2022-07-27 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Webinar Meeting
July 27, 2022
Chair Crank called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
The Land Acknowledgement was read by Lily Distelhorst.
Board Members Present Staff Present
Alicia Crank, Chair Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director
Roger Pence, Vice Chair Kernen Lien, Interim Planning Division Manager
Matt Cheung Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts, and Human Svcs. Director
Judi Gladstone Leif Bjorback, Chief Building Official
Richard Kuehn Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Mike Rosen Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Beth Tragus-Campbell (alternate)
Lily Distelhorst (student rep)
Board Members Absent
Todd Cloutier (excused)
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER ROSEN,
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 13 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Larry Williamson asked about engagement activities related to the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Mr.
Lien explained he would give an update at the end of the meeting.
Marjorie Fields made comments regarding the Salmon -Safe Certification process. She strongly urged the City
to move ahead with problems mentioned in the report such as removing blockages to salmon in the streams and
stabilizing stream breaks, especially in Perrinville Creek and Shell Creek.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 1 of 9
Greg Fer_ug son commented on the Salmon -Safe Certification process. He urged the Planning Board not to
recommend that the certification be allowed. He expressed concern about the certification and the need for
improvements to the certification. The climate change issue needs to be taken seriously, and it is not adequately
addressed in the report. He stated that there are blockages on all the salmon -bearing streams. These are
acknowledged in the report, but there is no requirement to fix the blockages. Similarly, there are habitat issues
identified in the report, but there is no requirement for the City to fix them. He urged the Planning Board to
reject the report and send it back to the Science Team to add actions that will help the situation.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
A. Development Services Activity Report
Development Services Director McLaughlin and Chief Building Official Bjorback made a presentation
regarding 2022 Development Activities focusing on COVID response, permit activity, key development, and
Comprehensive Plan performance measures.
COVID Response forced the department to move to electronic permitting activities. MyBuildingPermit.com is
the online portal for managing permit applications. Pre -application meetings continue over Zoom. Customer
feedback on electronic processes has been positive. City Hall reopened to the public in March with reduced
hours. The majority of staff are utilizing a hybrid work model. Customer assistance is provided in -person,
virtual, or over the phone and/or email.
Chair Crank asked about staffing levels. Director McLaughlin reported that they just hired their second new
planner after some reshuffling. Now, they are nearly fully staffed with the exception of one associate planner.
Director McLaughlin reported on the numbers and types of permits issued and the corresponding revenue. There
is an upward trend of the annual number of building permits. She reviewed impact fees and general facility
charges, solar permits, and building inspections.
Mr. Bjorback reviewed a map of the key projects in Edmonds. Most are located near the Highway 99 corridor,
along Edmonds Way, or in the bowl. Projects highlighted included:
• Wastewater Treatment Plant — Carbon Recovery, 200 - 2nd Avenue S. - issued
• GRE Apartments —192 new residential Units, 23400 Highway 99 — nearing completion
• Anthology of Edmonds —127 new senior living units, 21200 — 72nd Avenue W. - issued
• Bell Street Apartments — 4 new residential units, 650 Bell Street — nearing completion
• Main Street Commons — retail, restaurant, and event space, 550/558 Main Street - issued
• Edmonds Crossing —10 new residential units, 23830 Edmonds Way — in the framing stages
• Kisan Townhomes —18 new residential units, 22810 Edmonds Way - issued
• Ford Hunter Townhomes — 4-unit townhomes, 7528 — 215d' Street SW — open for occupancy
• Paradise Heights —12 new residential units, 550 Paradise Lane - issued
• Edmonds Townhomes — 4-unit townhome, 8029 — 238d' Street SW — wrapping up permit review
• Civic Field — park updates, 300 — 6d' Avenue N — estimated to open mid -winter
• Apollo Apartments — 252 new residential units, 23601 Highway 99 — nearing issuance
• Port Office Building — 6650 sf new commercial, 471 Admiral Way - applied
• Westgate Station — 4700 sf commercial + 20 residential units, 9601 Edmonds Way - applied
• Pine Park — 6 live/work + 8-unit townhome, 614/616 — 5d' Avenue S. - applied
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 2 of 9
• Sunde Townhomes — 5-unit townhome, 8629-238"' Street SW — in design review
• Greenhill Townhomes — 6-unit townhome, 7103 — 210t' Street SW — in design review
• GBH Holdings — 24-unit townhome, 627 Dayton — in design review
• Housing Hope — 52 new residential units + services, 8215- 236t' Street SW — in design reviews
• Glacier Environmental Services — new commercial office + warehouse, 7509 — 212t' Street SW, in
design review
• Terrace Place — 260 new residential units, 23625 — 84t' Avenue W — pre -application
• Brass Tack Investments — 7 new residential units, 9516 Edmonds Way — rezone
• Edmonds Way PRD — 16-lot Planned Residential Development, 5401550 Edmonds Way — pre -
application
Director McLaughlin reported on the City's Comprehensive Plan Performance Measures as articulated in the
Comprehensive Plan. These measurements reflect city-wide and city government energy use; the number of
residential units permitted; the average number of jobs within the city; the lineal feet of water, sewer, and
stormwater mains replaced or rehabilitated; the Capital Facilities Plan project delivery results; and lineal feet of
sidewalk renovated or rehabilitated.
Comments/Questions:
Board Member Rosen asked if new sidewalks were included in the "renovated or rehabilitated" numbers.
Director McLaughlin affirmed that the new sidewalks were included in the calculations even though they
weren't necessarily spelled out. Board Member Rosen suggested highlighting that since it is such a high priority
for residents. He then referred to the increase in residential electricity consumption. He pointed out that they
have been strongly encouraging load increase behavior such as electric vehicles and switching from gas to
electric. Director McLaughlin agreed. Board Member Rosen asked for more information about the goals for the
average number of residential units permitted. Ms. McLaughlin thought that if they met that target, they were
on track for meeting the number of units needed. Mr. Lien added that the targets are from the 2015
Comprehensive Plan Update and the previous growth targets that the City was assigned. There will be new
targets with the new update. The City is on track to meet the 2035 targets, but, per the Buildable Lands Report,
beyond 2035 they are short.
Board Member Campbell thanked staff for the information. She commended staff she has worked with on the
permitting and inspection process.
Board Member Gladstone asked about the height of Terrace Place. It seems tall and out of place for the area.
Director McLaughlin noted that the area was recently rezoned. There is currently a 75-foot maximum, and the
proposal is going up to the maximum height. Mr. Lien added that this property is in the General Commercial
(CG) zone along the Highway 99 corridor. Board Member Gladstone expressed concern about the huge number
of units this will have and the resulting increase in pedestrian and car traffic. Mr. Lien explained there are
extensive frontage improvements required in the CG zone including new sidewalks. The Housing Hope project
is on the same block so the whole area will get frontage improvements. This area is also being considered for
the Green Streets project. Board Member Gladstone expressed concern about the impact on the neighborhood
and encouraged robust community engagement. She also spoked to the importance of considering where and
how the sidewalks are installed so they are useful. Director McLaughlin agreed and discussed how the
development of street typologies fits into that. This will ensure that each development has consistent application
of sidewalk standards. This will also involve a sidewalk code update. Board Member Gladstone referred to the
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 3 of 9
utility replacement metrics and suggested that a more meaningful metric might be the number of miles being
replaced each year and the term of replacement for the whole system.
Vice Chair Pence noted that they have seen some of these projects in previous years. He asked for clarification
about how the annual counts are done. Director McLaughlin noted that for the purposes of Comprehensive Plan
measurements, they are only counted one time, but staff is including them each year in the presentations because
they are in different phases of development. Vice Chair Pence referred to the live/work units and asked if this
is a requirement. Director McLaughlin replied that the live/work component is not required, but ground floor
commercial is. Vice Chair Pence asked if the City would require residents to have a business license. Director
McLaughlin indicated they would.
Board Member Cheung said he appreciated the maps used in the presentation as a visual representation of where
the projects are. He referred to the increase in residential energy consumption and asked if there was monthly
data for 2021. He wondered how that compares to 2022. Director McLaughlin indicated she could look into
that.
Board Member Kuehn thanked staff for the presentation and for the maps. Regarding sidewalks, he encouraged
attention to the areas where they are needed the most. He stressed that they need to be usable. Director
McLaughlin commented that as part of the Reimagining Neighborhoods and Streets project, they will be doing
a pedestrian prioritization investment network which will inform where they need to invest. They will also be
looking at including in -lieu programs. Regarding the energy usage, Board Member Kuehn said he was also
interested in seeing the monthly data. He thought that perhaps people really ramped up their work -at-home
efforts in 2021 rather than 2020.
Student Representative Distelhorst said she was excited to see more multifamily housing in Edmonds but asked
if areas like Highway 99 will be prioritized to be safer for pedestrians. She spoke to the importance of improving
the area completely to provide equitable development. Director McLaughlin agreed. She noted that it makes
sense to put this density along Highway 99 where they have the high quality Bus Rapid Transit. Along with that
will be the prioritization of pedestrian safety where the development is going and where the people will be. She
spoke to the importance of involving the community in this and of focusing on quality of life for those areas.
She commented on how the Green Streets project could fit in with this goal and beautify the area.
Board Member Campbell spoke to the need for sidewalks on 80 and on 236th Streets and noted that the
sidewalk on 238d' will be even more utilized with the opening of the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. She
commented on Community Transit's proposed bus route from Edmonds Ferry directly to the Mountlake Terrace
Transit Center going up 238t'. She recommended that one of the conditions of the Terrace Place project be a
stoplight at 238th Street and Highway 104 to help with the traffic situation there. Director McLaughlin indicated
that a traffic analysis would be done.
B. Equitable Engagement Framework
Director McLaughlin explained the goal is to create a framework for engaging and building meaningful
relationships with communities who have historically been underrepresented in planning for public
infrastructure and other city projects. She reviewed the tasks involved in creating the draft framework including
a team kickoff meeting, demographic data review, interviews, developing a criteria map, community champions
list, and compiling the draft framework. The demographic review aims to provide a demographic profile of
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 4 of 9
communities in the city based on factors such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, income, internet access, and language
spoken at home. Ten different census tracts were reviewed. She discussed detailed results of the demographic
review and discussed deliverables: demographic analysis, criteria mapping, scales of engagement, and the
Equitable Engagement Framework.
Board Member Gladstone asked if the numbers in area 9 included the people of Esperance and if they would
be included in communications. Director McLaughlin was not sure if they were included in the numbers but
indicated she could find out. She explained that if they are talking about a physical project, it would be relevant
to include the residents of Esperance in communications. Board Member Gladstone asked why the population
of black people was not specifically listed. Chair Crank commented that it is only 1-2% of the population and
was included in persons of color. She noted that persons of color numbers may actually be higher because many
people are mixed race but must choose one "box" on the census form. She spoke to the importance of
considering the different races and cultures and the perspectives and values within those communities. Director
McLaughlin concurred.
Vice Chair Pence agreed with the challenge of having to check one box for race. He requested a full copy of the
report when it is done. Finally, he wondered how this will work in practice; for example, with the Unocal
property. Director McLaughlin explained how the tools could be used to make decisions. Vice Chair Pence said
he hopes that the underrepresented residents and overrepresented residents will be brought together. Director
McLaughlin noted that this may take extra time as the goal is to nurture relationships, educate, build confidence,
increase comfort levels, and level the playing field for underrepresented community members.
Board Member Cheung expressed appreciation for this work. He is looking forward to seeing the rest of the
report.
Board Member Rosen said he loves this data. He spoke to the importance of different approaches for different
needs. He asked about the stunning number of 27% Hispanic/Latino and asked why the census says it is only
7.9%. Director McLaughlin said she would look into it.
Board Member Kuehn also said he really likes this focus. He looks forward to hearing more about this.
Chair Crank commented on the difficulty of mixing the overrepresented groups with the underrepresented
groups initially. She noted that this project will create the opportunity to have uncomfortable but important
conversations. She stated that the outreach will need to be community -minded to be successful. She commented
on the importance of being mindful of how they approach underrepresented people. She is proud of Edmonds
for taking on this challenging work.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Salmon -Safe Certification
Director Feser introduced this item and Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla. She explained that the City
ended up the Salmon -Safe evaluation with 12 condition items that need to be met within five years and three
pre -certification items. The Planning Board had requested additional information on May 25 regarding
prioritization and criteria of the 12 conditions, resources needed in terms of costs and staff commitments, time
estimations, private landowner requirements, and pre -conditions 1 and 2 confirmation by the City. Additionally,
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 5 of 9
staff has come up with a couple requests they would like the Council to consider when they are reviewing
certification and contemplating adoption.
Director Feser reviewed the prioritization of the conditions and the four criteria used to prioritize them (benefit
to aquatic habitat/species; direct vs. indirect; action vs. plan; and area). The five conditions that ended up at the
top are also the ones that staff is bringing forward with some considerations for the Council to extend time or
allocate budget dollars for to make them happen. The most impactful items and the ones that require the most
resources are identified as priorities by both staff and Salmon -Safe. Director Feser also reviewed resource
estimation for the various conditions in terms of cost estimate and city staff time required to sustain the project.
Regarding private landowner requirements, the assessment done by Salmon -Safe was only for city -owned sites
so that isn't an issue. Regarding the pre -conditions, she received confirmation that Pre -Condition 1 might have
one follow-up piece. Pre -Condition 2 is good to go. Pre -Condition 3 applies to Parks and will take approximately
three months. She thinks all three will be completed before this is adopted by Council. She reviewed staff
requests/revisions related to the five top conditions.
Board Member Cheung suggested that one additional metric that might be helpful is the length of time it will
take for each of those categories. Director Feser concurred. She stated that the conditions have timeframes
associated with each one of them. By agreeing to the certification, the City agrees to the timeframe. Board
Member Cheung explained that more detail about how long the City expects each one to take would be helpful.
Board Member Gladstone thanked staff for the presentation. She asked Director Feser about the driver and the
value of the certification. Director Feser reviewed some of the history of the Salmon -Safe certification. She
acknowledged that members of the public would like to see a little more action, but staff realizes that to do this
type of work they need to develop permits, plans, and put a lot of things in place. Mr. De Lilla concurred and
spoke to the importance of having an accurate assessment of all the issues at hand before taking action.
Board Member Rosen thanked staff for responding to the Board's questions. He asked if staff s salaries are
included in the cost allocation. Director Feser replied that they are not, and neither are the consultant costs.
Board Member Rosen asked if things like climate change and emerging science are being taken into
consideration. Director Feser discussed the Parks response to the water situation. The Conservation Plan will
respond to climate -related issues and describe how the City will adapt. Mr. De Lilla agreed that they are doing
their best to keep up with the data as it is updated. He discussed how they updated the Stormwater Code to
decrease the flashiness of Perrinville Creek. This is more than what is required by the State for drainage
standards and factors in impervious surfaces that actually exist.
Board Member Rosen asked about the projected impact on salmon runs related to each condition. Director Feser
replied that Salmon -Safe said it was hard to quantify, but they have seen results in other cities where these plans
have been implemented. Board Member Rosen noted that since they have a baseline, they could implement
some milestones to see if they are making a difference. This could build in some opportunities to course correct
if things are not working or double down if they are. He referred to Condition 4 which relates to water
conservation plans and irrigation and asked how this rose so high to the top in terms of its impact on salmon.
Director Feser said she would follow up with Salmon -Safe on this.
Board Member Campbell asked if there are other projects that have been tabled that are potentially more
actionable than these items. If they don't support the Salmon -Safe framework, are there other alternatives they
are looking at? Mr. De Lilla explained that the Department of Ecology is requiring that all the Phase 2 cities put
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 6 of 9
together a Stormwater Management Action Plan. In some ways the Salmon -Safe certification will supplement
other things; in other ways, it will not. He reviewed other work the City is also doing. Board Member Campbell
asked about the impact that focusing on this is having on staff time and other projects. Director Feser replied
that some of these items would not have been on the work plan. By committing to the certification, they have
to put off other things. Board Member Campbell asked what those things are. Director Feser indicated she would
need to follow up on that. This is part of why they want to go to Council to make sure Council understands the
price tag and the time commitment required. Ultimately, this will be the Council's decision. Mr. De Lilla
concurred. The preference would be to get additional staffing and funds so they can continue to deal with all the
other issues.
Board Member Gladstone commented that the tradeoff issue is an important one that the Council should
consider seriously given the demands on the budget. She thinks it would also be important for Council to
consider what those milestones will be.
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
CHEUNG, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD ADVANCE THIS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION,
UNDERSCORING THE IMPORTANCE OF LOOKING AT THE FINANCIAL TRADEOFFS OF
IMPLEMENTING THIS VERSUS THE IMPACTS ON THE REST OF THE BUDGET AND
ENSURING THAT THERE ARE GOOD MILESTONES OR BENCHMARKS FOR MAKING SURE
THAT THERE IS VALUE IN THE WORK THAT IS BEING DONE. MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Permanent Design Standards for Multifamily Buildings in the BD2 Zone
Senior Planner Clugston reviewed a PowerPoint presentation regarding Permanent Design Standards for
multifamily -only buildings in the BD2 zone. Council adopted interim design standards a couple months ago.
Staff is in the process of developing permanent design standards for these same buildings. He reviewed the
timeline for the adoption process and the moratorium process. These standards are intended to apply to the areas
in the BD2 zone that do not have the Designated Street Front requirements. Council also adopted an interim
map during the design standard discussion which changed the Street Front map. As a result, only a handful of
non -Designated Street Front parcels remain in the BD2 zone at the edges of the downtown area. The interim
design standards targeted these particular sites and addressed materials, private amenity space, street -side
amenity space, and roof modulation/stepdown regulations.
Materials:
• Breaks up massing; strengthens identity
• Preferred exterior materials: natural stone, wood, architectural metal, brick, and glass
• Man-made is acceptable if made to look like preferred materials
Private Amenity Space:
• Intended to improve livability for smaller residential units
• Allows for architectural discretion to design amenity space to align with building character, orientation,
and style
• Provides additional articulation of massing, adds interest to the facade, and increases `eyes on the street'
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 7 of 9
• Standards:
0 10% of project area
o can be made by balconies, decks, patios, yards
o can be grouped together with a dwelling unit or grouped for resident use
o if with individual units must be greater than 40 square feet
o balconies can project 5' into setback from R-zone property
o decks and patios can project up to 10' in the setback area
Street -side AmenitySpace:
• Results in a setback from the sidewalk to serve as amenity space
• Activates street front to improve the pedestrian experience
• Strengthens pedestrian access and site identity
• Standards:
o Must be 5% of lot area
o Must be between the building front and sidewalk only and open to sky
o Must include landscaping, seating, art, etc.
o Street -side amenity space area excludes any private amenity space area that is provided at the
front of the building
o Canopy/awnings are required and do not impact the amount of street -side amenity area.
Roof Modulation/Stepdown: The language added to the interim standards stated that "some roof modulation is
required with preference for stepdowns that follow the slope when slope exists." The intent was to provide a
variation in roof plane and reduced the bulk of the building. The Architectural Design Board asked staff to pick
up more on the roof modulation aspect and provide a menu of options that a developer could use to meet the
additional roof modulation requirements. Staff will be working on this for next week.
Private Amenity pace — Rooftop Deck: There was some concern that if the required private amenity space was
allowed on the rooftop, it might all go there. The Architectural Design Board wanted the rooftop option to be
available after the 10% of private amenity space is achieved for individual units. They also would allow that to
be above the height limit with certain conditions.
Mr. Clugston stated that staff would be going back to the ADB next week to further refine the language for
permanent standards and then be back before the Planning Board in two weeks for a public hearing on those
standards.
Comments/Questions: None
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
Mr. Lien reviewed the extended agenda and solicited feedback on the length of the agenda/meeting tonight.
Chair Crank stated she did not like late meetings. She thinks the length of agenda tonight was good, but the
members need to self -monitor the amount of questions and comments. She reminded board members that staff
welcomes questions between meetings also.
Board Member Gladstone thought there was too much on the agenda tonight. It's not necessarily the number of
items on the list, but how long each one takes. She appreciates Chair Crank's comments about being judicious
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 8 of 9
about commentary, she thinks they need to make sure that they have the time to really understand the issues
well enough to make informed recommendations. Chair Crank agreed and recommended, when possible, asking
staff questions ahead of time.
Vice Chair Pence reminded folks that he had suggested not taking a break in mid -August which might have
helped. Chair Crank did not think that would have made that much of a difference.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
None.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Mr. Lien gave an update on public engagement activities related to the Comprehensive Plan update process. He
commented on the very positive response staff had from the public about having a table set up at the market and
noted they will likely continue this to some degree.
Board Member Gladstone thanked Mr. Lien for giving her a mini tour of the BD2 zone. This was very helpful
for her to better understand the situation.
Board Member Campbell thanked staff for all the work put in for tonight's meeting. Although it was a long
meeting, it was full of important information.
Vice Chair Pence commented that he will try to make a practice of asking questions ahead of meetings when
possible. He asked that the Board be kept apprised of the status of the code rewrite which Mr. Clugston will be
working on. Mr. Lien replied that would be coming to the Board as soon as possible.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 10:03 p.m.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
July 27, 2022 Page 9 of 9