Loading...
2021-12-08 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Webinar Meeting December 8, 2021 Chair Rosen called the December 8, 2021 virtual meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. He shared that Board Member Cloutier has been reappointed until 2025. Board Member Kuehn has moved into the open position, No. 4, which runs until 2023. As a result, the alternate position is currently open. He also noted that Commissioner Gladstone would be leaving the meeting early tonight. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. Board Members Present Mike Rosen, Chair Alicia Crank, Vice Chair' Richard Kuehn Judi Gladstone Matt Cheung Roger Pence Lily Distelhorst (Student Rep) Board Members Absent Todd Cloutier (unexcused) Staff Present Eric Engmann, Senior Planner Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES None ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. "Vice Chair Crank joined the meeting at 7:10, which was previously arranged. 2 Board Member Kuehn joined the meeting at 8:02 p.m. which was previously arranged. 3 Board Member Gladstone left the meeting at 7:52 by previous arrangement. Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 1 of 7 AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Seitz spoke regarding the PROS (Parks, Recreation, and Open Space) plan resources and the SR99 Corridor. She stressed that the City does not own the land that Mathay-Ballinger Park is on in its entirety. Its play structures are partially located on right-of-way, and modifications are only allowed through Temporary Limited Use Permit authorization from the Snohomish County Public Utility District (PUD). The PUD has the perpetual right to build an electrical substation that they are currently allowing park uses on. Since Highway 99 is an area of concern for utility upgrades, she is concerned about the limitations and risks to the only existing city park to serve the Highway 99 uptown area. She discussed multiple issues with this park and urged the City to work harder and invest in durable park resources to provide equity in this area. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Residential Occupancy Code Amendment Senior Planner Engmann continued a previous discussion on existing Residential Occupancy Limits standards and amendments that need to be made because of state legislation that happened this past year. He gave a recap of SB 5235 and the city's existing code section. SB 5235 prohibits local governments from limiting the number of unrelated persons occupying a home. There are some exceptions for short-term rentals, building code occupancy loads, and some group homes. SB 5235 also addressed owner requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), but this was vetoed by the governor. Regarding the portion limiting the number of unrelated persons occupying a home, the conflicting portions of Edmonds' code are in the Section A with the definition of "family" and Section D — Calculations in Single -Family Zones. The proposed draft would: • Remove residential occupancy limits (per state legislation) • Maintain limits on number of dwellings in single-family zoning • Shorten the definition of "Family" to include related or unrelated individuals • Rely on the definition of a single-family dwelling to enforce the single-family component of it. Strengthen structural/element requirements for single-family dwellings which doesn't rely on the people that live inside the dwelling (one mailbox, water meter, gas meter ... common access to rooms) • Maintain section that talks about Group Living and Exclusions from Family Definition. • Maintain provisions limiting the rental of an ADU to either the primary house or the ADU • Maintain provision allowing normal hosting activities • Strengthen the definition of Single -Family Dwelling Unit and add criteria to the definition. • Maintain the requirement for one family and one dwelling per lot • Adds requirements to limit one mailbox, water meter, and gas meter and to have common access to and common use of all living, kitchen and eating areas • Strengthen definition of Dwelling Unit so that it aligns better with the State's definition. A portion was added that states that it includes: permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation • Remove exceptions for nurses and caregivers in Accessory Dwelling Unit section because this isn't needed anymore • Maintain owner -occupancy requirement for ADUs • Remove exceptions in the density limitation for ADUs because these aren't needed anymore. • Maintain density limits for ADUs Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 2 of 7 Board Member Pence referred to the criteria for determining a single-family dwelling, he noted that a limit on one kitchen is used in some jurisdictions. Regarding ADUs and mailboxes, he commented that it seems reasonable to allow a separate mailbox for the ADU. Mr. Engmann commented that a lot of modern homes have two kitchens so this could be problematic. Staff opted to use scenarios which are more common to all single-family dwellings. He noted it is likely that the ADU code will be coming to the Planning Board for review in the not -too -distant future so they can look at the mailbox regulations at that time. Board Member Pence asked how often the City must engage in enforcement actions regarding the number of people in a dwelling. Mr. Engmann replied that they often get calls, but it is usually related to a secondary issue like the number of cars. Chair Rosen referred to the section on owner occupancy and asked for more information about the ability to leave and or rent. Specifically, he wondered if VRBOs and the like were acceptable in Edmonds. Mr. Engmann replied that you can only rent out the main home or the ADU, but not both. Commissioner Gladstone asked for confirmation that a scenario with a senior and a caregiver would be covered under this definition. Mr. Engmann replied that it would be. Commissioner Gladstone asked why the criteria focused on water and gas but not electric. Mr. Engmann was not sure but noted they could add electric. Planning Manager Chave added that the City permits water and gas, but electrical is entirely done through the State; it would be much more difficult to get information. Commissioner Gladstone noted that some utilities (like water) like to have separate meters on ADUs. Mr. Engmann indicated they could look at that. Mr. Chave stated this provision has been in place for many years with no problems. Mr. Engmann commented that individuals may sign up for updates at www.edmondswa.gov/codMdates. There was consensus to move forward with scheduling of a public hearing on this item. NEW BUSINESS Item B was addressed first because Commissioner Gladstone had to leave the meeting early. B. Election of Officers for 2022 COMMISSIONER PENCE NOMINATED ALICIA CRANK FOR CHAIR FOR 2022. CHAIR ROSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER CRANK ACCEPTED THE NOMINATION AND WAS ELECTED UNANIMOUSLY. CHAIR ROSEN NOMINATED ROGER PENCE FOR VICE CHAIR FOR 2022. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED. COMMISSIONER PENCE ACCEPTED THE NOMINATION AND WAS ELECTED UNANIMOUSLY. A. Multifamily Design Standards: Intro and Scoping Exercise Mr. Engmann explained this is a dual conversation with the Architectural Design Board. He introduced the code amendment and the scoping/framework on the zoning. The three phases of the code amendment process are the formation phase, the articulation phase, and the adoption phase. This topic is currently in the formation process where they create initial ideas, create objectives, establish an outreach plan, gather information have initial Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 3 of 7 discussions with stakeholders, the ADB, and Planning Board. He discussed the roles and interactions of the ADB and the Planning Board and where each group is in the process. What was heard at the first ADB meeting: • Flexibility: Flexibility in standards for better design outcomes • Engagement: Ensure public is informed and part of decision -making • ADB Anticipated Involvement: Deep dive into the specific standards • Relations: Protect the character and charm of Edmonds • Adjustments: Allow ADB to adjust standards for site -specific context • Affordability: Housing affordability costs and impacts should be considered • Theme by Type: Have design types based on the development type (townhomes, apartments) • Challenges: Difficult to make decisions when public concerns are often about zoning standards • Likes: Like how criteria is shown in staff report and how downtown standards differentiate between portions Mr. Engmann reviewed Comprehensive Plan goals and City Council direction related to this topic. He presented a framework plan to establish the scope of this project. Criteria considerations include form and massing; building aesthetics; neighborhood compatibility; sustainability; affordability; and equity. Stakeholders include the government (city staff, boards, City Council); residents (community members, local businesses, neighborhood groups); and the development community (builders and contractors). He commented on the challenge of balancing the outcomes of specificity and flexibility. Scenario testing will be key to make sure they have a good middle ground. Possible development types/zones where Multifamily Design Standards may apply include multifamily zones (RM zones), subdivisions/unit lot, commercial zones, downtown zones (BD zones), Westgate Mixed Use (WMU), and Community General Zones (CG). In general, it involves residential development between single- family and mid -rise, often called the "Missing Middle" housing stock. It acts as a transition from commercial to single-family zones and as a residential buffer along major roads and near transit. Multifamily Zones (RM zones): These make up 6% of the City's area and are divided into four areas - around downtown, along 196 h Street near the border with Lynnwood, near Edmonds Woodway Highschool, and Edmonds Way/Firdale Village. Subdivisions/Unit Lot: This is a type of development which allows for fee simple development of lots — usually townhomes or individual home developments. It follows the subdivision regulations and is done with a site plan. It must also meet the standards for that zoning district. The new design standards in multifamily zones would apply here. Commercial Zones: Neighborhood Business (BN) does not allow multifamily development. Community Business (BC) does allow multifamily, but only as part of mixed -use development, and there are already design standards in place. Staffs recommendation is that this would be outside the scope of the Multifamily Design Standards. Downtown Zones (BD zones): Multifamily is only allowed as part of a mixed -use development, and there are already extensive design guidelines. Staff thinks this also should be excluded from the Multifamily Design Standards. Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 4 of 7 Westgate Mixed Use () MU and Community General Zones (CG): Multifamily is allowed as part of a mixed - use development in these zones. This area already has extensive design standards in place created recently with greater height and density than they would be talking about in other multifamily areas. Staff is recommending that this area would not be part of the Multifamily Design Standards. Mr. Engmann summarized that staff s recommendation is to focus the Multifamily Design Standards on the Multifamily Zones (RM) and Subdivision/Unit Lots. Staff is talking about finalizing the outreach/engagement and will bring this to the Planning Board for Feedback. Following that, the plan is to begin significant public involvement and assess community preferences. Individuals may sign up for updates at www.edmondswa.gov/codMdates. Comments and Questions: Chair Rosen thanked Mr. Engmann for the structure of the presentation and the emphasis on public engagement. He asked about the possibility of Council having strong feelings about which areas to cover and whether they would support Council's recommendation. He suggested getting feedback from them before going too far along in the process. Board Member Pence asked for confirmation that they would not be making changes to zoning footprints or density. Mr. Engmann thought this was true but expressed an interest in hearing what the public has to say. Board Member Pence expressed some hesitancy about the narrow focus and spoke in support of neighborhood planning and a broader, more holistic approach. Mr. Engmann acknowledged those concerns, but recommended reading through Council minutes to better understand Council's discussion and direction on this topic. Vice Chair Crank asked if the new director would be meeting with the Planning Board soon to understand what her priorities are as they weigh in on this. She noted that there would also be a shift in the makeup of the Council which will be starting in January. These factors are important to consider as they begin the process. Mr. Engmann replied that the new director is eager to meet the Planning Board as soon as the agenda allows. He agreed that it would be a good idea to check back in with Council and make sure that these are still the priorities. Student Representative Distelhorst asked if there are design standards on single-family homes. If not, then what is the point of having them for multifamily housing? Mr. Engmann replied that there are not design standards for single-family homes. They are set more on the hard standards like setbacks and lot coverage. The difference with multifamily is that the impacts on the community can be greater. Ms. Distelhorstthen asked if having more standards on multifamily housing could make it harder to have more multifamily housing in Edmonds. Mr. Engmann replied that it could. When they start talking about things like limiting the mass or adding more restrictions on the buildings it can add to the cost and can make it more difficult to build. However, if they talk about things like front entrances or articulation off the building (rather than taking away from the building) they do not add as much cost, but still add value to how it looks. This is important to consider. Board Member Pence noted it is common in zoning codes to provide bonuses of some kind in exchange for publicly beneficial components. He asked if this would be considered. Mr. Engmann noted they are still early in the process, but things like front entrance porches, patios, balconies, and awnings could be allowed in the Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 5 of 7 setbacks four or five feet without changing how close the actual massing of the building is. Board Member Pence asked about additional density — additional units or rentable area. Mr. Engmann noted the initial thought is that they would not be adding more density but encouraged the Board to go through the process more before they make that decision. Board Member Pence referred to the minimum lot area per dwelling unit zoning standards for multifamily zones and indicated he would like to discuss this more at some point. Mr. Chave agreed that the way this is set up is a very old construct. The City has been working on changing that area by area over the years. He recommended looking at this as they go through the Comprehensive Plan update process. Mr. Engmann asked for feedback on the way he had divided the roles and interactions of the ADB and the Planning Board. Vice Chair Crank indicated she was comfortable with it. Board Member Pence stated he would appreciate a joint meeting sooner rather than later in the process. Chair Rosen wondered if the discussion about the public engagement process might be a good conversation to have together. Mr. Engmann expressed concern that coordinating joint meetings could start pushing things back further but stated that staff would look into that. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA This is the last meeting of the year. The meeting with the new director will be added in as soon as possible. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Rosen noted that Council President Paine reached out to him and Vice Chair Crank to see thoughts about returning to a hybrid meeting. He appreciated being able to give feedback on that topic. He summarized the Planning Board's many activities and achievements in 2021. He congratulated the new Chair and Vice Chair and thanked staff for their hard work and guidance and thanked the rest of the Planning. Board for their service and their wisdom. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Kuehn expressed appreciation to the group for allowing him to come in late tonight. Board Member Cheung expressed appreciation to outgoing Chair Rosen for his leadership during this difficult year. He recognized Vice Chair Crank also for her service. He welcomed Alicia Crank as Chair and Roger Pence as Vice Chair next year. Vice Chair Crank also thanked Chair Rosen for his excellent service. She looks forward to serving next year with Board Member Pence. Board Member Pence suggested having an in -person retreat sooner, rather than later. He reiterated that the legislature has made it much easier to annex Urban Growth Areas. He recommended considering Esperance. He is looking forward to working with Vice Chair Crank and serving as Vice Chair. Mr. Engmann commented that the Architectural Design Board is looking for new members. He also encouraged anyone interested in code updates to sign up on the mailing list at www.edmondswa.gov/codMdates. Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 6 of 7 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 8, 2021 Page 7 of 7