2024-02-28 Planning Board PacketOF EDA'
v ti Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board
REGULAR MEETING
BRACKETT ROOM
121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL- 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020
FEBRUARY 28, 2024, 7:00 PM
REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION:
Meeting Link: https://edmondswa-
gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxITG9LZkc3 KOhuS014QT09 Meeting ID: 873 2287
2194 Passcode:007978
This is a Hybrid meeting: The meeting can be attended in -person or on-line. The physcial
meeting location is at Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N., 3rd floor Brackett R000m
Or Telephone :US: +1 253 215 8782
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.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
For topics not scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes
S. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update (AMD2023-0008)
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Green Building Incentives Program
8. NEW BUSINESS
9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
A. Extended Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
February 28, 2024
Page 1
11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
13. ADJOURNMENT
14. GENERIC AGENDA ITEMS
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
February 28, 2024
Page 2
2.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 02/28/2024
Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning & Development
Prepared By: Michelle Martin
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approval of minutes from February 14th meeting.
Narrative
Draft minutes from February 14th attached.
Attachments:
PB 02142024_draft
Packet Pg. 3
2.A.a
CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Hybrid Meeting
February 14, 2024
Chair Mitchell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City
Hall and on Zoom.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
The Land Acknowledgement was read by Student Representative Distelhorst
Board Members Present
Jeremy Mitchell, Chair
Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chair
Judi Gladstone
Richard Kuehn (online)
Nick Maxwell (online)
Emily Nutsch (alternate) (online)
Lily Distelhorst (student rep)
Board Members Absent
Susanna Martini (excused)
Staff Present
Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Jeff Levy, Senior Planner
Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner
Consultants:
Kate Howe, VIA Perkins Eastman, Principal
Shreya Malu, VIA Perkins Eastman, Project Manager
Dan Kennedy, VIA Perkins Eastman
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES (January 24, 2024)
Board Member Gladstone referred to and read proposed amendments to the January 24 meeting minutes which
she had previously sent the group.
MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
GLADSTONE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 24, 2024 WITH THE AMENDMENTS
AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Teresa Hollis, Edmonds resident, commented on packet page 75, Alternative B: Distributed Growth scenario.
This talks about getting back the transition zones that were lost in 2017 when the Subarea Plan was finalized,
and they upzoned nine parcels that were three-story apartment buildings to be 75-foot buildings. She stated that
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
February 14, 2024 Pagel of 5
Packet Pg. 4
2.A.a
the idea of creating transition zones is controversial. The City made a unanimous decision at both the Planning
Board and the City Council after 20 years of planning for Highway 99 to have CG all the way to the boundaries.
She stated it was not appropriate to come into her neighborhood and take what is now a single-family house
and make it available to be a three-story apartment building. She encouraged the City to focus on creating
transition through building design such as step backs. The idea of exploring transition zones "inside and outside
the plan boundaries" is extremely unpopular. She thanked staff for the great information in the packet.
Roizer Pence, former Planning Board member and chair, commented on the 75-page packet which was added
to the agenda on Monday night and did not give the Planning Board or the public much time to preview it. He
spoke to the importance of engaging the public in conversations about the future of Edmonds in ways such as
public open houses. He urged them not to try to include this level of technical information in an online open
house. He referred to Teresa Hollis's comments related to block -by -block planning and said that is a function
of the subarea planning process which should follow adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
GUla Shoemake asked that as they work on the Comprehensive Plan, they take into account climate change
because the crisis is upon us. She urged them to ask themselves how things relate to climate change and if they
are including what is needed to make the city and the area ready for what is going to happen.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Comprehensive Plan Update — Existing Conditions and Growth Alternatives
Kate Howe, VIA Perkins Eastman, presented a summary of what they have been doing since they completed
the neighborhood meetings in December. She reviewed the importance of and reasons for planning and
explained that City of Edmonds' adopted plans and initiatives as well as input from public Comprehensive Plan
meetings lend ideas on how to explore future growth. She stressed that with the Comprehensive Plan they are
focusing on policy level land use changes and categories, not implementing ordinances, zoning, height, design,
etc. She reviewed the 2044 Growth Management Act (GMA) targets for population, jobs capacity, and housing
capacity and pointed out that Edmonds needs to plan for an additional 4,000 housing units.
Land Use (Growth Alternative) Approaches reviewed included the following:
1. Update City's approach to Single Family Detached to comply with House Bills.
2. Identify and define a set of "Neighborhood Centers" and "Neighborhood Hubs".
• Foster 15-minute neighborhoods with public amenities and activities to serve local community.
• Enable more equitable distribution of housing in a range of income strategies.
3. Rethink Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center's Land Use policies to encourage uses that contribute
to Edmonds' Arts District and downtown local businesses.
4. Explore potential to accommodate growth in the Medical District along the Highway 99 corridor.
5. Evaluation transition zones within the Highway 99 sub -area vicinity.
Ms. Howe reviewed the impacts of HB 1110, HB 1337, and HB 1220 on single family zones and planning for
Edmonds' housing capacity. She summarized that Edmonds is a high -cost community with high average sale
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
February 14, 2024 Page 2 of 5
Packet Pg. 5
2.A.a
prices for middle housing units. She reviewed a Housing Affordability Distribution table translating housing
types to affordability levels based on the Department of Commerce's Guidebook for applying HB 1220.
Assuming compliance with all housing bills means that Edmonds' total capacity increase needed is only 2,700
units. She referred to the Methods memo which has much more detailed information about this.
Director McLaughlin discussed the Neighborhood Centers and Neighborhood Hubs growth alternative which
would foster 15-minute neighborhoods, align with the Climate Action Plan, and create better economic
outcomes for more people in more places. Centers and Hubs selection criteria were reviewed as well as
prototypical development descriptions and potential land use designations. Strategies designed to secure public
benefit from growth could include incentives for bonus heights in exchanges for community amenities.
Director McLaughlin reviewed potential alternatives.
• No Action — This is not compliant with GMA requirements. The model code put out recently by
Washington State has a universal height requirement of 35 feet and would supersede any city that tries
to take no action.
Alternative A: Focused Growth — This puts the majority of capacity within the Neighborhood Centers
(Firdale Village, Westgate, and Five Corners) and would afford 4-6 stories which includes bonus height
incentives. It also includes an expansion to the Medical District. It would have a slight increase in
Neighborhood Hub (2-3 stories including bonus height incentives) capacity. There would be good
coverage of Edmonds with the 15-minute concept.
Alternative B: Distributed Growth — This also focuses on Neighborhood Hubs and Centers but puts
moderate growth within the Neighborhood Centers compared to Alternative A. The allowance would
be 4-5 stories within the Neighborhood Centers and 3-4 stories in Neighborhood Hubs. This option does
not include the Medical District expansion.
Director McLaughlin explained that staff will be analyzing all aspects of these alternatives and articulating
impacts in the EIS. From this, they will be able to pick and choose the preferred alternative. She encouraged the
Planning Board to provide input on anything that is missing so it may be considered in staff s analysis. The
overall target is achievable in both Alternative A and Alternative B. Staff sees a huge benefit to offering
development incentives. She reviewed the evaluation framework which includes being consistent with the
GMA, PSRC Vision 2050, and Snohomish County countywide planning policies; implementing State housing
bills; and creating opportunities for the City to achieve the Community's vision.
Planning Board deliberation followed and included questions related to bus lines, policy drivers for the
alternatives, consideration of the area around 76th and 196t' for a Hub, how the Highway 99 subarea plan is
approached in the alternatives, transition zones, and a desire for more clarity about the future of Highway 99.
There were also questions about potential consideration of the corridors approach, how the Waterfront Activity
Center fits into the alternatives from an equity perspective, clarification about housing types, and how the land
value disparity throughout the city is addressed. There was a comment about how the Edmonds "charm"
referred to in the Vision Statement doesn't only exist in the downtown area, a suggestion to increase the number
of Hubs around the city in order to keep the building heights down in more places, a suggestion to look at other
areas around the city (even if they don't contribute to placemaking) such as the area around Wade James
Theater, discussion around the reasons for the expansion of the Medical District versus another Hub, and a
reminder of the importance of considering topography when looking at the 15-minute neighborhoods.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
February 14, 2024 Page 3 of 5
Packet Pg. 6
2.A.a
Draft Area Details: Senior Planner Jeff Levy gave a high-level review of how the policy land use expansion
might be approached for the different alternatives in the various Centers and Hubs (Westgate, Five Corners,
Medical Center, Firdale, North Bowl, and Perrinville).
Deliberation included questions and comments on extent versus height considerations for the Westgate corridor,
displacement risks related to Firdale redevelopment, the potential of merging some of the height and extent
criteria for different areas, and a suggestion to look at areas where there are schools and parks and where the
age of housing is about to turn around. There was also a suggestion to make a pie chart graph or other illustration
showing how much capacity and what types of units each area currently has and could potentially take for each
of the alternatives. The Board highlighted the need for robust engagement efforts related to the alternatives both
online and with neighborhood meetings and asked about how to calculate and communicate impacts of
increased density to existing infrastructure. Board members questioned if Comprehensive Plan policies are
expected to change and how to look at items a la carte when the EIS needs to look at cumulative effects. The
Planning Board expressed appreciation to staff and consultants for their hard work.
NEW BUSINESS
None
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
None
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
There was agreement to hold a special meeting on the February 28t' at 6:30 p.m. to address a legal topic in
Executive Session with the City Attorney prior to the regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. Senior Planner Clugston
gave an update on board member replacement efforts and reviewed the extended agenda. On February 28 the
Board is expected to have the Executive Session at 6:30 and then a Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit Public
Hearing and a discussion on Green Building Incentives. There was discussion about adding updated
Comprehensive Plan information to the March 6 retreat in addition to the work plan discussion. There were
questions and clarification about the EIS and Comprehensive Plan process/timeline and a suggestion to add a
true third alternative.
There was a question about if the Planning Board is the best group to be considering the canopy goal. Maybe it
is better to leave it to the Tree Board? Director McLaughlin explained why she thought that the Planning Board,
Tree Board, and Climate Protection Committee were the appropriate three groups to be working on the tree
canopy goal. She also expressed a willingness to develop and work on this through a subcommittee.
There was a desire to make sure the Planning Board gets a touch on the alternatives going to be considered in
the EIS and agreement to add another update on March 27 in addition to the retreat discussion on March 6.
There was a comment that multifamily design standards had fallen off the extended agenda but it could be useful
to have it on there because of its influence on discussions about higher densities. It was noted that it was already
on the extended agenda but was listed as design standards and process and isn't assigned a date yet.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
February 14, 2024 Page 4 of 5
Packet Pg. 7
2.A.a
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Board Member Kuehn commended everyone for the great work.
Vice Chair Golembiewski wished everyone Happy Valentine's Day.
Board Member Gladstone was pleased to be finally working on the Comprehensive Plan update.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
Chair Mitchell expressed appreciation to Student Representative Distelhorst for her time and commitment on
the Planning Board as this was her last meeting. Thanks to staff and consultants for the great presentation.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
February 14, 2024 Page 5 of 5
Packet Pg. 8
6.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 02/28/2024
Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Amendment to allow for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units — "Expanding
housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units in accordance
with H B 1337."
Staff Lead: Rose Haas
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Rose Haas
The Housing Element in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan recommends the following strategy to
promote affordable housing:
o The City [should substantially revise] its accessory dwelling regulations,
providing clearer standards and streamlining their approval as a standard
option for any single family lot (2020 Comprehensive Plan, p. 92).
In 2021, the Citizens' Housing Commission stated the following policy recommendation for updating
the ADU code to include detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs):
o Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the
SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size,
ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not
require a conditional use permit.
In the spring of 2023, the state legislature passed HB 1337 which requires jurisdictions like Edmonds
to update their development codes to allow for DADUs and make related code changes to make it
easier to create accessory dwelling units.
In late October of 2023, City Council indicated that they wished to allow detached accessory
dwelling units (DADUs) in anticipation of conforming with the state mandate that takes effect in July
2025.
Staff introduced the proposal to allow for DADUs as well as to fully comply with the upcoming
required State of Washington mandate at Council Committee on November 14, 2023.
Staff held a live public webinar on November 30, 2023 with an online comment period from
November 30- December 31, 2023.
Staff introduced the proposal at Planning Board on December 13, 2023.
Staff discussed the proposal at Planning Board on January 10, 2024 and January 24, 2024. The
preliminary discussion touched on the following topics:
§ Regulation of units in lots that contain critical areas;
§ Maximum unit square footage;
§ Setback reductions;
§ Utilities connections, metering, and Public Works' requirements;
§ Nullification of existing owner -occupancy covenants.
Staff will reintroduce the proposal and present draft code amendments at City Council on February
27, 2024.
Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing on the Proposal on February 28, 2024. Legal notice for the
Packet Pg. 9
6.A
public hearing was published and posted on February 14, 2024. Comments received to date are
included as Attachment 1.
Staff has updated the webpage (Edmondswa.gov/ADU) throughout the entire process. The webpage
includes the recorded webinar, draft code amendments, FAQs, self -guided slide shows, and has
provided a forum for ongoing public comment.
Staff Recommendation
After the staff presentation, Planning Board should open the public hearing and
take public testimony on the draft redline/strike-out code in Attachment 2.
After taking public input, staff would welcome any Planning Board feedback about
the draft code language.
If the Board is satisfied with the draft language and has no additional substantive
comments, staff requests that the Board generate a decision memo for City
Council that includes recommendations on the following policy topics:
1. Allowance of ADUs on lots that contain critical areas;
2. ADU size restrictions;
3. ADU setback reductions;
4. Parking restrictions;
5. Impact fees.
If there are additional substantive issues to address, staff would bring the draft code back for
another work session prior to a recommendation.
Narrative
Accessory dwelling units provide additional affordable housing options within existing single-
family neighborhoods. Edmonds has allowed accessory dwelling units (ADUs) since 2000 but only
when they are in or attached to a primary residence (ECDC 20.21).
There is existing demand for this housing option; Planning staff receives significant interest
through phone inquiries, emails and counter visits from community members on a weekly basis.
They are interested in having accommodation for families to age in place or to help offset rising
housing -related costs.
State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the
next Comprehensive Plan due date, or by June 30, 2025. The requirements for the City of
Edmonds will be as follows:
Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU).
No owner -occupancy requirements.
Allow separate sale of ADUs.
No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW
36.70A.696(8).
Maximum size limitation no less than 1,000sf.
Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line, the lot line abuts a public alley.
No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention
mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic
requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit.
Packet Pg. 10
6.A
Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height.
Allow impact fees of no more than 50% of the fees imposed on the principal unit.
While work on the periodic Comprehensive Plan update continues, changes to the accessory
dwelling unit code can be made now using existing City policy guidance and the ADU guidance
provided by the Department of Commerce.
The core obiectives of the ADU code update are to:
1. Allow DADUs in the City of Edmonds.
2. Align with HB 1337 in terms of development standards.
3. Provide clear and objective guidance for those who choose to add ADUs or DADUs to
their property.
4. Provide code standards for height, floor area, parking, utilities, etc.
Staff will present updated draft code language in both the Edmonds City Code (ECC) and the
Community Development Code (ECDC). Updates are proposed to impact fee language in
Chapter 3.36 of the ECC (new since the January 24 draft), and within Chapters 16.20, 17.40,
17.50, 17.115, 20.01, 20.21 20.35 ECDC as well as within Title 21 ECDC (definitions).
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Public Comments
Attachment 2 - Redline strikethrough Code Amendment
Attachment 3 - Notice of Public Hearing
Packet Pg. 11
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: Jon Milkey <jpmilkey@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 3:29 PM
To: Planning
Cc: Council; JPM
Subject: DADU's
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Good afternoon,
Please include our comments below for the DADU discussion.
Hoping that Edmonds adopts a code that accommodates BOTH the citizens that will build
DADU's and the citizens that chose not to, or cannot afford to... As you may know, it is
much easier to take a "wrecking ball" to neighborhoods and implement the most
stringent form of a requirement than to draft a code that balances many of the reasons
our citizens live in Edmonds or have moved to Edmonds. Less housing density,
parking, lack of light pollution, tree canopy are only a few reasons people chose to live
in Edmonds. I suspect that Planners know many more reasons why people chose to live
in Edmonds and we are hoping you can make the necessary effort to adapt DADU
requirements to minimize impacts to citizens and the environment.
1. There are steep hills in the area and with a 24' height, the ADU may extend 10
feet or more above the primary residence roof line and obstruct neighbor
views. The current height of the primary residence should be taken into account.
2. All setback should be the same as the primary residence although backing to an
alley may make sense. Decreased side setbacks for ADU's should not impact
neighbors who have lived in the area or moved to the area for certain
neighborhood layouts.
3. Separate sale of ADU's - should this be delayed until all zoning is changed form
single family to multi -family (or 2 -4 townhomes, apartments...), this essentially
has the same neighborhood impact especially with two ADU's. Hope the off-street
parking spot comes with the sale as well as the required easement to access the
property.
4. More development = less tree canopy.
5. More development = less stormwater infiltration due to impervious surfaces
6. More development = more light pollution
7. Two ADU's per lot will have a significant impact to existing neighborhoods and the
environment as mentioned above. Minimum of 1 off-street parking space per ADU
would help neighborhood crowding.
8. Parking should be required no matter the distance from a transit stop. Citizens
living in these areas may already have parking issues and this would only increase
the impact
i
Packet Pg. 12
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: Pentakota, Navyusha
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2023 3:05 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: FW: Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) Submission Notification
From: notification@civiclive.com <notification@civiclive.com>
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:20 PM
To: Pentakota, Navyusha <navyusha.pentakota@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/2/2023 1:19:31 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
ADUs will be built in Edmonds for the purpose of short term rental (AirBnB, VRBO, etc.)
unless the code prohibits or restricts the short term rental industry from expanding into our
textarea-1700597715163-0 neighborhoods. There are negative consequences of allowing unlimited short term rentals
all over town, including a shortage of long term rentals and a quality of life impact on
neighboring streets and residents. As an example, please review the short term rental
restrictions recently implemented in Chelan County.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19947015&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 13
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2023 1:58 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2023-12-26 02:57 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2023-12-26 02:57 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/26/2023 4:57:58 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I served on the ECHC 2019 - 2021. 1 was on one of the task groups looking at the ADU issue.
have talked with many citizens about building these units. I find most residents completely
unaware of the process of building and the need to consider the "lay of the land". This
knowledge undergirds my comments. 1. Please keep size limits to 1000 SQ Ft as required by
'1337. Do no go larger. 2. Please keep setbacks and % permeable surface coverage
requirements as they currently are. 3. Only take away parking requirement where
mandated by 1337. 4. Be clear that ADU/DADU allowed only in PRD where there are no
codes and covenants on structures. These homeowner already have smaller lots that zoned
textarea-1700597715163-0- land taken from their lots in creating the common lot which is non -buildable. 5. Be
cautious in your phrasing. Much in the current briefing on ADU/DADUs gives the impression
that units can somehow skirt the engineering codes and safety requirements for sewers and
water and electrical lines . You will have a lot of unhappy people with the city staff if you are
not clearer. 6. BE clear that ADUs/DADUs are not cheap to build. 7. Give some wording that
discusses the "good neighbor" ethic of concern over view protection and the like. I know
you cannot mandate that but we can have the moral/ethical discussion about it. 8. Please
do not rush all this in changing to comply with 1337 that no thought is given to our
uniqueness in topography and environmental concerns considering we are a small city on
the waters of Puget Sound. Thank you for the change to provide comments.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19993559&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 14
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2023 6:40 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2023-12-27 07:40 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2023-12-27 07:40 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/27/2023 9:40:13 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I'm a former member of Edmond's Citizens Housing Committee and an architect with my
own firm. I'm concerned with HB 1337 and the direction the City is pursuing with increased
housing. I understand Increased housing is a necessity. Housing is difficult due to the size of
Edmonds. I hope the City tree ordnance isn't compromised by increased housing. During my
time on the Housing Committee we provided a multi -family design package to the City
Council. This included vertical and horizontal modulation; multiple siding types and differing
colors. These items will add interest and visually lessen building scale. Pre -approved plans
for ADU's I hope will be re -considered. These plans cannot respond to existing homes
textarea-1700597715163-0they're attached to or detached from. These pre -approved plans will not be in character
with the neighborhood. Cookie cutter housing will result from this type of construction.
Impervious surfaces will be greatly increased. The new waste water treatment plant may
not be able to process the increased combination of rain run off and sewage. Increased
traffic will result in long wait times at traffic lights. Side streets with increased density in
combination with less off street parking will reduce these streets to single lane roads or
impassable roads. The City will become a parking lot. Off street parking will be an important
part of the housing solution. I hope the City establishes a global approach to resolving the
increased housing problem; factoring in the everyday functions that occur. Thank you. Keith
Soltner
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19993875&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
i
Packet Pg. 15
6.A.a
From:
notification (cbciviclive.com
To:
Haas, Rose
Subject:
Comments 2024-01-04 11:46 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Date:
Thursday, January 4, 2024 10:46:50 AM
Comments 2024-01-04 11:46 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 1/4/2024 1:46:17 PM
(GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
My mother is 68 years old and an Edmonds residence. She is
lower income and cannot afford a single family home and will
textarea-1700597715163-0 soon need to live in a structure without stairs. We have
purchased a home with a large lot hopeful to build her a DADU
that she can not only afford, but meets her aging needs.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https:Hedmondswa.gov/fonn/one.aspx?
obj ectld=20008710&contextld=19931715 &returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 16
6.A.a
The Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [ACE] provides the following comments
regarding the Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update first presented in a webinar on
November 30, 2023. A copy of these comments will be submitted to the Planning Board
as well.
ACE believes that only one code update to align with EHB 1337 should be done. It
will be easier for the public to understand rationale and the proposed changes if changes
are presented only once within a given 2-year period. Furthermore, doing just one code
revision saves city staff time. Rushing to produce interim changes to current ADU/DADU
code also increases the possibility that unintended consequences get codified and then are
harder to remove from the code because "well, they are in the code now...," "we should
have thought this one through better...," or "we never should have rushed to get
something out there..."
Additionally, since EHB 1 337 is a major departure from past practice that will alter
the landscape and perhaps have unintended consequences, as a guiding principle, ACE
believes that it is a wise course of action to implement the requirements of law without
going beyond said law's mandates.
Overall, there are several areas left unaddressed by the Summary of changes:
• The Summary of changes does not address impact fees. EHB 1337 allows for
impact fees no greater than 50% of the home on the lot. Whether a person bikes,
walks to transit, or drives a vehicle, this additional ADU/DADU housing will have an
impact on our streets for pedestrian and traffic safety as well as maintenance of
streets. So, an impact fee for streets and utilities is appropriate in a ratio
proportionate to the home already on the lot.
• When referring to nationalized "best practices," that offer cookie -cutter approaches
from agencies such as AARP, briefings and the like should acknowledge the
uniqueness of the topography of Edmonds with its hillsides and critical areas that
may limit the use of DADUs or even ADUs on some lots.
• No mention is made that engineering, stormwater management, setbacks, and
impermeable surface limits will remain in place as environmental and climate
change buffers. Thus, as listed, the changes in the Summary seem to offer a "free-
for-all" approach to building ADU/DADUs.
Packet Pg. 17
6.A.a
• No mention is made of how height limits, especially on sloped lots, will be
measured or giving reference to how those measurements are done so applicants
wishing to build can ascertain if they really can do what they want.
• The issue of view corridor impacts is not addressed. Since homeowners with water
views are assessed extra property taxes for views, allowing a new building that
diminishes that view has an adverse impact on view homeowners. If possible, ACE
suggests that it might be a "good neighbor" practice to include in the permit
packet a summary of comments from neighbors on the proposed building. Doing so
would mean that those seeking to build would have engaged their neighbors in the
planning stages and hopefully addressed neighbors' concerns.
• Clarity in all areas in this code update is truly critical so that the changes result in
homeowners wishing to add ADU/DADU may do so with clear guidance. Failure to
do so will only create confusion, requests for variances or clarifications that
uselessly tie up staff time, a precious resource.
Now follows comments on specific parts of the Summary of changes provided as the
last handout of the slide presentation:
• Under Permit needed — the statement on PRDs should be strengthened by clearly
stating PRDs that have no HOA's or CCRs.
• Under Number of Units: this is unclear with respect to how ADU/DADUs will be
counted in relation to EHB 1337 and E2SHB 1 1 10. In other words, will
ADU/DADUs be counted as a unit under the middle housing designation?
• Under size:
o ACE does not support reducing rear setbacks because of the impact such
reduction would/could have on views, light in all homes around the new unit,
loss of trees.
o ACE supports keeping the bedroom limit at two bedrooms. More bedrooms
than that in a small unit would reduce the quality of living space and the
functionality for those with mobility issues.
o ACE would like to see the size limit reduced to1,000 square feet which is in
line with EHB 1 337 and in line with the size of current new 2-bedroom
Packet Pg. 18
6.A.a
apartments in Edmonds. [Note: The Hazel 2-bedroom units range from 920
— 1040 sq feet. Westgate 2-bedroom units range from 815-885 sq feet.]
• Under Design: ACE recommends addressing rooftop decks in this section,
preferably not allowing them on 2-story buildings that are at the 24-foot height
limit.
• Under Parking: ACE is pleased to see that off-street parking will be required if lot is
further than '/Z mile from a major transit hub but believes this should be stipulated
clearly in the Summary of changes for clarity.
Thank you for considering these comments from ACE. ACE wishes to see a code finalized
that aligns with EHB 1 337 and allows homeowners who wish to build on lots that can
accommodate these ADU/DADUs units a minimum of frustration because the code is clear
and responsive to the needs of the residents.
Karen Haase Herrick, LTC, USA, RET, RN, MN
President
Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [ACE] Board of Directors
Packet Pg. 19
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: Wally Danielson <oilcanw@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 1:43 PM
To: Planning
Subject: ADU Code Update
ISome people who received this message don't often get email from oilcanw@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
I am extremely disappointed in how the state legislature has
removed land use control from Edmonds. There appears to be little
remaining leeway. Please make the new updates as restrictive as
you can to preserve the look and feel of existing Edmonds.
Packet Pg. 20
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 11:56 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/19/2024 2:55:40 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-0Can a DADU be placed in a large front yard if the primary home is set back against the
property line. We are on a corner lot and would like to use the front yard for this purpose
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20103275&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 21
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 10:15 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:14:39 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I'm for the use of adu's within certain guidelines. The adu should be limited to 1000sf unless
textarea-1700597715163-0the adu is within the existing primary residence. Additionally an attached or detached adu
should not be more than 10% higher than the primary residence up to a maximum 25ft
height.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20107484&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 22
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: esskar@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 3:58 PM
To: Planning
Subject: For your consideration regarding the size of DADUs
ISome people who received this message don't often get email from esskar@aol.com. Learn why this is important
Greetings,
The planning board as well as the city council should adopt the recommendation of staff and allow
DADUs to be up to 1200 sq feet in size.
There are a number of reasons why this recommendation should be adopted.
A maximum of a 1000 sq foot DADU is too small for most families with children that wish to reside in
Edmonds. A larger DADU could have two or even three bedrooms. Most DADUs of 1000 sq. feet or
less would most likely have only one bedroom.
The state legislation addressing DADUs established 1000 sq. feet as the absolute minimum size to
be constructed. In doing so, they envisioned larger DADUs. 1200 sq. feet is still very close to the
minimum but will be more useful in meeting the goals of increasing affordable housing.
Almost all of the residential parcels in Edmonds other than in the downtown core are at least 8000 sq
feet, and many residential parcels are much larger. Single family residential parcels in Edmonds can
easily accommodate 1200 sq. foot DADUs without losing the Edmonds' "small town feel".
It is more expensive to construct smaller DADUs than larger ones. This is as a result that it is more
expensive to construct bathrooms and kitchens as compared to bedrooms and living rooms. With a
larger DADU, construction costs would be less expensive per square foot, and owners would better
recoup their investment with higher rent for a larger and more functional DADU.
In addition, a larger DADU would result in more homeowners willing to relocate to the DADU, and
renting their larger houses out to families that need the extra space and can afford the rent. That
would be a win/win for all concerned.
Most DADUs will probably be two floors rather than one. It is less expensive to go up rather than out
when building. As a result, the footprint for a 1200 sq. foot DADU would be minimal as compared to a
1000 sq foot DADU. That is a minor increase in size in order to increase affordable housing and
make it more worthwhile for more owners to construct DADUs.
I thank you for taking the above into consideration.
Eric Soll
Edmonds, WA
Packet Pg. 23
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 12:40 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 01:40 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-2101:40 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 3:40:21 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I think the allowance for ADU's on private home property is a wonderful idea, I like the idea
textarea-1700597715163-Oof being able to care for family members and earn extra income. I would like to see this
allowed as long as the restriction is one unit per lot and the current guidelines are met.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108759&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 24
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 5:02 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 06:01 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-2106:01 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 8:01:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
We are in a housing crisis, and need to consider all housing options for Edmonds! ADU's
allow elderly residents to downsize and age in place, younger families to have a home,
textarea-1700597715163-0single parents and individuals to have a smaller rental unit, more affordable housing options
for our workforce that cannot afford to live here, as well as strengthens the community
overall!
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20109799&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 25
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 10AS AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:45:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am in strong support of Edmonds expanding access and relaxing codes to allow more
textarea-1700597715163-Oconstruction of detached accessory dwelling units. Please do everything you can to expand
housing options in our city!
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108430&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 26
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 2:49 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/22/2024 5:49:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am a home owner in Edmonds and support the proposals listed above. Not only for the
textarea-1700597715163-0aging population but for family members wanting to support their adult, mentally ill children
but need space separation.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20111889&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 27
6.A.a
January 10, 2024
City Council of Edmonds/Planning Board,
I had planned to attend the meeting tonight but am feeling a bit beat up after a doctor's appointment
today so I am expressing my concerns here:
ADUs in neighborhoods can, if done well, be a help with housing. Size is important, ADUs should not
be over 1000 square feet, preferably less, one level. There are three in our neighborhood that have been
done well, blend into the property and the neighborhood and aren't obtrusive. One ADU allowed per
property. Available off street parking is a requirement.
It is critical that the primary home owner reside in the main house on the property. This allows for
oversight, neighborhood continuity and prevents multiple rentals on a single piece of property in a
single family neighborhood. In the rush to approve legislation that dismantles single family zoning the
State has failed to take in to consideration the people and properties that have been in place for
decades, the ones who pay taxes, who pay their salaries and the ones who, having worked to support
themselves and their neighborhoods want to be able to enjoy their neighborhood.
One ADU per property and owner occupied main dwelling are a must. Edmonds is special, please keep
it that way.
ristie Simard
425 743 2743
Packet Pg. 28
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: David Bratt <david.bratt@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 9:33 PM
To: Planning
Subject: questions and comments regarding your meeting on January 24
Attachments: Screenshot 2024-01-24 210344.png
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Some people who received this message don't often get email from david.bratt@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
Hi there,
I was an online participant in the planning board's meeting on January 24. 1 submitted two questions using the Q&A
function on Zoom. When you saw my questions, you choose to dismiss them for some reason. I've attached a screenshot
of my questions to this email. Would you please send me responses when you have the bandwidth to answer my
questions?
A few additional points.
First, a comment on the maximum square footage for D/A ADUs:
I hope that you will keep the 1200 square foot maximum size limitation for DADUs/ADUs, rather than reverting
to the 1000 sq ft max mandated by SB 1337. Nearby municipalities such as Kirkland have shown that such a
higher limit on DADUs can work. Edmonds can do it too!
Larger possible sizes of ADUs/DADUs doesn't mean that all such units will be built to the maximum size. But a
higher upper limit on the size of a DADU/AADU does mean that more living and working arrangements will be
possible for those who build them out and/or reside in them.
Given the fact that some folks work from home for some or all of their work week, larger -sized D/A ADUs make
a home office more feasible. We in Edmonds should want to compel such folks to call Edmonds their place of
home/business.
Miscellaneous comments
Thanks,
Dave
I would encourage the board to prioritize an abundance of housing (meaning, in the case of Edmonds,
smoothing the path to D/A ADU construction) over the goal of a percentage of tree canopy coverage.
Should the board maintain its commitment to a particular % of canopy coverage, please give property
owners/developers an option to offset the cutting down of trees for the purpose of building construction by
planting trees elsewhere.
Packet Pg. 29
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:31 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-07 06:30 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-07 06:30 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/7/2024 8:30:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
We've designed a number of DADUs & ADUs in many Jurisditions and Edmonds is the only
textarea-1700597715163-0one that requires a CUP whichs adds time and money at the expense of the Homeowner as
well as keeping staff from working on more important issues at the expense of taxpayers..
MGabbert, AIA & AICP
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20083929&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 30
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 7:04 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/9/2024 10:03:48 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
1. There shouldn't be a restriction on the sq footage of the ADU or DADU. This should be a
decision of the property owner(s). 2. There shouldn't be a requirement for an "EV-ready'
parking space for new DADUs. The new code will not require parking for ADUs, so requiring
textarea-1700597715163-0 parking for a new DADU is contradictory. It also contradicts the AARP conclusions regarding
parking. 3. When will the new code be enacted? Inquiries to the Planning Department
regarding the date have gone unanswered. 4. What process and fees will be associated with
permitting an ADU? That has not been addressed in the presentation.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088663&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 31
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 4:22 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Contact Planning and Development 2024-02-10 05:22 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Contact Planning and Development 2024-02-10 05:22 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/10/2024 7:22:14 PM
(GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
Your Name Kelly Harvill
Your Email Sail4homer@gmail.com
Subject Construction on apt bldg
Type of Inquiry Building Permit Comment or Question
Hello, I am a renting tenant at 410 Pine Street. I am writing to ask if a permit for completion of the
building construction has been issued. I live on the top floor apt in this building and there have been
temporary wooden supports holding up the stair landings in the eastern stairwell since October. In
Message addition to the inconvenience of using the front stairs when carrying anything, I'm concerned about
possible mold growth in the wall due to a large cutout in the siding being left exposed to the
elements through all the rain we've had. I'd like to know the status of the permit for this project to
be completed. Thank you.
Acknowledgement I agree
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088937&contextld=17263725&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 32
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 11:43 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 2:43:01 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-01 do not think the EV ready parking space should be mandated
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089009&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 33
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 10:37 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/10/2024 1:36:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
Please pass. With the increased cost of housing, and living, our community would benefit.
textarea-1700597715163-0The regulations surrounding this proposal are sound and could only help the people of
Edmonds Oshuna Oma
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088805&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
1
Packet Pg. 34
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 6:20 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 07:19 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1107:19 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 9:19:47 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am totally against this proposal. Edmonds is it's own unique area. We do not need to
textarea-1700597715163-0clutter the space with tiny type housing to accommodate this new law! What about
parking?
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089047&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
1
Packet Pg. 35
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 9:47 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 12:46:55 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I am strongly in support of this updated policy. Increasing the amount of affordable housing
means keeping families in neighborhoods, kids off the streets, and raises the density of our
textarea-1700597715163-0city without having to turn every empty lot into a condo complex. There are too many
abandoned and derelict houses, yet few can afford the houses that are availability available.
Let's get new housing options out there!
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089093&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 36
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: Greg Babinski <gbabinski@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 10:35 AM
To: Planning
Subject: City of Edmonds Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Some people who received this message don't often get email from gbabinski@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
I support the general direction that the Edmonds Planning Board outlined in a recent slide deck, related to changes to
ADU's in Edmonds.
I am a long time Edmonds resident, living in the bowl for more than 15 years on either 3rd Ave S or 3rd Ave N
During this period I have seen slow but continual change for the better. The future changes to Edmonds code
requirements related to ADUs seem reasonable to me and should help Edmonds to continue to evolve in a planned and
positive manner.
We have to comply with the requirements in HB 1337. We have to recognize that the population of the US, Washington,
Snohomish County, and Edmonds will all continue to grow throughout the 21st Century. And there is a huge issue with
housing affordability for young people across the Puget Sound region. I was recently speaking with a young UW
Associate Professor who teaches at the Seattle campus, but has to live in Everett because he cannot afford closer
housing. He is the perfect example of the type of situation that the proposed updated ADU code changes would help.
One caution I would have is related to allowing manufactured ADUs. This is a good idea to keep costs contained, but I
hope the code would include design requirements for manufactured ADUs that would ensure against shabby
construction or appearance.
Although it is outside the purview of the Planning Board, I would also encourage the City to advocate to both
Community Transit and Sound Transit for better transit services that both supports an integrated City and also connects
us to the entire region with fast and frequent Edmonds -centric transit.
I encourage the Planning Board and the Council to pursue the recommended code changes. I look forward to a more
dense population in Edmonds and a thriving community of both long-time and new residents.
Sincerely,
Greg Babinski, MA, GISP, EthicalGEO Fellow
201 third Ave N., Suite 316
Packet Pg. 37
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 11:51 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 12:51 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-11 12:51 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 2:51:01 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-0 Whatever final rules or regulations are adopted, it is crucial that they be enforced to
legitimize the rules and regulations. Otherwise, it's all a farce.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089119&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 38
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:04 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 01:03 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1101:03 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 3:03:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
permits needed. YES Attached or detached OK. 1 per lot only. Any configuration? NO Explain
textarea-1700597715163-0 planned residential zones. NO prefab for rentals or occupancy. NO on 24 ft. NEED rear
setbacks. NO on 1200 Sq feet. too big. Want design restrictions, Owner occupancy required.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089123&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
1
Packet Pg. 39
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:04 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 01:04 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1101:04 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 3:04:11 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
As single family home owners in Edmonds, we strongly support these changes. Allowing
textarea-1700597715163-0 DADUs will increase property owner flexibility in allowing more housing options for all. The
ability to add a DADU instead of an attached unit makes sense for us and many others. The
parking spot provision is spot on.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089125&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 40
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 4:42 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 05:41 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1105:41 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 7:41:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
On the channel 5 news a few days ago was some great look back and resident interviews
about the Lahaina / Maui fire. It seems much of the neighborhood fires spread
uncontrollably because of the urban density — the neighborhood streets were so crowded
with parked cars and boats that fire engines and the like were not able to get to the fires,
textarea-1700597715163-0 resulting in the horrible devastation. Edmonds was not designed and planned for ADU /
DADUs and high density — parking, sewer, water, power, public transportation and other
infrastructure. I am also very concerned with predictable increase in crime that always
comes with density. While changes in the density code are apparently required, specific
strict requirements and fees are not. Please keep the Lahaina deaths and devastation in
mind.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089213&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 41
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 8:14 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 09:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1109:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 11:14:14 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
A DADU would be a wonderful thing for my family to be able to add to our property. We
textarea-1700597715163-0 have a child who will likely never be fully independent due to developmental delays and this
would allow him some independence. This will open up so many housing options in
Edmonds.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089233&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 42
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 8:58 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 09:57 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1109:57 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 11:57:58 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-01 am against allowances to increase allowances accessory dwellings.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089251&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 43
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 3:50 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 04:50 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-1104:50 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 6:50:13 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I fully support ADUs and DADUs. However, if it is not mandated by the state, I do not
support the requirement for the parking spot and for it to be EV ready. I have an existing
textarea-1700597715163-0ADU in my house and have plenty of street parking where my tenant parks. If I were to add
a DADU, I would still have plenty of street parking and that would not be compatible with EV
parking. Adding EV parking would require a major remodel of my house so that the tenant
would not have access to the main house.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089019&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 44
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 8:30 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 09:29 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-12 09:29 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 11:29:35 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
We live in unincorporated Esperance, thank god. When my stepdad died, my mom was as
suddenly looking for an affordable place to live. The best of her options was going to
bankrupt her in just a few years. I discovered DADUs were allowed, so she had a tiny home
on our property. Mom is now safe and happy, and the whole family is relieved. When she is
textarea-1700597715163-0gone, my brother will move in, and when he is gone, perhaps my kids will move in. We don't
ever plan to rent it. This wouldn't have been possible if we were incorporated. DADUs saved
my mother a lot of money, and kept this family together and stable. It also prevented us
from having to sell our lot to a developer that would put six homes on it. A vote for DADUs
is a vote for less traffic, it is a vote to fight sprawl and crowding, and it is a vote for families
who need a better option. Thank you.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089712&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 45
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 11:23 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 12:22 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-12 12:22 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 2:22:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
Two ADUs makes every property a TRlplex- avoid at every cost. PARKING must be included
textarea-1700597715163-0for all residents. EV not necessary. Require designated garbage can areas, preferably near
street. Screened or fence. 600 size max for ADUs. Starting with this size or smaller is the
best way to begin.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20090405&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 46
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 2:56 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 03:55 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-12 03:55 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 5:55:48 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-0 Not crazy about decreased set backs. Fences with space makes good neighbors
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20091398&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 47
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 5:07 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 06:06 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-12 06:06 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 8:06:41 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I feel like this is being shoved down our throats weather we want it or not! We worked hard
to buy into a SFR 30 plus years ago, If you think for one second this is a cure to affordable
housing you need serious help! We have no parking as it is, no sidewalks to walk safely, No
textarea-1700597715163-0design requirements this is total BS all the city is looking for is MORE TAX DOLLARS!. You can
remove "Edmonds mind of day" under the current GMA we already meet the requirements,
don't think for a minute that my neighbor that spent 75k on her ADU is going to rent it out
for less than current rate or turn it in to a air BNB you have to put in restriction s. EV charger
is a joke there needs to be a stand against this whole mess that is being forced on us.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20091581&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 48
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 8:19 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 09:18 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-12 09:18 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 11:18:52 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
Any approach to allowing for additional housing in a fixed space without an accompanying
plan and funding to provide additional city infrastructure will lead to a reduction of services
and impact the quality of life for all residents. The city council has been told this numerous
textarea-1700597715163-0times, yet continues to repackage the concept, while providing only supporting arguments.
Who is the council representing; what is their motivation; why aren't they listening? Please
go back to the Edmonds housing survey results of a couple years ago or issue a new
objective survey, then act on the majority's response. Thank you
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089681&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 49
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From:
Jon Milkey <jpmilkey@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, February 15, 2024 7:36 AM
To:
Planning
Cc:
JPM
Subject:
Fwd: ADU Comments
Follow Up Flag:
Follow up
Flag Status:
Flagged
Some people who received this message don't often get email from jpmilkey@gmail.com. Learn whV this is important
Good morning,
Please include my comments below in your review.
I believe the City is able to do BOTH 1) use ADU's as a tool to increase
alternative housing, and 2) align the ADU policy with the Edmonds charm,
vibe, feel... Hope we are diligent/smart/tenacious enough to prevent Edmonds
from resembling the mistakes, oversights or collateral damage (crime, lack of
neighborhood character, pollution, environmental damage...) of increasing
housing density.
1. 24' height limit will obstruct views - please protect the view shed.
Specifically, an ADU built in the backyard on the west facing hillside, will
obstruct the view of the neighbor to the east, north and south. A 1-story
primary residence constructs a 2-story ADU - a view that previously
existed is now obstructed.
2. Does the 24' height limit include chimneys, railings, vents, skylights, roof
decks or solar panels
3. I did not see any off street parking requirements for ADU's. Street
parking reduces areas for bikes, impacts the safety of pedestrians and
vehicle passage. Drive down the side streets in Ballard - they are
essentially one-way streets and cars often have to back for a long
distance to permit passage of cars in the alternate direction.
4. Will the max coverage rate of 35% still apply. Does this include all
impervious surfaces.
5. ADU can be zero lot line in alleys. Request a minimum of 5' for a setback
since usable access, egress, and entrance may be occurring in the alley -
this is a safety issue since cars are permitted to use alleys and often
work is completed from the alley access including landscaping. Will the
Packet Pg. 50
6.A.a
City take back the City alley property where homeowners have extended
their lots into the alley?
6. Can a home business be run out of an ADU - customers may visit the
ADU and further impact the parking issues
7. Can a roof deck be built on an ADU potentially further impacting the
neighbors view - people, umbreallas and trellises extend the roof height
well beyond 24' and further impact views...
8. Can an ADU be wider than the primary residence (width extends beyond
the width of the primary residence)- this will change the neighborhood
o
appearance if visible from the street.
o
9. Is ADU required to resemble the appearance of the primary residence in
o
any way - color, appearance, architecture...
a
1o.Can the ADU be a "mobile home"
r
11.Appears that your earlier discussion about being able to separate and
Q
possibly sell the ADU from the primary residence is not currently on the
table. I would anticipate that separate utilities would be required for gas,
o
water, sewer, storm and electricity. Can Edmond's utility system handle
the increased loads or are existing "pipes" (water, sewer, storm and
D,
power) able to handle the increased load
12.Will there be additional storm water detention or storage requirements or
7@
o
will all new stormwater be discharged to the existing system - can our
o
system handle the increased load
N
13.Is there a requirement to maintain tree cover
14.Can ADU's be rented as Air BnB's or short term rentals
a
15.Are the same number of people permitted to reside in an ADU as a
primary residence
E
16.EV charging stations required for ADU's
0
17.Will fire sprinklers be required if fire department access to the ADU is
limited due to primary residence
a
18.Possible environmental requirements for ADU's - no gas, energy star
appliances, heat pumps, local sourcing of materials
Jon and Kelli Milkey
206.334.4318
z
Packet Pg. 51
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 2:47 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-15 03:46 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Comments 2024-02-15 03:46 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/15/2024 5:46:42 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am all for allowing detached ADUs as long as they are prohibited from becoming short-
term rentals. The goal should be increased housing availability for multi -generational
textarea-1700597715163-0families and others who want to live and/or work in Edmonds, and not increased
accommodations for tourists. I am also in favor of the development of converting a single-
family lot into a mini tiny home complex where friends can age in place together but all
have their privacy and separate self-contained space when needed.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20098757&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 52
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 4:20 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-16 05:20 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-16 05:20 PM(M5T) was submitted by Guest on 2/16/2024 7:20:18 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-0I am in favor of ADUs in Edmonds. As a resident it is comforting to have this option for our
children if they should ever need it and also as a great option for seniors.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20101635&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 53
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2024 8:43 AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-17 09:42 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-17 09:42 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/17/2024 11:42:52 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
Dear Edmonds Planning Division, I live in the south most part of Edmonds on Maple
Lane/84th on a flat lot with 1/4 acre. My hope is to build an ADU in the back SW corner for
textarea-1700597715163-0flex space: office, visiting guests, sons returning from east coast, etc. The current set back
from the rear is 15 ft which would push the unit much closer to my primary home. I hope
that this will be amended in your upcoming code adjustments. I have assumed it would be 5
ft. yours, Lucy Smith 206-972-4276
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20102256&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 54
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: Wally Danielson <oilcanw@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 1:43 PM
To: Planning
Subject: ADU Code Update
ISome people who received this message don't often get email from oilcanw@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
I am extremely disappointed in how the state legislature has
removed land use control from Edmonds. There appears to be little
remaining leeway. Please make the new updates as restrictive as
you can to preserve the look and feel of existing Edmonds.
Packet Pg. 55
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 11:56 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/19/2024 2:55:40 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
textarea-1700597715163-0Can a DADU be placed in a large front yard if the primary home is set back against the
property line. We are on a corner lot and would like to use the front yard for this purpose
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20103275&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 56
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 10:15 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:14:39 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I'm for the use of adu's within certain guidelines. The adu should be limited to 1000sf unless
textarea-1700597715163-0the adu is within the existing primary residence. Additionally an attached or detached adu
should not be more than 10% higher than the primary residence up to a maximum 25ft
height.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20107484&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 57
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: esskar@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 3:58 PM
To: Planning
Subject: For your consideration regarding the size of DADUs
ISome people who received this message don't often get email from esskar@aol.com. Learn why this is important
Greetings,
The planning board as well as the city council should adopt the recommendation of staff and allow
DADUs to be up to 1200 sq feet in size.
There are a number of reasons why this recommendation should be adopted.
A maximum of a 1000 sq foot DADU is too small for most families with children that wish to reside in
Edmonds. A larger DADU could have two or even three bedrooms. Most DADUs of 1000 sq. feet or
less would most likely have only one bedroom.
The state legislation addressing DADUs established 1000 sq. feet as the absolute minimum size to
be constructed. In doing so, they envisioned larger DADUs. 1200 sq. feet is still very close to the
minimum but will be more useful in meeting the goals of increasing affordable housing.
Almost all of the residential parcels in Edmonds other than in the downtown core are at least 8000 sq
feet, and many residential parcels are much larger. Single family residential parcels in Edmonds can
easily accommodate 1200 sq. foot DADUs without losing the Edmonds' "small town feel".
It is more expensive to construct smaller DADUs than larger ones. This is as a result that it is more
expensive to construct bathrooms and kitchens as compared to bedrooms and living rooms. With a
larger DADU, construction costs would be less expensive per square foot, and owners would better
recoup their investment with higher rent for a larger and more functional DADU.
In addition, a larger DADU would result in more homeowners willing to relocate to the DADU, and
renting their larger houses out to families that need the extra space and can afford the rent. That
would be a win/win for all concerned.
Most DADUs will probably be two floors rather than one. It is less expensive to go up rather than out
when building. As a result, the footprint for a 1200 sq. foot DADU would be minimal as compared to a
1000 sq foot DADU. That is a minor increase in size in order to increase affordable housing and
make it more worthwhile for more owners to construct DADUs.
I thank you for taking the above into consideration.
Eric Soll
Edmonds, WA
Packet Pg. 58
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 12:40 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 01:40 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-2101:40 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 3:40:21 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
I think the allowance for ADU's on private home property is a wonderful idea, I like the idea
textarea-1700597715163-Oof being able to care for family members and earn extra income. I would like to see this
allowed as long as the restriction is one unit per lot and the current guidelines are met.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108759&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 59
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 5:02 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 06:01 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-2106:01 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 8:01:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name Value
We are in a housing crisis, and need to consider all housing options for Edmonds! ADU's
allow elderly residents to downsize and age in place, younger families to have a home,
textarea-1700597715163-0single parents and individuals to have a smaller rental unit, more affordable housing options
for our workforce that cannot afford to live here, as well as strengthens the community
overall!
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20109799&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 60
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 10AS AM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:45:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am in strong support of Edmonds expanding access and relaxing codes to allow more
textarea-1700597715163-Oconstruction of detached accessory dwelling units. Please do everything you can to expand
housing options in our city!
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108430&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 61
6.A.a
Haas, Rose
From: notification@civiclive.com
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 2:49 PM
To: Haas, Rose
Subject: Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) Submission Notification
Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/22/2024 5:49:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona
Name
Value
I am a home owner in Edmonds and support the proposals listed above. Not only for the
textarea-1700597715163-0aging population but for family members wanting to support their adult, mentally ill children
but need space separation.
To view this form submission online, please follow the link below:
https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20111889&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions
Packet Pg. 62
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE— 1337 v.7
DRAFT ADU Code Amendments v.5
3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees.)
A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125.
from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity
within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or
change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities.
1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous
improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited
to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs.
2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of
a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or
lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the
prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential
structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for
which there is no increase in the number of residential units.
3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations,
expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling
unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note
accessory dwelliRg units (ADIJs) aF@ ROt considered to create- additignal dwtalliRg WRitS
becaus;o Grnr :20:21 WO d9tas; not Consider enl Ic as iRGreaSiRg the overall deRSit.y of a
ogle family residential n inhhnrhood 1
B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee
rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change
of use permit or remodel permit.
1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration,
expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable
impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior
use.
Commented [RH1]: I added Comments for annot
whether the code is being deleted, moved or added
why. Or, whether more info is needed
Commented [HR2]: Under departmental internal
and with the City Attorney
Packet Pg. 63
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share
of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in
ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125.
3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the
development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the
proposed development.
4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete
building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete
building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director
pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded.
5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in
administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be
established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council.
C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time
the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the
required building permit or business license or other approval unless and until the impact fees
set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed
exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building
permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance
with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013].
3.36.040 Exemptions.
A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all
impact fees under this chapter:
1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use
and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units;
2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential
units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs;
3. Demolition or moving of a structure;
Packet Pg. 64
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.7
4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less
of gross floor area;
5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same
site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the city
within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a
structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any
structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more
than 100 square feet; or
6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an
existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not
changed (arce«or„ dweinn.. , nitS (ADUs) are not si.dere.d to create a.JdWAn;4i dlAfpiifnn
u.n.uts; hecoi ice CGDC 20 21 0:20 dpps; not cAnr'dPr ADD is as g then roii density of
a single family residential neighborhood, and beEause the Eit)(5 traffic Model does nAt
assign additional trips to the net,.,nrk as a rLas-At of ADI icy
E. Low-income housing units shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of the street impact fees
to the extent the units satisfy this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the
developer recording a covenant that prohibits using the low-income housing units for any
purpose other than for low-income housing. At a minimum, the covenant must address price
restrictions and household income limits for the low-income housing development, and that if
the property is converted to a use other than for low-income housing, the property owner must
pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion. The covenant shall also
require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation
that shows that the low-income units are continuing to be rented in compliance with the
covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the housing is
located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded
upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the street impact fee.
C. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park
impact fees under this chapter:
1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to,
Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums
and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor
of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be
00
0
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
m
CL
d
O
U
c
d
3
0
O
N
N
O
Commented [HR3]: Under departmental internal L and with the City Attorney
Packet Pg. 65
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is
exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate
only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for
low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the
owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an
exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of
application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived.
D. Early learning facilities shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of street and park impact
fees; provided, that the early learning facility satisfies the conditions of this subsection. Such
exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that requires that at
least 25 percent of the children and families using the early learning facility qualify for state
subsidized child care, including early childhood education and assistance under Chapter 43.216
RCW, and that provides that if the property is converted to a use other than for an early
learning facility, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of
conversion, and that also provides that if at any point during a calendar year the early learning
facility does not achieve the required percentage of children and families qualified for state
subsidized child care using the early learning facility, the property owner must pay the
remaining impact fee that would have been imposed on the development had there not been
an exemption. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city
along with supporting documentation that shows that the early learning facility is in compliance
with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the
early learning facility is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney
and shall be recorded upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the impact
fees.
E. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls
within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable
law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals
procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4268 § 1, 2022; Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A),
2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013].
3.36.120 Park impact fee rates.
The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact
fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise
Packet Pg. 66
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and
credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee
applicable to the type of development as follows:
A. Effective October 1, 2014:
1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit.
2. Accessory dwelling units: $1,367.03 per dwelling unit.
3. 2-. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit.
4.3. Nonresidential development: $1 .34 per square foot. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1
(Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013].
3.36.125 Street impact fee rates.
The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact
fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise
provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee
applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below.
For properties zoned BD - Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 - Specialty Retail
shall be applied.
2016 (w/
2017 (w/
2018 (w/
2019 and
ITE Land Use Code -
Fee
$1,049.41
$2,543.01
$4,036.61
beyond (w/
Description
Calculation
cost per
cost per
cost per
$5,530.21 cost
trip)
trip)
trip)
per trip)
110 - Light Industrial
per square foot
$1.50
$3.64
$5.77
$7.91
140 - Manufacturing
per square foot
$1.12
$2.72
$4.32
$5.92
151 - Mini -warehouse
per square foot
$0.40
$0.97
$1.54
$2.10
210 - Single-family house
per dwelling
$1,196.33
$2,873.60
$4,561.37
$6,249.14
unit
Commented [HR4]: Under departmental internal
and with the City Attorney. Per RCW 36.70A.681(1)(
city of county may not assess impact fees on the
construction of accessory dwelling units that are grc
than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be irr
on the principal unit
00
0
0
O
A
N
O
N
Q
m
w
ca
CL
d
O
U -
+-' v
C
81
C
Packet Pg. 67
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE- 1337 v.7
ITE Land Use Code -
Description
Fee
Calculation
2016 (w/
$1,049.41
cost per
trip)
2017 (w/
$2,543.01
cost per
trip)
2018 (w/
$4,036.61
cost per
trip)
2019 and
beyond (w/
$5,530.21 cost
per trip)
215 - Accessory dwelling units
per dwelling
1$3,124.57
unit
220 -Apartment
per dwelling
unit
$776.56
$1,881.83
$2,987.09
$4,092.36
230 - Condominium
per dwelling
unit
$629.65
$1,525.81
$2,421.97
$3,318.13
240 - Mobile home
per dwelling
unit
$671.62
$1,627.53
$2,583.43
$3,539.33
251 - Senior Housing
per dwelling
unit
$157.41
$584.89
$928.42
$1,271.95
320 - Motel
per room
$629.65
$1,525.81
$2,421.97
$3,318.13
420 - Marina
per boat berth
$188.89
$457.74
$726.59
$995.44
444 - Movie theater
per screens
$13,166.00
$31,905.90
$50,645.37
$69,384.85
492 - Health/fitness club
per square foot
$2.78
$6.74
$10.98
$14.66
530 - High school
per square foot
$0.82
$1.98
$3.15
$4.31
560 - Church
per square foot
$0.69
$1.68
$2.67
$3.65
565 - Day care center
per square foot
$6.57
$15.77
$25.02
$34.29
620 - Nursing home
per bed
$199.39
$483.17
$766.96
$1,050.74
710 - General office
per square foot
$2.07
$5.01
$7.95
$10.89
720 - Medical office
per square foot
$3.81
$9.54
$15.14
$20.74
- Commented [HR5]: Under departmental internal
and with the City Attorney. Per RCW 36.70A.681(1)(
city of county may not assess impact fees on the
construction of accessory dwelling units that are gre
than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be irr
on the principal unit
Packet Pg. 68
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE- 1337 v.7
ITE Land Use Code -
Description
Fee
Calculation
2016 (w/
$1,049.41
cost per
trip)
2017 (w/
$2,543.01
cost per
trip)
2018 (w/
$4,036.61
cost per
trip)
2019 and
beyond (w/
$5,530.21 cost
per trip)
820 - Shopping center
per square foot
$1.34
$3.26
$5.17
$7.08
826 - Specialty retail
per square foot
$0.93
$2.06
$3.27
$4.48
850 - Supermarket
per square foot
$4.80
$10.50
$16.84
$22.84
850 - Convenience market 15 -
16 hrs
per square foot
$5.80
$14.07
$22.38
$30.58
912 - Drive-in bank
per square foot
$7.00
$15.97
$25.41
$34.73
932 - Restaurant: sit-down
per square foot
$4.70
$10.04
$15.95
$21.84
933 - Fast food, no drive -up
per square foot
$9.19
$22.28
$35.36
$48.44
934 - Fast food with drive -up
per square foot
$11.23
$26.24
$41.66
$57.07
936 - Coffee/donut shop, no
drive -up
per square foot
$5.73
$13.88
$22.04
$30.19
938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive-
up, no indoor seating
per square foot
$10.55
$25.56
$40.37
$55.58
945 - Gas station with
convenience
per vehicle
fueling position
$3,347.62
$6,916.99
$10,979.58
$15,042.18
[Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016].
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
R
r.+
Q
C
O
E
t
0
R
Q
Packet Pg. 69
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
Chapter 16.20
RS - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
16.20.000 Purposes.
16.20.010 Uses.
16.20.020 Subdistricts.
16.20.030 Table of site development standards.
16.20.040 Site development exceptions.
16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan.
16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory dwelling units.
16.20.06050 Site development standards - Accessory buildings.
16.20.000 Purposes.
The RS zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for
residential zones of ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000:
A. To reserve and regulate areas primarily for family living in single-family dwellings;
B. To provide for additional nonresidential uses which complement and are compatible with
single-family dwelling use. [Ord. 3547 5 1, 20053.
16.20.010 Uses.
A. Permitted Primary Uses.
1. Single-family dwelling units;
2. Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020;
3. Primary schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R);
8
Packet Pg. 70
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
4. Local public facilities that are planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement
plan, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050;
5. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted
master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070.
B. Permitted Secondary Uses.
1. Foster homes;
2.I ccessory dwelling units subject to the requirements of 16.20.050 ECDC:
3. 2—Home occupation, subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.20 ECDC;
3 -4. The renting of rooms without separate kitchens to one or more persons;
5.4 The following accessory buildings:
a. Fallout shelters,
b. Private greenhouses covering no more than five percent of the site,
c. Private stables,
d. Private parking for no more than five cars,
e. Private swimming pools and other private recreational facilities;
6. -5-. Private residential docks or piers;
7 6-. Family day-care in a residential home;
8 . 7-. Commuter parking lots that contain less than 10 designated parking spaces in
conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted
in this zone. Any additionally designated parking spaces that increase the total number of
spaces in a commuter parking lot to 10 or more shall subject the entire commuter parking
lot to a conditional use permit as specified in subsection (D)(5) of this section, including
commuter parking lots that are located upon more than one lot as specified in ECDC
21.15.075;
9. 8— Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(1).
9
00
0
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
m
CL
d
O
V
C
Commented [MC6]: ADUs will be a permitted set p) y
use. ADUs currently require a conditional use perm C
addition to any building permit requirements. Redu
permitting time and cost. 3
O
N
rn
O
t�
t�
Q
Packet Pg. 71
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
1. High schools, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R);
2. Local public facilities that are not planned, designated, and sited in the capital
improvement plan, subject to ECDC 17.100.050;
3. Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements
of ECDC 17.100.070.
D. Secondary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
1. Preschools;
2. Guest house;
3. Amateur radio transmitting antennas;
4 Accessory wellingunits;
4— Commuter parking lots with 10 or more designated parking spaces in conjunction with a
church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone; and
6. -5-. Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(2). [Ord. 3988 § 7, 2015; Ord. 3900 § 4, 2012;
Ord. 3702 § 1, 2008; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
16.20.020 Subdistricts.
There are established seven subdistricts of the RS zone in order to provide site development
standards for areas which differ in topography, location, existing development and other
factors. These subdistricts shall be known as the RS-6 zone, the RS-8 zone, the RS-10 zone, the
RS-12 zone, the RSW-12 zone, the RS-20 zone, and the RS-MP zone. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
10
Packet Pg. 72
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
16.20.030 Table of site development standards.
Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Maximum Minimum
Sub Maximum Side Rear Maximum
Lot Area Lot Street Coverage Parking
Density' Height
District (Sq.Ft.) Width Setback Setback Setback M Spaces'
RS-20 20,000 2.2 100, 25' 3513 & 25' 25' 35% 2
10,
IRS-1 2 12,000 3.7 80' 25' 10, 25' 25' 35% 2
RSW- 12,000 3.7 — 15' 10, 35' 25' 35% 2
124
IRS-1 0 10,000 4.4 75' 25' 10, 20' 25' 35% 2
RS-8 8,000 5.5 70' 25' 7-1/2' 15' 25' 35% 2
RS-6 6,000 7.3 60' 20' S' 15' 25' 35% 2
RS-MP5 12,0005 3.75 80'5 255 10i5 255 25' 35% 2
1 Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined by dividing the total lot area by the density allowed by
the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole
number.
2 See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking requirements.
3 Thirty-five feet total of both sides, 10 feet minimum on either side.
4 Lots must have frontage on the ordinary high water line and a public street or access easement approved by
the hearing examiner.
5 "MP" signifies "master plan." The standards in this section show the standards applicable to development
without an approved master plan. Properties in this zone may be developed at a higher urban density lot
pattern equivalent to RS-8 but this shall only be permitted in accordance with a duly adopted master plan
adopted under the provisions of ECDC 16.20.045.
[Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
11
Packet Pg. 73
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
16.20.040 Site development exceptions.
A. Average Front Setback. If a block has residential buildings on more than one-half of the lots
on the same side of the block, the owner of a lot on that block may use the average of all the
setbacks of the existing residential buildings on the same side of the street as the minimum
required front setback for the lot. Detached structures such as garages; carports; and
uncovered porches, decks, steps and patios less than 30 inches in height, and other uncovered
structures less than 30 inches in height shall not be included in the "average front setback'
determination.
An applicant for such a determination shall provide a drawing which locates the street property
line for the entire block, as well as the existing street setbacks of all buildings required to be
used for the purpose of calculating the "average front setback." The drawing shall be prepared
and stamped by a land surveyor registered in the state of Washington.
B. Eaves and Chimneys. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required setback not more than
30 inches.
C. Porches and Decks. Uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may project
into a required setback not more than one-third of the required setback, or four feet, whichever
is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches above ground level at any point.
D. Reserved.
E. Corner Lots. Corner lots have no rear setback; all setbacks other than the street setbacks
shall be side setbacks.
F. Docks, Piers, Floats.
1. Height. The height of a residential dock or pier shall not exceed five feet above the
ordinary high water mark. The height of attendant pilings shall not exceed five feet above
the ordinary high water mark or that height necessary to provide for temporary emergency
protection of floating docks.
2. Length. The length of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed the lesser of 35 feet
or the average length of existing docks or piers within 300 feet of the subject dock or pier.
3. Width. The width of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot
width when measured parallel to the shoreline.
12
Packet Pg. 74
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
4. Setbacks. All residential docks or piers shall observe a minimum 10-foot side yard
setback from a property line or a storm drainage outfall. joint use docks or piers may be
located on the side property line; provided, that the abutting waterfront property owners
shall file a joint use maintenance agreement with the Snohomish County auditor in
conjunction with, and as a condition of, the issuance of a building permit. joint use docks or
piers shall observe all other regulations of this subsection.
5. Number. No lot shall have more than one dock or pier or portion thereof located on the
lot.
6. Size. No residential dock or pier shall exceed 400 square feet.
7. Floats. Offshore recreational floats are prohibited.
8. Covered Buildings. No covered building shall be allowed on any residential dock or pier.
[Ord. 3845 § 5, 2011; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan.
A. General. The "single-family -master plan" zone is intended to apply to the area lying along
the south side of SR-104 north of 228th Street SW, where there are development constraints
related to access and traffic on SR-104. Development in this zone may be approved at RS-12
standards without an approved master plan. An approved master plan is required before any
development can occur at RS-8 densities.
B. Criteria for Approving a Master Plan. Properties seeking to develop at RS-6 or RS-8 densities
shall be developed according to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly
demonstrates the following:
1. That access and lot configurations shall not result in additional curb cuts or unmitigated
traffic impacts on SR-104; at a minimum, a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer
approved by the city shall clearly demonstrate this requirement.
2. That the configuration and arrangement of lots within the master plan area provide for
setbacks on the perimeter of the proposed development that are compatible with the
zoning standards applied to adjoining developed properties. For example, a master plan
adjoining developed lots in an RS-MP zone that were developed under RS-12 standards
13
Packet Pg. 75
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
shall have RS-12 setbacks along common property lines, although the lot sizes, widths, and
other bulk standards may conform to the higher density lot configuration approved
through the master plan. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 20051.
16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory dwelling units,
A. General. Accessory dwelling units must meet all of the standards of Chapter 16.20 ECDC
except as specifically provided in this section.
B. Number of Units. A principal dwelling unit may have two accessory dwelling units in the
following configurations: one attached and one detached accessory dwelling units, two
attached accessory dwelling units, or two detached accessory dwelling units.
C. Table of ADU development standards. OL a,
Sub District
Maximum ADU
Minimum
Maximum ADU
Minimum Parking
Gross Floor
Area S . Ft.
ADU Rear
Hei h
Spaces
Setback','
RS-20
1,200
25'
24'
0
RS-12
1,200
25'
24'
0
RS-10
1,200
20'
24'
0
RS-8
11000
1013
24'
0
RS
1,000
10i3
24'
0
1 INo rear Setbacks are required for detached accessory dwelling units from the rear lot line if
that lot line abuts a public alley, regardless of detached accessory dwelling unit size.
2 Standard street and side setbacks per ECDC 16.20.030 apply.
3 The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of five feet for a detached
accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less.
14
Commented [MC7]: Moving and updating ADU Is
currently in ECDC 20.21. ADUs are only allowed in si
family (RS) zones so it is reasonable to include the A
related standards in the RS zoning chapter. At the s:
time, the standards are being updated to be consist,
HB 1337 and best practices.
Commented [RH8]: HB 1337 will require gross flc
up to 1,000sf. Gross floor area is defined by RCW 36
as "the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit ind
basements and attics but not including a garage or a
structure."
Commented [MC9]: Consistent with HB 1337
Packet Pg. 76
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
D. Types of Building. A manufactured or modular dwelling unit may be used as an accessory
dwelling unit. Detached accessory dwelling units are allowed to be created in existing legally
permitted buildings, including detached garages. Legal nonconforming buildings converted for
use as an accessory dwelling unit must meet the requirements of 17.40.020(D).
E. Driveways. Access to the principal unit and any residential units shall comply with city codes
and policies as established by ECDC Title 18.
d. Utilities and Services. The Public Works Department considers Accessory Dwelling Units
dependent upon the principal unit and within the capacity of existing infrastructure of the
primary unit.
1. Utilities. All new or extended utilities must be undergrounded in accordance with
ECDC 18.05.010.
2. Utility Access. Occupants of Accessory Dwelling Units and the primary unit must have
unrestricted access to utility controls for systems (Including water, electricity, and gas) in
each respective unit or in a common area.
3. Water Meter. Only one water service and meter is allowed per parcel to serve the
principal unit and each accessory dwelling unit. Private submetering on the property is
allowed, but the City is not involved with installing or reading the submeter.
4. Sewer. Only one sewer lateral is allowed per parcel to serve the principal unit and
each accessory dwelling unit. Separate connections to the main trunk line will not be
permitted.
�5. Septic System.
5. Mailboxes. Additional mailboxes may be added for each permitted unit, as approved
by the Post Office.
G. Health and Safety. Accessory dwelling units must comply with all the applicable requirements
of the current building codes adopted by ECDC Title 19 and must comply in all respects with the
provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Accessory dwelling units will be
required to have separate ingress/egress from the principal dwelling unit.
H. Previously approved accessory dwelling units. ADUs that were previously approved by the City
of Edmonds may continue and are not subject to the standards of this subsection. If expansion
15
Commented [HR10]: Language TBD by Public We
Department. Per State requirements, cities may pro
ADUs on properties not served by sewers.
Commented [RH11]: Under review with City of E
Public Works Department, Utility Billing, and olymp
Water and Sewer District
00
0
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
m
r
to
CL
d
13
O
U
c
d
3
O
N
N
O
Q
Packet Pg. 77
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
or modification to an approved unit is proposed, the ADU must come into full compliance with
the requirements of this section.
16.20.060 16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory
buildings.
A. General. Accessory buildings and structures shall meet all of the standards of ECDC
16.20.030 except as specifically provided in this section.
B. Height. Height shall be limited to 15 feet, except for amateur radio transmitting antennas
and their supporting structures. Garages or other accessory buildings attached by a breezeway,
hallway, or other similar connection to the main building which results in a separation
exceeding 10 feet in length may not exceed the 15-foot height limit. The separation shall be
determined by the minimum distance between the outside walls of the main building and
accessory building, exclusive of the connecting structure.
C. Rear Setbacks. The normally required rear setback maybe reduced to a minimum of five feet
for accessory buildings covering less than 600 square feet of the site.
D. Satellite Television Antenna. A satellite television antenna which measures greater than one
meter or 1.1 yards in diameter shall comply with the following regulations:
1. General. Satellite television antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance
with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes as the same exist or are hereafter amended.
A building permit shall be required in order to install any such device.
2. Setbacks. In all zones subject to the provisions contained herein, a satellite television
antenna shall be located only in the rear yard of any lot. In the event that no usable satellite
signal can be obtained in the rear lot location or in the event that no rear lot exists as in the
case of a corner lot, satellite television antennas shall then be located in the side yard. In
the event that a usable satellite signal cannot be obtained in either the rear or side yard,
then a roof -mounted location may be approved by the staff, provided, however, that any
roof -mounted satellite antenna shall be in a color calculated to blend in with existing roof
materials and, in the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, shall not exceed nine
feet in diameter unless otherwise provided for by this section. In no event shall any roof-
16
Packet Pg. 78
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
mounted satellite television antenna exceed the maximum height limitations established
by this section.
3. Aesthetic. Satellite television antennas shall be finished in a nongarish, nonreflective
color and surface which shall blend into their surroundings. In the case of a parabolic,
spherical or dish antenna, said antenna shall be of a mesh construction. No commercial
advertising of any kind shall be displayed on the satellite television antenna.
4. Size and Height. Maximum size for a ground -mounted parabolic, spherical or dish
antenna shall be 12 feet in diameter. No ground -mounted antenna shall be greater than 15
feet in height unless otherwise approved for waiver as herein provided. The height of roof -
mounted satellite television antennas shall not exceed the lesser of the height of the
antenna when mounted on a standard base provided by the manufacturer or installer for
ordinary operation of the antenna or the height limitation provided by the zoning code.
5. Number. Only one satellite television antenna shall be permitted on any residential lot
or parcel of land. In no case shall a satellite television antenna be permitted to be placed
on wheels or attached to a portable device for the purpose of relocating the entire antenna
on the property in order to circumvent the intentions of this section.
E. Amateur Radio Antennas.
1. The following applications for the following approvals shall be processed as a Type II
development project permit application (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC):
a. Requests to utilize an amateur radio antenna dish which measures greater than
one meter or 1.1 yards in diameter;
b. Requests to utilize an antenna which:
i. Would be greater than 12 feet in height above the principal building on a site.
The height of the antenna shall be determined by reference to the highest point of
the roof of the principal building, exclusive of the chimney or other roof -mounted
equipment. The request to locate a 12-foot antenna on a building is limited to
buildings whose height conforms to the highest limit of the zone in which the
building is located.
ii. Would exceed the height limit of the zone when mounted on the ground or on
any accessory structure (see subsection (E)(2)(d) of this section).
17
Packet Pg. 79
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
2. The application shall comply with the following regulations:
a. Definition. "Amateur radio antenna" means an antenna, or any combination of a
mast or tower plus an attached or mounted antenna, which transmits noncommercial
communication signals and is utilized by an operator licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission. Guy wires for amateur radio antennas are considered
part of the structure for the purpose of meeting development standards.
b. General. Amateur radio antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance
with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes, as the same exist or are hereafter
amended. A building permit shall be required to install an amateur radio antenna.
c. Location. Amateur radio antennas may be ground- or roof -mounted, however, these
devices shall:
i. Be located and constructed in such a manner as to reasonably ensure that, in
its fully extended position, it will not fall in or onto adjoining properties;
ii. Not be located within any required setback area; and
iii. Be retracted in inclement weather posing a hazard to the antenna.
d. Height. The height of a ground -mounted tower or roof -top antenna may not exceed
the greater of the height limit applicable to the zone or 65 feet when extended by a
telescoping or crank -up mechanism unless an applicant obtains a waiver (see
subsection (F) of this section).
i. Only telescoping towers may exceed the height limits established by subsection
(E)(1)(b) of this section. Such towers shall comply with the height limit within the
applicable zone and may only exceed the height limit of the applicable zone and/or
65-foot height limit when extended and operating and if a waiver has been
granted.
ii. An antenna located on a nonconforming building or structure which exceeds
the height limit of the zone in which it is located shall be limited to height limit of
the zone plus 12 feet.
18
Packet Pg. 80
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
e. Aesthetic. To the extent technically feasible and in compliance with safety
regulations, specific paint colors may be required to allow the tower to blend better
with its setting.
F. Technological Impracticality - Request for Waiver.
1. The owner, licensee or adjacent property owner may apply for a waiver if:
a. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for
the owner of a satellite television antenna to receive a usable satellite signal;
b. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for
the holder of any amateur radio license to enjoy the full benefits of an FCC license or
FCC protected right; or
c. An adjacent property owner or holder of an FCC license or right believes that
alternatives exist which are less burdensome to adjacent property owners.
2. The request for waiver shall be reviewed by the hearing examiner as a Type III -A
decision and may be granted upon a finding that one of the following sets of criteria have
been met:
a. Technological Impracticality.
i. Actual compliance with the existing provisions of the city's zoning ordinance
would prevent the satellite television antenna from receiving a usable satellite
signal or prevent an individual from exercising the rights granted to him or her by
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) by license, law or FCC regulation;
or
ii. The alternatives proposed by the property owner or licensee constitute the
minimum necessary to permit acquisition of a usable satellite signal by a satellite
television antenna or to exercise the rights granted pursuant to a valid FCC license,
law or FCC regulation.
b. Less Burdensome Alternatives. The hearing examiner is also authorized to consider
the application of adjacent property owners for a waiver consistent with the provisions
of subsection (F)(1)(c) of this section without the requirement of a finding that a usable
satellite signal cannot be acquired when the applicant or adjacent property owner(s)
19
Packet Pg. 81
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
establish that the alternatives proposed by the applicant are less burdensome to the
adjacent property owners than the requirements which would otherwise be imposed
under this section. For example, adjacent property owners may request alternative or
additional screening or the relocation of the antenna on the licensee's property. In the
interactive process described in subsection (F)(3) of this section, the hearing examiner
shall attempt to balance the impact of the tower on the views of adjacent properties,
as well as the impacts of alternative screening and relocation in order to equitably
distribute any negative impacts among the neighbors while imposing reasonable
conditions on the antenna, its location and screening that do not impair the rights
granted by the FCC to the licensee.
3. The process shall be an interactive one in which the hearing examiner works with the
licensee to craft conditions which place the minimum possible burden on adjacent
property owners while permitting the owner of the satellite antenna or holder of an
amateur radio license to fully exercise the rights which he or she has been granted by
federal law. For example, the number of antennas and size of the array shall be no greater
than that necessary to enjoy full use of the FCC license. Conditions may include but are not
limited to requirements for screening and landscaping, review of the color, reflectivity and
mass of the proposed satellite television antenna or amateur radio facilities, and other
reasonable restrictions. Any restriction shall be consistent with the intent of the city council
that a waiver to the antenna owner be granted only when necessary to permit the satellite
television antenna to acquire usable satellite signal or to allow the licensee to exercise the
rights granted by Federal Communications Commission license after consideration of
aesthetic harmony of the community. The process employed should involve the interaction
of the licensee or owner and the neighborhood. Certain issues have been preempted by
federal law and shall not be considered by the hearing examiner. Such issues include, but
are not limited to, the impacts of electromagnetic radiation, the potential interference of
the amateur radio facility with electronic devices in the neighborhood and any other matter
preempted by federal law or regulation. Impact on view and on the values of neighboring
properties may be considered in imposing reasonable conditions but shall not be a basis
for denial of a permit to construct the antenna.
4. The application fee and notification for consideration of the waiver by an owner of a
satellite television antenna shall be the same as that provided for processing a variance. No
fee shall be charged to the holder of a valid FCC amateur radio license.
20
Packet Pg. 82
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.7
5. In the event that an applicant for waiver is also obligated to undergo architectural
design review, the architectural design board shall defer any issues relating to the antenna
and/or other amateur radio equipment to the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner
may, at his or her discretion, request the architectural design board review and comment
regarding required screening and landscaping and its integration into sight and
landscaping plans. No additional fee shall be required of the applicant upon such referral.
G. The provisions of subsections (D), (E) and (F) of this section shall be interpreted in
accordance with the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission including but not
limited to PRE-1. In the event of ambiguity or conflict with any of the apparent provisions of this
section, the provisions of federal regulations shall control. [Ord. 3736 §§ 8, 9, 2009; Ord. 3728 § 3,
2009; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
117I.40.020 Nonconforming building and/or structure.
A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the
site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to
such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of
Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city.
Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory
dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial
evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1,
1981. In the case of a property that was annexed afterjanuary 1, 1981, then the date shall be
that of the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be
overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
B. Continuation. A nonconforming building or structure may be maintained and continued,
unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or
altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the building except as
expressly provided in subsections (Q through-(J)@ of this section.
C. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by
reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of
Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Cultural
Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a council -
approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation. "Restoration" means reconstruction of the historic building or structure
21
00
0
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
m
r
cc
M
CL
d
O
U
c
d
3
Commented [HR12]: Per HB 1337, a city or a cou 0 ist
allow detached accessory dwelling units to be convE
N
from existing structures, including but not limited tc O
detached garages, even if they violate current code
V
requirements for setbacks or lot coverage Q
Packet Pg. 83
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is consistent with full
compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20.45
ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The reconstruction of all such historic buildings and
structures shall comply with the life safety provisions of the State Building Code.
D. Maintenance and Alterations.
1. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a nonconforming building or structure shall be
permitted.
2. Solar Energy Installations on Buildings That Exceed Existing Height Limits. A rooftop solar
energy installation mounted on a nonconforming building that exceeds the existing height
limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision if:
a. The installation exceeds the existing roof height by not more than 36 inches.
b. The installation is designed and located in such away as to provide reasonable
solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties.
3. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site
development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of
the building, shall be permitted.
4. In an effort to provide modular relief, minor architectural improvements in commercial
and multifamily zones may encroach into the nonconforming setback adjacent to an access
easement or public right-of-way not more than 30 inches. Minor architectural
improvements may also be permitted in nonconforming side or rear yard setbacks only if
they intrude not more than 30 inches nor one-half of the distance to the property line,
whichever is less. "Minor architectural improvements" are defined as and limited to bay
windows, eaves, chimneys and architectural detail such as cornices, medallions and
decorative trim. Such improvements shall be required to obtain architectural design
review. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt such improvements in compliance
with the State Building and Fire Codes.
5. Alterations required by law or the order of a public agency in order to meet health and
safety regulations shall be permitted.
E. Relocation. Should a nonconforming building or structure be moved horizontally for any
reason for any distance, it shall thereafter come into conformance with the setback and lot
22
Packet Pg. 84
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
coverage requirements for the zone in which it is located. Provided, however, that a building or
structure may be moved on the same site without full compliance if the movement reduces the
degree of nonconformity of the building or structure. Movement alone of a nonconforming
building or structure to lessen an aspect of its nonconformity shall not require the owner
thereof to bring the building or structure into compliance with other bulk or site development
standards of the city applicable to the building or structure.
F. Restoration.
1. If a nonconforming building or structure is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal
to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall
not be reconstructed except in full conformance with the provisions of the Edmonds
Community Development Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of
destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as a Type II staff
decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Damage of less than 75 percent of
replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its former size, shape and
lot location as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair is initiated by
the filing of an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC
19.00.025(G) et seq. within 18 months of the date such damage occurred. The director may
grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been
received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months.
2. Residential Buildings. Existing nonconforming buildings in use solely for residential
purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be reconstructed without
regard to the limitations of subsections IEl and a of this section, if, but only if, the
following conditions are met:
a. If a nonconforming multifamily residential building or a mixed use building
containing multiple residential units is damaged in excess of 75 percent of its
replacement cost at the time of destruction, the building may be restored to the same
density, height, setbacks or coverage as existing before the destruction or damage
occurred if, but only if, an application for a building permit which vests as provided in
ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. is filed within 18 months of the date the damage occurred.
The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension
request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18
months.
23
Packet Pg. 85
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
b. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with
entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or
reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a
conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or
reconstruction.
c. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not
apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures.
d. A nonconforming residential single-family building maybe rebuilt within the
defined building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are
substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current
codes. Substantial compliance shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff
decision. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final and appealable only as
provided in ECDC 20.06.150.
3. The right of restoration shall not apply if:
a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the
owner or the owner's agent;
b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross
negligence of the owner or owner's agents; or
c. The building was demolished for the purpose of redevelopment.
G. Accessory Dwelling Units. A preexisting nonconforming detached accessory building may be
converted into an accessory dwelling unit provided it meets the standards in ECDC 16.20.050(F)
and G . -Minor exterior modifications required for conversion into conditioned space or other
minor exterior modifications required by the International Residential Code adopted by ECDC
Title 19 may be permitted. 'Minor exterior modifications' include, but are not limited to, egress
windows, exhaust vents, and other minor modifications that are required for health and safety
as determined by the Building Official.
G- H. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an
accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other
substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before
January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date
24
Packet Pg. 86
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
shall be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption
may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
k-l. BD5 Zone. The BIDS zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of
existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(5). In the BIDS zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be converted
to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 without being required to come into
compliance with the ground floor elevation requirements of ECDC 16.43.030(B).
1—LThe antenna and related equipment of a nonconforming wireless communication facility
may be completely replaced with a new antenna and related equipment; provided, that, upon
replacement, the applicant shall use the best available methods and materials to enhance the
appearance of the antenna and related equipment and/or screen it from view in a manner that
improves the visual impact or the conspicuity of the nonconformity. [Ord. 4154 § 6 (Att. D), 2019;
Ord. 4151 § 2 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3961 § 3, 2014; Ord. 3866 § 2, 2011; Ord. 3781 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 13, 14,
2009; Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008].
25
Commented [MC13]: Old code that is no longer
part of this update.
Packet Pg. 87
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
17.50.020 Parking space requirements.
[Refer to ECDC 17.50.010(C) and 17.50.070 for standards relating to the downtown business
area.]
A. Residential.
1. Single-family and multifamily.
a. Single-family dwellings: two spaces per principal dwelling unit, except:
b. Multiple residential according to the following table:
Required parking
Type of multiple
spaces per dwelling
dwelling unit
unit
Studio
1.2
1 bedroom
1.5
2 bedrooms
1.8
3 or more
2.0
bedrooms
2. Boarding house: one space per bed.
3. Rest home, nursing home, convalescent home, residential social welfare facilities: one
space per three beds.
B. Business.
26
Packet Pg. 88
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
1. Retail stores, including art galleries, convenience stores, department stores, discount
stores, drug stores, grocery stores, supermarkets: one space per 300 square feet;
2. Furniture, appliances, and hardware stores: one space per 600 square feet;
3. Services uses, including barber shops, beauty shops, dry cleaners, laundries, repair
shops: one space per 600 square feet;
4. Medical, dental and veterinarian offices, banks and clinics: one space per 200 square
feet;
5. Business and professional offices with on -site customer service: one space per 400
square feet;
6. Offices not providing on -site customer service: one space per 800 square feet;
7. Bowling alley: four spaces per bowling lane;
8. Commercial recreation: one space per 500 square feet, or one space for each customer
allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load;
9. Car repair, commercial garage: one space per 200 square feet;
10. Drive-in restaurants, automobile service station, car dealer, used car lot: one space per
500 square feet of lot area;
11. Restaurant, tavern, cocktail lounge: if less than 4,000 square feet floor area, one per
200 square feet gross floor area; if over 4,000 square feet floor area, 20 plus one per 100
square feet gross floor area in excess of 4,000 square feet;
12. Plant nurseries (outdoor retail area): one space per five square feet of outdoor retail
area;
13. Motels and hotels: one space per room or unit;
14. Retail warehouse, building materials yard: one space per 1,000 square feet of lot area
or one per three employees;
15. Manufacturing, laboratories, printing, research, automobile wrecking yards, kennels:
one space per two employees on largest shift;
27
Packet Pg. 89
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
16. Mortuary: one space per four fixed seats or per 400 square feet of assembly area,
whichever is greater;
17. Marina: to be determined by the hearing examiner, using information provided by the
applicant, and the following criteria:
a. The type of storage facility (moorage, dry storage, trailer parking) and intended use
(sailboats, fishing boats, leisure boats),
b. The need to accommodate overflow peak parking demand from other uses
accessory to the marina,
c. The availability and use of public transit;
18. Storage warehouse: one space per employee;
19. Wholesale warehouse: one space per employee;
20. Adult retail store: one space per 300 square feet;
21. Sexually oriented business (except adult retail store): one space for each customer
allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load.
C. Community Facilities.
1. Outdoor places of public assembly, including stadiums and arenas: one space per eight
fixed seats, or per 100 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater;
2. Theaters: one space per five seats;
3. Indoor places of public assembly, including churches, auditoriums: one space per four
seats or one space per 40 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater;
4. Elementary schools, junior high schools, boarding schools (elementary through senior
high), residential colleges and universities: six spaces per classroom, or one space per
daytime employee, whichever is greater;
5. Nonresidential colleges and universities: one space per daytime employee;
6. High schools (senior): one space per daytime employee;
7. Museums, libraries, art galleries: one space per 250 square feet;
28
Packet Pg. 90
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
8. Day-care centers and preschools: one space per 300 square feet, or one per employee,
plus one per five students, whichever is larger;
9. Hospitals: three spaces per bed;
10. Maintenance yard (public or public utility): one space per two employees.
D. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure Parking Standards. See Chapter 17.115 ECDC for
parking standards relating to electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. [Ord. 4251 § 2 (Exh. A),
2022; Ord. 3496 § 2, 2004].
20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework.
A. Permit Types.
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE III -
B
TYPE IV
TYPE V
Zoning
Accesser
Contingent
Essential
Site specific
complianc
dwelling it
critical area
public
rezone
e letter
review
facilities
Lot line
Formal
Shoreline
Technological
Development
Zoning text
adjustment
interpretatio
substantial
impracticality
agreements
amendment;
n of the text
development
waiver for
area -wide
of the ECDC
permit,
amateur
zoning map
bythe
where public
radio
amendments
director
hearing not
antennas
required per
ECDC
24.80.100
29
Commented [MC14]: ADUs will no longer requirc
conditional use permit but rather a building permit
to a single family residence.
Packet Pg. 91
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.7
30
Commented [MC15]: Moved to ECDC 16.20 and
consistent with FIB 1337 and best practices
00
CD
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
d
Cu —
'0 !d
Q
d
O
U
c
Packet Pg. 92
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.7
31
co
0
0
O
M
N
O
N
Q
d
r.+
l0
Q
N
O
U
_
d
3
0
O
m
Q
m
E
m
E
Q
m
O
U
t
O
L
t
4)
�L
4)
_
4)
w
Packet Pg. 93
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.7
32
co
0
0
O
m
N
O
N
Q
d
r.+
l0
Q
N
O
U
_
d
3
0
O
m
Q
m
E
m
E
Q
m
O
U
t
O
L
t
4)
�L
4)
_
4)
w
Packet Pg. 94
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.7
33
co
0
0
O
m
N
O
N
Q
d
r.+
l0
Q
N
O
U
_
d
3
0
O
m
Q
m
E
m
E
Q
m
O
U
t
O
L
t
4)
�L
4)
_
4)
w
Packet Pg. 95
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.7
20.35.020 *pplicability.�
A. Planned residential developments (PRDs) may be located in any residential zone of the city
Uses permitted in the PRD shall be governed by the use regulations of the underlying zoning
classification.
1. PRDs in single-family zones shall be comprised of detached dwelling units on individual
lots, and any appurtenant common open space, recreational facilities or other areas or
facilities.
a. The PRD process is not available to single-family lots that are incapable of further
subdivision.
b. The PRD process shall not be used to reduce any bulk or performance standard not
specifically referenced herein. Bulk standards not referenced may be varied only in
accordance with Chapter 20.85 ECDC, Variances, or through the modification provision
provided through the subdivision process as outlined in Chapter 20.75 ECDC.
B. Property included in a PRD application must be under the ownership of the applicant, or the
applicant must be authorized pursuant to a durable power of attorney or other binding
contractual authorization in a form which may be recorded in the land records of Snohomish
County to process the application on behalf of all other owners.
34
Commented [MCI 6]: The PRD code currently prc
ADUs. That restriction is proposed to be eliminated
PRD is just another type of single family residential
subdivision. As long as the PRD lot can meet the AD
requirements proposed in ECDC 16.20.050, it could
ADU.
Packet Pg. 96
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
C. Accessory dwelling units and " Home use occupations restricted by ECDC 20.20.010(B)
01 5(D) shall not be permitted within a PRD. [ord. 3455 § 1, 20031.
21.05.015 Accessory dwelling unit,, attached
An att child accessory dwelling unit is a sstructure attached- to or constructed ,.,,thin a ngle-
famii dWelIiRg (ADU) is a subordinate dwelling unit added to, created within, or detached from
a principal dwelling unit, providing independent living facilities that include permanent
provisions for living sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Accessory dwelling unit does not
include recreational vehicles or mobile homes. ^high has; ii"in^ f,^iitios; for nno inai.,ia,,,i nr
ngle tarn'" herne [Ord. 3294 § 2, 2000].
21.30.010 Family.
A. Family means individuals related or unrelated by genetics, adoption, or marriage living in a
dwelling unit.
B. The term "family" shall include:
1. State licensed adult family homes required to be recognized as residential use pursuant
to Chapter 70.128 RCW;
2. State licensed foster family homes and group care facilities as defined in RCW
74.15.180, subject to the exclusion of subsection u of this section;
3. Group homes for the disabled required to be accommodated as residential uses
pursuant to the Fair Housing Act amendments as the same exists or is hereafter amended.
C. The term "family" shall exclude individuals residing in halfway houses, crisis residential
centers as defined in RCW 74.15.020(1)(c), group homes licensed forjuvenile offenders, or other
facilities, whether or not licensed by the state, where individuals are incarcerated or otherwise
required to reside pursuant to court order under the supervision of paid staff and personnel.
35
Packet Pg. 97
6.A.b
DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.7
D. E—Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit normal hosting activities associated with
residential use. [Ord. 4260 § 4 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 3571 § 1, 2005; Ord. 3184 § 1, 1998].
21.35.013 Gross Floor Area.
An interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not
including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable accessory structures.
21.80.075 Principal dwelling unit
Primary housing unit located on the same lot as an accessory dwelling unit.
21.90.080 Single-family dwelling (unit).
Single-family dwelling (and single-family dwelling unit) means a detached building configured as
described herein and occupied or intended to be occupied by one family, limited to one per lot.
A single-family dwelling shall be limited to one mailbox, electric meter, gas meter, and water
meter. It will also have common access to and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating
areas within the dwelling unit. .n additienal ^ ailbAx can he added to the 'At
12. MMWMMI- M"INryMsMLbT .1.�yI:11i1.Y13!J� 1
36
Commented [RH17]: Consistent with RCW 36.70,
Commented [RH18]: Consistent with RCW 36.70,
00
0
0
O
A
N
O
N
Q
d
C4
Q
M
d
O
U
C
d
3
O
Q
Packet Pg. 98
6.A.c
�p EDM
0�� CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning Board will hold a public hearing on proposed amendments to
the City's accessory dwelling unit (ADU) code in Chapter 20.21 of the
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and related chapters. The
purpose of the code update is to comply with the mandatory elements of
House Bill 1337, which was adopted by the Washington State Legislature in
2023, and to be consistent with the recommendations of the City's Citizens
Housing Commission from 2021.
NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds
FILE NO.: AMD2023-0008
COMMENTS ON
PROPOSAL DUE: February 28, 2024
Any person may comment on this application until the public hearing is
closed. Relevant materials can be reviewed by visiting the City's website at
www.edmondswa.gov (under the applicable Meeting Agenda or Public
Notices), or by contacting the City contact noted below. Comments may be
mailed, emailed, or made at the public hearing. Please refer to the
application file number for all inquiries.
PUBLIC HEARING: A hybrid public hearing will be held by the Planning Board on February 28,
2024, at 7 p.m. The physical location is at Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Avenue
N, 3rd Floor, Brackett Room.
Or join the Zoom meeting at:
https://edmondswa-
gov.zoom.us/I/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxITG9LZkc3KOhuS014QT09
Or via phone by dialing 253-205-0468
Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194
Password: 007978
CITY CONTACT: Rose Haas, Planner
rose.haas@edmondswa.gov
425-771-0220, extension 1239
PUBLISH: February 14, 2024
Packet Pg. 99
6.A.c
Everett .Daily Herald
Affidavit of Publication
State ol•Washington }
County of Snohomish i ss
Michael Gates being first duly sworn, upon
oath deposes and says: that lic/slit is the legal
representative of the Everett Daily Herald a
daily newspaper. •ncc said newspaper is a legal
newspaper by order of the superior court in the
county in which it is published and is now and
has been lim more than six months prior to the
date of the first publication of the Notice
licreinalicr referred to. published in the English
IanguagC continually as a daily newspaper in
Snohomish County. Washington and is and
always has been printed in whole or part in the
Everett Dailv Ilerald and is of general
circulation in said County, and is a legal
newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99
of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter
213, Laws of 1941. and approved as a legal
newspaper by order of the Superior Court of
Snohomish County, State of Washington, by
order dated .lime 16, 1941. and that the annexed
is a true copy of ED11991 »3 NOTICE3 PB
PUBLIC as it was published in the regular and
Clore issue of said paper and not as a
supplement form thereof' for a period of I
issue(s), such publication commencing on
02/14/2024 and ending on 02/14/2024 and that
said uewsp;ym- was regularly distributed to its
subscribers during all of said period.
The anlo uu I' the fee Iiu uch publicalion is
SG0.2t1.
Subscribed and sworn before me on this
day of trr'l� nLIZ�_
o�or 1-1
Notary Public in and Ror the Slate of
Washington.
L uy.,I lilnuuul. - LrUA1. Ana I IJ RII-I Ili
RUSE. 10 %S I
Packet Pg. 100
6.A.c
Classified Proof
CITY OF EDMONDS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning Board will hold a public
hearing on proposed amendments to the City's accessory dwelling
unit (ADU) code In Chapter 20.21 of the Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) and related chapters. The purpose of
the code update Is to comply with the mandatory elements of
House Bill 1337. which was adopted by the Washington State
Legislature in 2023, and to be consistent with the
recommendations of the City's Citizens Housing Commission from
2021.
NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds
FILE NO: AMD2023-0008
COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: February 28, 2024
Any person may comment on this application until the public
hearing is closed. Relevant materials can be reviewed by visiting
the City's website at www.edmondswa.gov (under the applicable
Meeting Agenda or Public Notices), or by contacting the City
contact noted below. Comments may be malted. emalledor made
at the public hearing. Please (star to the application file number for
all inquiries.
PUBLIC HEARING: A hybrid public hearing will be held by the
Planning Board on February 28, 2024, at 7 pin. The physical
location is at Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Avenue N, 3rd Floor,
Brackett Room.
Or join the Zoom meeting at:
https:l/edmondswagov.zoom.us(Y07322872194?pwd-W FdxT WJIQ
mxITG9LZkc3KOhuSO14QT09
Or via phone b,/. dialing 253-205.0468
Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194
Password:007978
CITY CONTACT: Rose Haas, Planner
rose.ltaas edmondswa.gov
425-771-0 20, extension 1239
Published: February 14, 2024. EOH991658
Proofed by Pospical, Randie, 02/15/2024 01:08:15 pin Pagc: ,
Packet Pg. 101
7.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 02/28/2024
Green Building Incentives Program
Staff Lead: Tristan Sewell
Department: Planning & Development
Prepared By: Tristan Sewell
Background/History
The City of Edmonds' 2020 Comprehensive Plan and 2023 Climate Action Plan include the creation of
regulatory incentives to encourage more energy efficient and environmentally friendly development.
Planning and Development staff briefly introduced the Green Building Incentives Program to Planning
Board on January loth, 2024 (meeting minutes and media available through weblink). This initial
discussion covered the motivations, policy context, supporting research, and asked questions about the
indirect impacts of such a program.
In the interim, Planning and Development staff developed initial concepts for land use and permitting
incentives (Attachments 1 and 2). Staff has also begun researching examples of enforcement to ensure
that applicants follow through with the requisite certification or that the City appropriately recovers its
losses, should a project fail to earn third -party verification of the proclaimed certification level.
Staff Recommendation
No action in required. Staff will provide a presentation and requests feedback from the Planning Board.
Staff can return with revised draft code and more developed enforcement measures at a future work
session if zoning incentives are to be considered.
Narrative
Establishing green building incentives in Edmonds prior to the implementation of new state housing
regulations and in advance of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan update allows integration with these
upcoming changes. Future development would then have access to green building incentives,
encouraging more efficient and sustainable development in Edmonds.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Draft Green Building Incentives Table 2.23.24
Attachment 2 - Building Permit Review Timelines for Green Buildings
January 10, 2024 Planning Board meeting
Packet Pg. 102
7.A.a
Edmonds Green Building Incentives
Single -Family Residential
Multifamily Residential, Commercial, and Mixed Use
Development
Type
New Construction'
Remodel
Multifamily Residential
Business (B) Zones
(RM) Zones
Certification
Built Green 4-Star
Built Green Remodel
LEED Gold BD + C
Minimum
Built Green 5-Star projects may use
Setbacks
setbacks one zone smaller (i.e., RS-10
N/A
N/A
to RS-8. RS-6 as -is).
Choose one* of the following:
+5' where all portions above
• +5' where all portions
standard height limit have
above 25' have at least 4-
slopes at least:
+5' for all portions
in-12 slope
3-in-12
BC
Height
+5' where all portions above 25' have
above 25' that have at
. Maximum unit density
at least 4-in-12 slope
least 4-in-12 sloe
p
increased one tier (i.e.,
RM-3 to RM-2.4)
4-in-12
BN, BP
6-in-12
BD
*LEED Platinum projects may
use both incentives.
As for one unit size smaller
The lesser requirement of
Parking2
1 per dwelling unit
N/A
(i.e., 2-bdr to 1-bdr. Studio as-
is).
code or parking study.
Expedited
See Review Times Table
See Review Times Table
See Review Times Table
See Review Times Table
Review
' Incentives unavailable to new single-family residences in RM, OR, Business, or Commercial zones. Incentives are available to single-family remodels, duplexes, and
ADUs in these zones.
2 Chapter 17.115 EV requirements calculated off standard parking requirement, not off incentivized parking.
Last revised February 23, 2024
Packet Pg. 103
7.A.b
DRAFT - EDMONDS TARGET TIMES FOR PERMIT PROCESSING (WEEKS)
Actual Review times may vary
Permit Type
Review Type
1st Review
2nd Review
3rd Review
Total Target Review Time
New Single Family
Regular
6
3
2
11
Expedited
3
2
1
6
Single Family Addition or
Remodel
Regular
3 to 5
2 to 3
1 to 2
6 to 10
Expedited
2 to 3
1 to 2
1
4 to 6
Commercial/ MF New
Regular
8
5
3
16
Expedited
4
3
2
9
Commercial/MF Additions
Regular
4
3
2
9
Expedited
2
2
1
5
ommercial Remodel
r(Tenant Improvement)
lRegular
1 41
21
11
7
I Expedited
121
11
11
4
Expedited review for single family not available in MF zones
Review times may vary depending on staff work volumes and complexity of project.
Packet Pg. 104
10.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 02/28/2024
Extended Agenda
Staff Lead: Michael Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Michael Clugston
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Discuss the attached extended agenda.
Narrative
An additional work session with the Comp Plan growth alternatives is scheduled for April 10, prior to the
issuance of the associated environmental determination.
Typically the Board takes a summer break for one of the August meetings. The Board needs to
determine whether to do that and if so, which meeting.
Attachments:
February 28 Extended Agenda
Packet Pg. 105
10.A.a
Planning Board Extended Agenda - February 28, 2024
(O
I
O
(O
I
l0
(O
I
LL
I
LL
I
00
G
I
m
G
I
I�
Q
I
O
Q
I
[V
i6
00
G
I
N
[V
I
N
.-I
I
l0
N
I
o
.--I
I
N
Q
I
.--I
Q
1
w
[V
N
1
rl
.-I
N
1
Ln
[V
U
O
M
O
I
m
[V
Z
I
m
.-I
Z
I
I�
[V
0
I
ci
-i
0
I
Lf
[V
Comprehensive Plan
Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement
Joint Discussion w/EDC on Comp Plan existing conditions
High Level Alternatives
D/R
D/R
D/R
Joint Discussion w/EDC on Draft 3 Alternatives
D/R*
Draft Preferred Plan and Policy
D/R
Final Plan and Policy
D/R
Code Updates
Critical Aquifer Recharge
Tree Code Update
D/R
Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (HB 1337 - mid 2025)
D/R
D/R
PH
Green Building Incentives
I
D/R
D/R
PH
Climate Legislative Package
I
Land use permit timelines (SB 5290 - end 2024)
1
D/R
PH
Design standards and processes (HB 1293 - mid 2025), including
multfamily design standards
Middle Housing (HB 1110 - mid 2025)
1
Long Range
Capital Improvement Program/Capital Facilties Plan
Tree Canopy Policy
I
D/R
Highway 99 Landmark Site
Administrative
Election of Officers
Planning & Development 2024 Work Plan
B
Annual Retreat
I
Planning Board report to City Council
D/R
B
Parks, Recreation & Human Services Report
B
B
KEY
I- Introduction & Discussion
PH- Public Hearing
D/R- Discussion/Recommendation (*Joint meeting w/EDC)
B- Briefing/Q&A
R- Report with no briefing/presentation
Regular meeting cancelled
Future Items
Neighborhood Center Plans
Code Modernization Projects:
1. Unified Development Code (late 2025)
Comp Plan Implementation
Highway 99 Community Renewal Program
Summer break (either August meeting)
Packet Pg. 106