al Rutledge cautioned that a conditional use permit does not require a public hearing. If the City were to use a conditional use permit to grant the setback exception to auto dealerships, staff would be able to make the decision without any public input. He pointed out that people would walk through the parking areas and along the sidewalk in front of the auto dealerships. Therefore, it is important that sufficient space be provided for safe parking and pedestrian access. He expressed his belief that Highway 99 is an excellent place for more intense development since the infrastructure is already in place to accommodate it. Board Member Guenther expressed his belief that a 15-foot front setback requirement on Highway 99 would be onerous. It would require too much real estate for landscaping in an area where the City is trying to encourage retail and commercial development. The setback requirement would be a great imposition along Highway 99. Board Member Henderson agreed that there should not be a 15-foot setback requirement on Highway 99 or on any other major arterial where businesses are located on both sides. The 15-foot setback requirement would only be appropriate where commercial zones are adjacent to residential zones and not on Highway 99 or Edmonds Way. Board Member Young recalled that the 15-foot setback requirement was originally designed to make Highway 99 more pedestrian friendly. However, this concern has been resolved by the substantial improvements that have occurred along Packet Page 99 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes December 13, 2006 Page 4 Highway 99 and the new landscape provisions included in the CG/CG2 update. He agreed with Board Member Henderson that the City must be sensitive to adjacent residential zones, but a 15-foot setback requirement would not be appropriate for properties along Highway 99 or any other major arterials that run perpendicular to it. Board Member Reed agreed that the setback requirement in the CG and CG2 zones should be reduced to make it realistic for the types of businesses that are located along Highway 99. However, even if the setback requirement were reduced to four feet, there would still be parts of Highway 99 where buildings abut right up against the sidewalk. Mr. Chave explained that these buildings would be considered non-conforming. Any redevelopment on these properties would be required to provide the minimum 4-foot setback. However, the existing buildings could continue to function as non-conforming. Chair Freeman noted that building setback requirements are a different issue than landscape setback requirements. She said she sees no reason why auto dealerships along Highway 99 should not be allowed to use all of the available land up to the front property line. She suggested the Board consider a zero front setback requirement for auto dealerships along Highway 99. Mr. Chung brought up the fact that the manufacturer would require them to install a certain amount of landscaping throughout the property, which would work out to about 42,000 square feet of landscaping on the Edmonds site. He pointed out that the manufacturer is very aware of how much landscaping would be provided on site so there is not a large area of black top. Chair Freeman pointed out that the landscaping required on site by the manufacturer would provide variety on Highway 99, so the auto dealerships should be allowed to use their property up to the property line. She expressed her belief that there should be no front setback requirement for auto dealerships. This would make Highway 99 more varied in appearance if some businesses provide landscape along the street front and others provide it within the property. She emphasized that auto dealerships are very important to Edmonds and there is very little land available for their use. The City should allow them to utilize as much land as possible in order to keep them in Edmonds. Board Member Young said he would be opposed to a zero setback requirement. Having at least four feet of landscaping along the property line would enhance the appearance of the product on display. It would also be appropriate to have at least some separation between the product and the sidewalk. Chair Freeman said that she has observed that the existing auto dealerships have parked cars right up to the property. However, there is a landscaped area between the property line and the public right-of-way. Mr. Chave pointed out that any landscaping that exists along the right-of-way on Highway 99 is on private property. Mr. Chung agreed with Board Member Young that it might not look appropriate for the cars to abut right up against the street, but when Highway 99 was improved, sidewalks were constructed between the street and the private properties. The sidewalks provide some buffer. He said Chair Freeman is suggesting that the landscaped areas within the lot would add a lot more depth to the property and make it more visually appealing. While he would like to be able to utilize 100% of the property, he understands that the City must be sensitive to how the development would look. He summarized that a 4-foot setback requirement, with a 2-foot overhang allowance as proposed by staff would also work. Mr. Chave noted that the new landscaping requirement would be very different from the historical requirement. Ground cover would be allowed rather than higher shrubs and trees. Trees would be required, but they would have a fairly significant spacing and be limbed. This type of landscaping would allow some of the cars to overhang a few feet into the setback area. He also noted that the new landscape requirements emphasize the use of more landscaping within the property. Mr. Chave expressed his concern about a zero setback requirement. If businesses were allowed to park vehicles right up to the property line, there is a good chance they would end up overhanging onto the sidewalk area. He suggested that a minimum 4-foot setback requirement be established. Because ground cover could be used in the setback, the auto dealerships would still be able to display their product in a manner that would be extremely visible from the sidewalk and street. BOARD MEMBER YOUNG MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE STAFF’S PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR STREET SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CG AND CG2 ZONES TO THE CITY Packet Page 100 of 121 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes December 13, 2006 Page 5 COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Chave noted that anyone who testified at the public hearing would receive a notice of the City Council hearing that would be scheduled sometime in January. Packet Page 101 of 121 Packet Page 102 of 121 Packet Page 103 of 121 Packet Page 104 of 121 Packet Page 105 of 121 Packet Page 106 of 121 Packet Page 107 of 121 Packet Page 108 of 121 Packet Page 109 of 121 Packet Page 110 of 121 Packet Page 111 of 121 Packet Page 112 of 121 Packet Page 113 of 121 Packet Page 114 of 121 Packet Page 115 of 121 Packet Page 116 of 121 Packet Page 117 of 121 Packet Page 118 of 121 Packet Page 119 of 121 Packet Page 120 of 121 AM-781 12. Presentation of Resolution to Council President Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/02/2007 Submitted By:Jana Spellman, City Council Time:5 Minutes Department:City Council Type:Information Review Committee: Action: Agenda Memo Subject Title Presentation of Resolution and Plaque to Councilmember Deanna Dawson for her service as Council President. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff N/A Previous Council Action The proposed Resolution thanking former Council President Deanna Dawson for her service as Council President from January to December 2006 was placed on this evening's Consent Agenda for approval. Narrative Presentation of Resolution and plaque to Councilmember Deanna Dawson for her service as Council President. Revenue & Expenditures Fiscal Impact Attachments No file(s) attached. Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 11:46 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 12/27/2006 01:17 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/27/2006 02:46 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 12/27/2006 10:30 AM Final Approval Date: 12/27/2006 Packet Page 121 of 121