Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2024-03-27 Planning Board Packet
OF BbMG ti Agenda Edmonds Planning Board 1,00 REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL- 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 MARCH 27, 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. Approve minutes from March 6th Retreat 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 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Plan Growth Alternatives Recommendation 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT 10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA A. Extended Agenda Edmonds Planning Board Agenda March 27, 2024 Page 1 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda March 27, 2024 Page 2 2.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/27/2024 Approve minutes from March 6th Retreat Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Michelle Martin Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review/Approve draft meeting minutes for both meetings: March 6th & 13th. Narrative Draft minutes from March 6th Retreat & March 13th Regular Meeting attached. Attachments: PB 03062024 Special Retreat draft PB 03132024 draft Packet Pg. 3 2.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Special Meeting/Retreat March 6, 2024 Chair Mitchell called the special meeting/retreat of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Plaza Room at the Edmonds Public Library and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Gladstone. Board Members Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chair Judi Gladstone (online) Susanna Martini (online) Board Members Absent Richard Kuehn (excused) Nick Maxwell (excused) Staff Present Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Jeff Levy, Senior Planner, Deputy Project Manager — Comp Plan Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Plan Update — Growth Alternatives Director McLaughlin reviewed the EIS process with the assistance of Senior Planner Levy. She discussed the Final EIS contents and the process for finalizing the alternatives for the Draft EIS. There was a question about how to handle other ideas that aren't included in the alternatives. It was explained that the Board should include other ideas in one of the other alternatives rather than creating a new one; policy discussions will happen later. There were various questions about the timeline for the whole process. Staff discussed the steps in the process. Director McLaughlin's presentation continued and covered the 15-minute neighborhood approach, neighborhood centers description, hubs description, incentives, land use designations, Alternative A (Focused Growth), Alternative B (Distributed Growth), an explanation of how the alternatives differ, and how ADUs impact the count. There is some question about the number of ADUs required per lot. There were questions about if the two ADUs per lot is even realistic and implications of assuming only one ADU per lot. Senior Planning Board Retreat Minutes March 6, 2024 Pagel of 4 Packet Pg. 4 Planner Levy explained they were only talking about the applicable lots and reviewed how the calculations were done. A board member asked about the breakdown of housing types and costs. Staff explained that middle housing prices are still high cost. ADUs would allow Edmonds to enable middle housing, change land use designations, and ensure housing affordability. There were questions about potential downsizing and about having a pie chart showing Highway 99 and downtown. This will be more relevant down the road when the Planning Board start talking about policy choices. Director McLaughlin continued the presentation and reviewed the evaluation framework for the alternatives. There was debate about balancing the density within the Highway 99 subarea and the takings law. Mr. Levy discussed potential zoning changes with the various alternatives in specific areas such as downtown, Highway 99 Subarea, and neighborhood centers and hubs. There were questions about potential height changes and accessibility, which will be discussed during policy discussions at a later date. A board member asked if additional height would be an incentive tied to affordable housing. Director McLaughlin explained that the incentives would be tied to infrastructure and open space. There will be other affordable housing policies and affordable housing types. For the growth incentives they are allowed to count the top floor so that's the incentivized floor toward growth targets. They don't need to decide the policies related to the incentives at this point. There was another review of capacity comparisons with the pie charts. Public Comments: Larry Williamson asked if there are any hubs missing in the map, specifically 76th between 203'd-205th. Staff will review this. Mr. Williamson also asked about green building incentives. Director McLaughlin replied that staff is currently working on green building incentives program but has not yet rationalized those with the incentives mentioned tonight. They do not anticipate this being an extra story in addition to what was mentioned. She anticipates that the green building would be one of the incentives. Erica asked about how transportation infrastructure is being factored into the Comprehensive Plan and if they are being done in isolation or in coordination. Director McLaughlin explained how land use leads the process, but they are working closely with Transportation and the rest of the Comprehensive Plan because there is a codependency between the Transportation Element and this information. Mike McMurray (online) said he was happy to see that Yost Park was considered to be a possible recommendation by the Planning Board. He thinks it would be good for the community to have a year-round facility there. He referred to economic vitality and expressed concern about views being blocked with some of the increased heights. He expressed concern about not requiring parking with ADUs and recommended looking into this further. He recommended looking into how they could meet the state policies in a more reasonable while still being a good neighbor. Additionally, with all the development and higher density, he wondered why they don't recommend a low -profile parking garage strategically placed downtown. Alan Meams, (online) commented on the climate implications of all the concrete and new surface area. Is heat and circulation being considered for these centers and nodes? Commission Comments/Questions Planning Board Retreat Minutes March 6, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Packet Pg. 5 2.A.a A board member asked if all neighborhood business zones had been looked at when coming up with the neighborhood hubs. Director McLaughlin thought they had been considered but said they would look into the one brought up by Mr. Williamson. Upcoming events and meetings related to the Comprehensive Plan were reviewed. A board member asked if it was accurate that the final EIS would show both alternatives but the Comprehensive Plan would pick somewhere between the bookends. Director McLaughlin thought that they would select a preferred but it could be a combination of the two. She stated she wanted to get confirmation from Herrera that her understanding was accurate. A board member expressed interest in having the consultant present in order to better understand the public engagement portion. Staff made some comments regarding public engagement, the online open house, and Community Champions. (Many of these comments were inaudible.) There was a question about the age range of the people who made comments and a comment that the younger population needs to be energized to be involved because this long-range planning will affect them the most. Director McLaughlin and Mr. Levy commented on the hope and optimism they have experience in working with the younger demographic that has been part of this process as well as the seniors and other members of vulnerable populations. There was a comment about looking at offsetting some of the density in the neighborhood and hub centers and freeing up some area for two or three-story courtyard apartments along the arterials with the bus routes. There was also a concern that at the community forum the public would be so focused on the presented alternatives that they might not get comments about things that are missing. Director McLaughlin spoke to staff s focus on the hubs rather than corridors because of its impact on pedestrians. She explained how they justified the medical district because of its proximity to Highway 99 and the transit infrastructure there and how they are trying to be mindful of the distribution within each neighborhood center and with each of the hubs. A board member referred to accessibility and asked for clarification about what a "15-minute walk" really means because it is so different for different people. Director McLaughlin explained that the 15-minute radius refers to a 3/4-mile radius from certain points. From an infrastructure perspective it is easier and more efficient for the City to leverage improvements in a smaller area rather than a long corridor. AUDIENCE COM1 ENTS None NEW BUSINESS A. Planning & Development Department 2024 Work Plan Director McLaughlin discussed the budget challenges, staffing challenges, and the busy year ahead. She reviewed the 2024 Planning & Development Department work plan with anticipated completion timeline by quarter. • Q 1: Title 19 Update; Critical Aquifer Recharge Area code amendment • Q2: Street Tree Plan; Green Building Incentive Program; Tree Canopy Goal; DADU code amendments; Climate -related code amendments Planning Board Retreat Minutes March 6, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Packet Pg. 6 2.A.a Q3: Reimagining Street Typologies/Update Official Street Map; Reimagining Activation Permit Structure; Climate champion series/public art Q4: Comprehensive Plan; Landmark 99; Permit review process revisions (per SB 5290); Design Review Modifications (per HB 1293); Tree Code updates PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Planning Manager Clugston reviewed the extended agenda as contained in the packet. Board members debated if they still wanted to hold the public hearing on draft alternatives on March 20. There was discussion about accommodating various schedules, the benefit of having a two-way dialogue, staffing challenges, public involvement, noticing, and capturing public comments. Several board members expressed interest in being part of the public forum on March 23 and being part of creating dialogue. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY CHAIR MITCHELL, TO CANCEL THE PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 20 AND SELECT TWO OR THREE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS TO ATTEND THE COMMUNITY FORUM IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY ON MARCH 23 AND PRESENT THAT BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD ON MARCH 27. It was clarified that the board members selected would work with staff to figure out their level of involvement. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. The Planning Board will select the members to attend the community forum at the next meeting (March 13) which is the joint meeting with the Economic Development Commission (EDC). Staff will create an agenda for the joint meeting along with questions that will be salient for the two bodies to be discussing rather than just presenting information. Board members suggested including the topics of having little nodes of commercial in multifamily residential areas around it; land production of areas they are upzoning; and the relationship of the draft alternatives and j ob targets. Staff explained that the j ob targets for Edmonds are already met through mixed use and remote work, but the EDC is excited about the 15-minute neighborhood concept as it relates to economic development. They expect the conversation to look at the strategy and multifaceted nature of how 15-minute cities can help the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan as they shift to policy development. The Critical Aquifer Recharge Area code amendment will also be on the agenda next week. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Mitchell reviewed the Planning Board powers and duties and stressed the need to be very efficient at meetings with the workload in front of them for the rest of the year. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:31 p.m. Planning Board Retreat Minutes March 6, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Packet Pg. 7 2.A.b CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting March 13, 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 noting that members of the Economic Development Commission (EDC) were joining them tonight for a joint discussion. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Kuehn. Board Members Present Staff Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Development Director Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chairl Todd Tatum, Economic Development Director Judi Gladstone Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Richard Kuehn Rob English, City Engineer Nick Maxwell Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer (online) Board Members Absent Susanna Martini (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES Other: Economic Development Commission Members MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 28 MEETING AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Director McLaughlin noted that item A under Unfinished Business should be amended to indicate they would be discussing growth alternatives, not existing conditions. Chair Mitchell proposed two additions to the agenda after the discussion with the EDC - a brief discussion regarding the March 23 Open House and a brief discussion regarding Planning Board assistance with the RFP for the Landmark 99. THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 'Board Member Golembiewski arrived at approximately 8:35 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Pagel of 6 Packet Pg. 8 2.A.b Bob Danson, Ol)Inpic View Water and Sewer District, referred to an email he recently sent to the Planning Board and a letter sent to the City Council. Their concern is protecting the aquifers. He noted that water rights are hard to come by in the State of Washington. Staff has been great to work with. He recommended that the Board continue to protect the QVa layer. Dawn Malkowski, Edmonds resident, commented on ADUs and DADUs. She asked the Board to reconsider the size and recommended staying with one level. She expressed concern about not requiring parking for ADUs or DADUs. She had questions about people renting out levels in their homes without making any improvements or getting permission from the City and wondered if that's okay. Diane Buckshnis (online) commented on the potential new amendments to the CARA code. She urged them not to jeopardize the Deer Creek aquifer. The new information should not change the original Planning Board recommendations. She encouraged them not to fear a lawsuit because there are many cities that deviate from the stormwater guidelines, and the State intentionally provides broad guidelines so cities can make appropriate changes. Also, the administration's argument focuses on water quantity and pretty much ignores water quality. She commented on her experience on the Puget Sound Partnership's Salmon Recover Board and the ongoing tension between growth, environmental protection, climate change pressures, and water quality. She urged them to say no to the amendments. Sam Brian (online, Edmonds resident, referred to the growth proposals and commented that the two current proposals for growth are really the same in that they analyze the exact same parcels for greater density. The only difference is whether they are five -story apartments or four-story apartments. These proposals don't address whether there are other parcels that could be rezoned for great density in conjunction with the neighborhood parcels or elsewhere. Specifically, he saw a minimal analysis of parcels along Highway 99. The analysis that was done didn't seem like it would change the capacity limits. It would only shift the building heights in a few select zones. He didn't see any analysis of rezoning parcels along State Route 104 other than the Westgate Neighborhood Center which is already part of Alternatives A and B. He asked the Planning Board to consider at least one proposal that analyzes additional parcels other than those in Alternatives A and B. He agrees that they need more housing in Edmonds. This is why he hopes that a third or even fourth alternative would be presented that analyzes rezoning new parcels in conjunction with the neighborhood ones, for example. That way, maybe two or three-story apartment buildings may suffice, rather than having four or five -story buildings. He also referred to the City's public online outreach survey and commented that he found the questions to be structured in a way that don't really allow the kind of feedback he has to be captured. There is no option to say that someone doesn't prefer either Alternative A or B. He noted that there are potential blind spots in this survey and willfully ignores a certain type of feedback. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Joint Discussion with Economic Development Commission regarding growth alternatives for the Comprehensive Plan Update Director McLaughlin reviewed 15-minute cities where most daily necessities are hyper local and can be accessed ideally by walk, bike, or sometimes transit. The focus is a people -centered urban environment with benefits to the local economy; stronger sense of community; better health and wellbeing; lower transport emissions, better air quality; fostering active living by design; ensuring places for people; connectivity; and diverse and affordable housing. She reviewed how Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Page 2 of 6 Packet Pg. 9 2.A.b many international cities are approaching this concept and how the Land Use Element of the existing Comp Plan supports this. Todd reviewed existing Economic Development Goals and discussions the EDC and staff have had about these, and the 2024 Economic Development Goals: A. Diversify and grow the City's jobs and economy to enhance local employment opportunities, strengthen the city's unique identities, build robust and differentiated employment sectors, attract spending from nearby communities, and increase municipal tax revenues to support local services. B. Revitalize and enhance the city's business districts and neighborhood hubs through placemaking and destination development approaches, while balancing the needs for housing, commerce and employment development with neighborhood character, amenities, and scale. C. Support and enhance the community's quality of life for residents of all backgrounds and incomes, workers, and visitors in order to sustain and attract business and investment to enhance economic well-being. D. Ensure that the City's zoning, permitting, infrastructure investment, and business support services facilitate economic development goals. There was a comment about the EDC's priority of infrastructure investment and a desire to look at the options in terms Sam Brian's comments and the focused versus distributed models. Board members asked clarification questions about the goals including what is meant by unique identities; the difference between placemaking and destination development approaches; and what "neighborhood hubs" means to Edmonds. An EDC member spoke to their desire to get away from business districts and move to people -focused neighborhood hubs. There was a concern that an unintended consequence of the binary choice between a focused model and a distributive model might be that of pitting neighborhoods against each other. Another question asked about asset mapping of each of the circles on the map so they don't exaggerate gaps and deficits. Director McLaughlin discussed staff s considerations when developing the options. A Planning Board member raised a concern that there might be too many goals and a suggestion to narrow it down to about five that they want to accomplish over the next five years such as protecting existing businesses. An EDC member explained that what they were looking at were mainly principles and not goals; the EDC will be prioritizing their top priorities amongst the policy pieces that come under the goals in the near future. The Comp Plan covers through 2044, so there will be many goals they want to accomplish. Anti -displacement is one focus — both from a resident perspective and a business perspective. The hubs would give existing businesses opportunities to grow and deepen because of the expanded customer base in those areas. Staff explained that the goals are intentionally broad so they can hone in on more specific policies and support the City over the 20-year period. A Planning Board member raised a question about where the City can foster community collaboration and leadership and about underscoring the importance of improving government Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Page 3 of 6 Packet Pg. 10 and the regulatory framework so businesses have more certainty. Will this long-term plan meet the needs of the next generation? EDC members pointed to common spaces in neighborhood hubs or centers as ways to support people's mental health and wellbeing. Neighborhood hubs naturally support the work -from -home climate. There was a question about regulations related to multiuse. Director McLaughlin explained this will continue to evolve. Director McLaughlin reviewed how they plan to measure success including: walkability scores; active transportation mode share, average commute times, public transit ridership, vacancy rates for commercial spaces, air quality measurements, green space accessibility, economic vitality indicators, and social equity indicators. There was discussion about the importance of being able to connect many of these successes to a public return on investment, challenges with metrics, and opportunities for Edmonds specifically. It was noted that Strong Towns has a database of cities that have amended their land use and should have some early metrics. Director McLaughlin reviewed a map showing the neighborhood hubs and centers. It was noted that they weren't necessarily planned to line up with public transportation, but they do. It turned out to be an opportunity to leverage that. Questions for discussion: • How will we define success? • What are opportunities in Edmonds that can be realized through a 15-minute city concept? • What are existing barriers to achieving this planning concept? A Planning Board member wondered why they couldn't expand the multifamily further out from the center of the hub to potentially lower the level of the buildings. There was discussion about losing the energy of the hub when development is dispersed and value to having a concentration of retail in a small area. An EDC member did not think any model is going to change the identity of the downtown core because it is already solid. There was a comment that having a North Bowl hub versus not having an identity around that area should be up to the residents. There was a question about what the pros and cons are of a distributive versus focused model with it comes to everything other than housing. Staff stressed is the driver for this exercise. Jobs are expected to be achieved through enabling mixed uses within the area. There were comments about one portion of the public not wanting more height while others, typically the younger demographic, have a very different opinion about this. The group debated the pros and cons of varying the building heights in hubs and centers.2 It was noted that the redevelopment potential of some of the perimeter areas outside the hubs and centers would be so high that it would be unlikely to redevelop. There was some discussion about refining and further providing identify for the international district along Highway 99 without putting additional growth there. Chair Mitchell asked the group if they feel the bookends are sufficient enough to capture the Economic Development goals. EDC members thought that this would give a strong framework to begin to argue for all the things the City needs — transit, PUD and other infrastructure investments, and developer relationships. If the CIP starts prioritizing investments around the a Vice Chair Golembiewski arrived. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Page 4 of 6 Packet Pg. 11 2.A.b neighborhood hubs and strategic planning starts pulling in transportation planning to that, the concept of hubs and centers is very sellable. The Planning Board thanked the EDC for their participation. B. Discussion regarding Planning Board assistance with the RFP for the Landmark 99 Chair Mitchell reviewed the request for representation with the RFP for the Landmark 99 project. He nominated Vice Chair Golembiewski to attend the Landmark 99 RFP discussion. There was consensus to approve this. C. Discussion regarding the March 23 Open House There was discussion about the structure of the open house and who would attend. The group extended the meeting at 9:00 to have the discussion on the CARA. Board Member Gladstone recused herself from the discussion. NEW BUSINESS A. Review of Planning Board's Recommendation to City Council on Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) Code Amendment Board Member Gladstone recused herself from this discussion. Planning Manager Clugston made the presentation noting that Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla was also present online. He reviewed the Planning Board recommendation and explained that the City Attorney has recommended revisiting modification 2 about disallowing any UIC wells — shallow or drilled — in the QVa areas of the Deer Creek aquifer but allowing shallow UIC wells in the other areas of that watershed. Mr. De Lilla discussed stormwater management in the Deer Creek CARA and explained that the code amendment would actually be more protective than Department of Health (DOH) requirements and the Department of Ecology (DOE) Manual. He explained that prohibiting shallow UICs in QVa in Deer Creek is infeasible. The staff recommendation is to eliminate the proposed modification #2 and to allow shallow UIC wells in the QVa soils in the Deer Creek CARA and update the Planning Board recommendation memo to the City Council accordingly. Board members asked questions about DOH requirements, potential future PFAS guidelines by the DOE, and related legal issues. A board member expressed support for allowing shallow UIC wells in the Deer Creek CARA. It was noted that there is currently no CARA code, and there are hundreds of UIC wells in the city. Water rights is a topic that is pertinent when it comes to water detention facilities. There was some discussion about the low -risk of PFAS contamination unless there are high intensity uses. The pollutant potential for a single-family area is extremely low, but the City is still treating it as if it were a medium to high risk level. There was discussion about why the Planning Board had originally decided not to allow injection wells in the QVa areas of the Deer Creek aquifer. One member wondered if there is any source data that links lower intensity single-family zoning and shallow UIC wells with increased risk for pollution. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Page 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 12 2.A.b Staff explained that DOE's table does not indicate that there are and the City is going even further than what they are requiring. Motion made by Board Member Maxwell to add to the original recommendation legal language about not enforcing the CARA regulation in a manner that would be perceived as a taking. There was discussion about the implication of keeping modification #2 as proposed and not allowing shallow UICs in the QVa soils of the Deer Creek CARA. The motion died for lack of a second. Motion made by Chair Mitchell, seconded by Vice Chair Golembiewski, to revise the Planning Board's original recommendation to Council, per staff s recommendation, to remove the 2nd modification to prohibit shallow UIC wells within the QVa soils of the Deer Creek aquifer. Motion passed (3-1). PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA March 27 - A recommendation is due to Council following the 3/23 open house on high level alternatives. There was a question about what happens with Comp Plan work after April 13. Director McLaughlin explained they would begin work on goals and policies starting with the Housing Element. They also will begin work on the Waterfront Vision following the design charette on March 20. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Thanks to everyone for staying so late. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 13, 2024 Page 6 of 6 Packet Pg. 13 7.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/27/2024 Comprehensive Plan Growth Alternatives Recommendation Staff Lead: Susan McLaughlin Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History The City of Edmonds is updating its Comprehensive Plan (the Plan) to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (GMA), Vision 2050 Growth Strategy, Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies, and other local plans and policies. The city is committed to developing a comprehensive, consistent, and culturally relevant plan that will guide the City's decision -making and development through 2044. The Plan update is titled Everyone's Edmonds to reflect our commitment to inclusivity and to elevating voices of underrepresented members and organizations within our community. Since the city completed its last periodic update in 2015, Edmonds was designated as a high -capacity transit (HCT) community in PSRC's Vision 2050 regional growth strategy, which shifted expectations on future growth. According to the growth targets adopted by Snohomish County in 2021, Edmonds will need to accommodate an additional 13,000 residents, 9,000 housing units, and 3,000 jobs by 2044. While previous planning indicated a surplus capacity for population and employment until 2035, the current planning foresees a deficit of approximately 4,000 residents and 500 jobs by 2044 based on existing zoning. The city must plan for this additional growth as a part of this periodic update while meeting the affordability, income, and density requirements of House Bills 1220, 1110, and 1337, which the state legislature adopted in 2021 and 2023. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Board review the material from the packet pertaining to growth alternatives and develop recommendations to City Council at their April 9 study session. Narrative The City is developing growth alternatives to identify areas suitable for accommodating anticipated growth to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements for the Plan's environmental impact statement (EIS). These alternatives show different ways that the city could meet its forecasted population and employment growth. The goal of the SEPA EIS process is to provide decision makers with information that they need about environmental impacts so that they can make a project decision. In this case, the decision maker is the council voting to adopt a 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update considering the impacts that were disclosed in the EIS. The decision could be to adopt one Packet Pg. 14 7.A of the action alternatives or to create a blend of the two, as long as all potential impacts have been analyzed in the EIS. The EIS identifies environmental conditions, potential impacts of the different growth alternatives, infrastructure investment needs, and measures to reduce or mitigate any significant, unavoidable adverse environmental effects. SEPA regulations require a "no action" alternative and a minimum of two reasonable alternatives with actions that can feasibly attain or approximate a proposal's objectives. The alternatives must include sufficiently detailed analysis to enable a comparative evaluation. Two growth alternatives have been developed based on community input and staff analysis, taking into account state and county - recommended methodologies. All three alternatives assume consistent growth with the 2044 Initial Population, Housing, and Employment Growth Targets, developed and adopted by the County in alignment with PSRC's VISION 2050. The attached Existing Conditions Memo (Attachment 1) is a foundation for analysis, decision -making, and planning. The memo includes preliminary findings from the community outreach events held between September and December 2023, along with demographic, economic, and spatial data analysis. Additionally, it highlights ongoing or new City initiatives relevant to the comprehensive plan, laying the groundwork for the proposed growth alternatives. The Land Use Capacity Analysis Memo (Attachment 2) outlines proposed methods and assumptions for the forthcoming City of Edmonds' Land Capacity Analysis within the Everyone's Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update. This method aligns with the GMA targets for new jobs and housing, while ensuring compliance with recently adopted state legislation (1110, 1337 and 1220). The public is encouraged to review, comment and question the proposed growth alternatives over a month long online open house, which closes on April 1, 2024. The City also hosted an in -person public forum on March 23, 2024. The feedback from that citywide forum has not yet been synthesized but overall staff was pleased with the number of attendees. It is estimated that there were nearly 200 people in attendance; Planning Board members, Staff and consultants were able to answer questions and to discuss community members' comments and concerns. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Existing Conditions Memo Attachment 2 - Land Capacity Analysis Methodology Attachment 3 - Draft High Level Growth Alternatives February 14, 2024 Planning Board meeting Packet Pg. 15 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Outline: A. Purpose of the Memo B. Planning Context: City of Edmonds B.1. Local and Regional Context B.2. Community's vision for the City of Edmonds B.3. City's key initiatives C. Land Use C.1. C.2. C.3. D. Housing D.1. D.2. D.3. D.4. Existing Land Use Parks and Open Spaces Environmentally Critical areas Existing housing types Key Housing Facts Changing Context Equity and Housing E. Economic Development E.1. Commuting and Employment E.2. Employment Sectors in Edmonds vs Comparison Cities E.3. Working from Home Trends F. Area Profiles F.1. Downtown F.2. Waterfront F.3. Westgate F.4. Five Corners F.5. Firdale F.6. North Bowl F.7. Perrinville G. Highway 99 Subarea Plan Appendix: Existing Conditions for Highway 99 Subarea 1 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 16 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Existing Conditions Purpose of the memo The purpose of this memo is to summarize existing conditions for the City of Edmonds, providing a basis of information for analysis, decision -making, and planning. The memo presents preliminary findings from September to December 2023, including demographic, economic, and spatial data analysis. This memo also identifies the ongoing or new City initiatives relevant to the comprehensive plan as available. This memo sets the stage to advance draft conceptual growth alternatives. City of Edmonds: Local + Regional Planning Context The City of Edmonds is in south Snohomish County on the western shores of Puget Sound, approximately 14 miles north of Seattle. Situated within the urbanized Puget Sound region, the city encompasses approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres) in area, including five linear miles of marine shoreline. Puget Sound bounds the city on the west, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace on the east, unincorporated Snohomish County on the north, and Woodway and the City of Shoreline on the south. The unincorporated area of Esperance, located in the city's southeast corner, is an enclave of Edmonds. A. State Framework Goals The Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes a framework for jurisdictions to manage and accommodate growth. The GMA sets requirements for comprehensive planning to guide future growth towards shared goals and ensure consistency and coordination between jurisdictions. Per the GMA, Edmonds is projected to grow by 13,000 people over the next twenty years. The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan updates are responsive to the capacity needs of this growth and are in accordance with the requirements of the GMA. The GMA contains statewide planning goals intended to guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans. B. Regional Goals The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is a Regional Transportation Planning Organization under chapter 47.80 RCW. The City of Edmonds is a member of PSRC. VISION 2050 provides a framework for how and where development occurs and how the region supports efforts to manage growth. "VISION 2050 is the shared regional plan for moving toward a sustainable and more equitable future. It encourages decision -makers to use existing resources and planned transit investments wisely while achieving the region's shared vision. VISION 2050 sets forth a pathway that strengthens economic, social, and environmental resiliency while enhancing the region's ability to cope with adverse trends such as climate change and unmet housing needs. As the region experiences more growth, VISION 2050 seeks to provide housing, mobility options, and services in more sustainable ways. Most importantly, VISION 2050 is a call to action to meet the needs of a growing population while considering the current needs of residents. VISION 2050 recognizes that clean air, health, life expectancy, access to jobs, and good education can vary dramatically by neighborhood. VISION 2050 works to rectify past inequities, especially for communities of color and people with low incomes. " 2 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 17 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo C. Planning Policies New state housing bills have been passed to address long-term state trends around housing availability in single-family zones in the Puget Sound Region. These bills are intended to promote housing supply, choice, and affordability. HB 1110 requires at least two homes to be allowed per lot. HB 1337 requires at least two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) per lot must be permitted in attached or detached configurations. The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan will address changes based on these specific regulations. More information on implementing these policies and regulations will be included in the Draft Housing Element, the Draft City of Edmonds Land Use Capacity Analysis, and its subsequent Growth Scenarios. D. Community's Vision for the City of Edmonds: Following extensive public outreach in the summer of 2022 and subsequent review by the Edmonds Planning Board, the following vision statement was developed for the Comprehensive Plan. "Edmonds is a charming and welcoming city offering an outstanding quality of life for all with vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe streets, parks, and a thriving arts scene shaped to promote healthy lifestyles, climate resiliency, and access to the natural beauty of our community." The consultant team held community meetings in December 2023, focusing on seven different geographic areas within Edmonds. Notable themes heard from the community are summarized below. The community's feedback and the city's common vision statement will be used to develop the City of Edmonds's growth alternatives. • Improve access, safety, and walkability to and within neighborhood commercial areas and centers... We heard ideas about increasing bus frequency, improving bus shelters, optimizing parking (reducing its impact and visibility), and creating connective pedestrian pathways that address missing crosswalks and incomplete sidewalks and mitigate high-speed traffic. • Introduce selective elements for place -making ... We heard community members discussing the need for more places to gather within the public realm and access to outdoor comfort and activities- e.g., seating, canopies, and heating. Community centers (public uses) and mixed - use development can be designed and introduced selectively to animate centers. • Protect and expand environmental assets.... Consistent support for more greenspace, trees, and nature within the built environments; desire to keep waterfront natural, protect the marsh, and reduce the visual impact of surface parking. • Grow mindfully.... Provide options for the neighborhood's commercial areas to grow and enhance existing assets. This includes introducing a range of services not currently available and exploring compact, diversified housing while keeping things low rise. People like the modest scale of Edmonds. • Preserve and enhance Edmond's uniqueness... through more attention to aesthetics, architectural styles, and local culture, and (maintaining) the experience of key City viewsheds to the water. Public art and popular businesses are intrinsic to what it means to be in Edmonds. Celebrate the identity of each neighborhood center. 3 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 18 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo E. City of Edmonds Key Initiatives: The Comprehensive Plan Update is an opportunity to integrate new components, including an updated Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan, Comprehensive Plans for Water system, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm and Surface Water management. In addition, aspects of the city's key initiatives can be reflected in updated goals and policies. Initiatives and approaches are summarized below: Climate Action Plan of 2023: This plan identifies actions the city and community can take to remain on target through 2035. This plan examines some of the ways climate change is likely to affect Edmonds. It identifies steps needed to understand and prepare for changes to rainfall and snowpack, summer heat and drought, and sea level rise. This Plan provides a roadmap and a few indicator metrics to help the community know how they are doing. The Comprehensive Plan will include climate -responsive policies and update the city's goals in the community sustainability element of the document. Growth alternatives may adopt sustainable land uses and transportation strategies that support mixed -use and transit -oriented development in neighborhood commercial centers to encourage close -to -home local shopping and employment opportunities. The comprehensive plan update is also an opportunity to introduce the subject of equity in the discussion of climate change. Climate action and equity can be applied as one of the comparative metrics for the growth alternatives. Reimagining Neighborhoods + Streets: Creating Community Spaces Together: This project is an opportunity to plan what the streets of tomorrow will look and feel like. New street typologies will consider vehicle movement and ensure that street design serves social, environmental, and economic needs and functions. Public space typologies will be designed to optimize the existing right of way by enabling social hubs, expanding connectivity, and improving environmental outcomes. Policies in the Comprehensive Plan will reflect these changes and city priorities. • Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Amendment to allow for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units: The city is currently developing a new policy approach to expand housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units in accordance with HB 1337. The core objectives are to: • Allow DADUs in the City of Edmonds. • Align with HB 1337 in terms of development standards. • Provide clear and objective guidance for those who add ADUs or DADUs to their property. • Provide code standards for height, floor area, parking, utilities, etc. The comprehensive plan will coordinate and align with these objectives and resulting policies. • Tree Code Updates: Tree protection ordinances are one of the ways cities balance urban growth with preserving a healthy, sustainable, and livable community. In 2020-2021, Edmonds' tree code was updated to support the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) Goal I to reduce development impacts on the urban forest. In early 2022, Edmonds completed a Tree Canopy Assessment measuring tree 4 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 19 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo canopy cover to guide canopy -enhancing strategies such as tree planting programs, public education, and tree code updates. The tree code updates are still in process. Growth projections in Edmonds Snohomish County produces a "Buildable Lands Report" based on Countywide population projections, most recently adopted in 20211. A detailed methodology defined by the county determines the "baseline" capacity available for growth within each City. The Buildable Lands report does not account for the assumed increase in available capacity resulting from the House Bills 1110, 1337, and 1225. This has shifted the context for planning in single-family residential areas to enable Accessory Dwelling Units and encourage "missing middle housing types." 2020 Target 2044 Growth Population 42,853 55,966 13,113 Housing Units 19,005 28,073 9,068 Jobs 14,174 17,232 3,058 1 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/1352/Buildable-Lands 5 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 20 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Existing Land Use Much of the city is characterized by detached single-family residential lots, representing about 75% of the total land area and 85% of the land area containing residential units. Edmonds is lower scale and suburban; its corresponding zoning prescribes height limits. Three stories are allowed for much of the city — this is slightly lower on downtown shopping streets and slightly higher in select areas, except for 75' along the Hwy 99 corridor (as defined in the Highway 99 Sub Area Plan). The 2020 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map resembles the existing land use pattern. It focuses future development into two defined "activity centers": • The MedicaUMighway 99 Activity Center Hotel and healthcare uses are clustered along Hwy 99 The Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center Hosts a variety of commercial and non- residential uses, including an Arts District. Beyond downtown, commercial and mixed -use areas are spread across the city. Parks and Open Spaces Existing Land Use Detached Residential Accessory/Attached - S-Plex Residential. 91 Units Residential` General Commercial & Office y Parks and Open Space Public Services Healthcare - Education r �" Utilities and Industrial~ Hotel Vacant Historic _ R'^ "Including ground i� . ■� - floor mixed use ^•_ a A t' T�]msc � ■^ ■ 0 1 2 Miles 1' - 500' 4 Figure 1: Existing Land Use Data Source: 2021 Snohomish County Buildable Lands Study The 2022 PROS Plan is the six -year, functional plan for the Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts and Human Services Department, serving as the blueprint for the management, enhancement, and growth of the City of Edmonds parks and recreation system and anticipates the programming and capital infrastructure investments necessary to meet the community's need for parks, recreation, open space, trails, and arts and culture. Key recommendations from the 2022 PROS Plan include the following: Acquisitions to Fill the Park System Gap to address inequities in parkland distribution. Park Development & Enhancements (Like Yost Pool replacement), which will also be part of the Capital Facilities element of the Comprehensive Plan Document. Trail Connections including sidewalk and bike lane improvements. ADA, Accessibility & Other User Convenience EnhancementsFindings in the Plan inform the 2024 Comprehensive Plan update, aiming to facilitate ways for more people to enjoy existing parks and identify actions to expand park facilities. 6 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 21 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Environmentally Critical Areas RCW 36.70A.030(5) defines five types of critical areas in Washington State: • Wetlands. • Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water. • Frequently flooded areas. • Geologically hazardous areas (e.g. steep slopes) • Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Steep slopes in Edmonds are located primarily in the northern and central edges of the city, creating a physical separation of its neighborhoods to the east within the downtown. Significant vegetation is at Yost Park, Pine Ridge Park, Maplewood Park, Southwest County Park, and east of Edmonds Marsh. Almost all the waterfront and a small part of south downtown are in a 100-Year Floodplain and Liquefaction Zone. In 2024, the City of Edmonds is developing a Critical area Aquifer Recharge site designation, which will be referenced in the Comprehensive Plan and might impact future areas of change. Hazards Moderate Risk Liquefaction Zone High Risk Liquefaction Zone 100yr Flood Zone Stream / Shoreline Figure 2 Liquefaction risk and flood map for Edmonds Waterfront Area Data Source: USGS 7 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 22 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a City of Edmonds WASHINGTON r" Single Family Zoning & Critical Areas Figure 3 Single Family Zones and Critical Areas Source: City of Edmonds 8 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 23 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Housing As noted, Single-family residences are the predominant land use within Edmonds. Figure 4 illustrates the location and percentage of units by building type. About 60% of the city's population is housed in single- family units, taking up 85% of the land area containing residential units. About one -quarter of the city's population is housed within the purple areas of the map clustered downtown, Westgate/along SR 104 in buildings larger than 12 units. Most of the city's residential lots contain 1 unit, with few duplexes. 51-100 Unit, 13-50 5-12 Unit, 6.70% lex, 3.10% Duplex, 4.40% Single Family, 59.80% 101-300 Unit, 5.90% Unit Count �2 3-4 5-12 13-50 51-100 101-300 N 0 1 2 Figure 4 Distribution of housing types across City of Edmonds Data Source: 2021 Snohomish County Buildable Lands Study Housing and household statistics for the City of Edmonds: ■ Miles 1"=500' 4 Housing units, 2020 47,023 Owner -occupied housing unit rate, 2020 71.6% Median value of owner -occupied housing units, 2018-2022* $761,300 Median gross rent, 2018-2022* $1,821 Households, 2018-2022* 18,269 Persons per household 2.29 Source: Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County Report 2023 *2022 data from https://www.census.qov/guickfacts/facbtable%dmondscitywashington 9 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 24 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Cost burdened households: There are more homeowners in Edmonds than renters. Total renter -occupied households: 28.4% In Edmonds, rental housing is strongly associated with multifamily and is clustered in the areas shown in the figure at right. Renters also comprise more cost -burdened households defined as >30% of income on rent/mortgage. Edmonds contains: • 45.6% of renter households (est. 37% regionally in 2020) are cost burdened. • 29.9% of owner households are cost -burdened. • 90% of subsidized units are in multifamily with smaller units and infrastructure costs. Miles 1-500' N 0 1 1 4 Figure 5 Renter occupied households Data Source: 2020 Census 10 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 25 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Age of Housing Stock: Much of the existing housing stock is now aging. Year Buit It was built between 1949 and 1972, placing 1872- 1%4 many lots within the city in position for ® 1905- 1918 replacement and potential redevelopment. -1934 19191919- 1948 1949-1957 1958 - 1964 1965-1972 1973-1983 1984-1997 1998 - 2013 City Lim Rs R1' � i,' f � _ .T = t • L O 42 Figure 6 Age of Housing stock Image from Housing Profile of City of Edmonds by the Alliance for Housing Affordability, 2015 Data Source: Snohomish County Assessor, 2012 11 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 26 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Lot Sizes Lot sizes in Edmonds generally correlate to the location and age of development. The smallest lots are located closer to downtown, while the largest are in the northern neighborhoods and along the waterfront. The average lot size is about '/4 acre. A Changing Context e� — Miles 1"=500' u 0 1 2 4 Figure 7 Lot size in Single Family Zones Data Source: 2021 Snohomish County Buildable Lands Study Edmonds Citizen's Housing Commission, initiated in 2019, was tasked with providing a fresh look at Edmond's housing policy in the context of the ongoing housing crisis. A package of policy recommendations was submitted to the Council in 2021. The Commission recommendations outline best practice mechanisms to support housing affordability and provide greater access to housing choices for renters and homeowners of all incomes. The Citizen's Commission explored practices to introduce infill, ground -oriented housing units that fit within existing neighborhoods. Ground -oriented housing constitutes accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, and quadraplexes, often complemented by nearby small-scale retail. Reintroducing these forms of walkable, low -impact housing has been popularized under the term "missing middle."" These units have been found to a) increase rental and homeownership options in desirable neighborhoods, b) make efficient use of existing municipal infrastructure, and c) not impact the scale or character of neighborhoods. The Citizens Housing Commission supports sensitively placed housing— e.g., adding a secondary dwelling unit or replacing a single-family detached home with a fourplex or duplex. The Commission also 2 https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/planning/housing/missing-middle-housing 12 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 27 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a includes supporting statements for new "urban villages" within accessible areas to share growth more equitably. Residential Permit Data for the City of Edmonds is included in the following. 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Housing Permits Issued in the City of Edmonds by Type Single Family—2 to 4 Unit Structures —5+ Unit Structures 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Housing Permits Issued, City of Edmonds, 2012- 22 2 to 4 Unit Structures, 6^ 6% Single Family, 406.37% Figure 8 Housing permits issued in Edmonds by housing type Data Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); https://www.huduser. goy/portal/datasets/socds.html 13 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 28 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Housing Displacement Risk As part of the VISION 2050 plan update, the PSRC has developed the Displacement Risk Mapping tool that combines data on local community characteristics into an index that classifies areas as having lower, moderate, or higher risk of displacement based on current neighborhood conditions and data from economic and local demographic pressures. Identifying specific areas with a heightened risk of displacement helps achieve more equitable outcomes in planning by supporting local communities and focusing mitigation programs and strategies toward these areas. Although the City of Edmonds falls under the "Lower" risk category, the risk shown is relative to the Puget Sound region. It does not identify the potential risk of displacement at a geographic scale finer than the U.S. Census tract. L-1 1 b The comprehensive plan will consider multiple ' studies and data points to reflect the City's equity goals and propose policies that help mitigate displacement risks. Figure 9 Housing Displacement Risk Source: https://www.psrc.orglour-work/displacement- risk-mapping 14 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 29 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Environmental Health Disparities WA State Department of Health's environmental health disparities map provides a weighted equity benchmark. It estimates a cumulative environmental health impact score for each census tract, reflecting pollutant exposures and factors that affect people's vulnerability to environmental pollution. The model is based on a conceptual formula of Risk = Threat * Vulnerability, where threat and vulnerability are based on several indicators. The threat is represented by indicators that account for the pollution burden, a combination of environmental effects, and environmental exposures in communities. Vulnerability is defined by indicators of socioeconomic factors and sensitive populations for which there is clear evidence that they may affect susceptibility or vulnerability to an increased pollution burden. The data on the map includes 19 indicators not limited to: • Exposure to Environmental Pollutants • Environmental Effects such as proximity to hazardous waste treatment etc • Educational Attainment • Cost -Burdened Households • Poverty Rate • Population with a Disability • Life Expectancy Figure 10 Environment Health Disparities Map Source: https://doh.wa.gov/data-and- statistical-reports/washington-tracking- network-wtn/washington-en vironmental- health-disparities-map 15 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 30 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Housing Affordability Household income is another important determinant of housing demand, especially regarding affordable housing. For the county as a whole, the median annual household income is slightly over $89,000 (Source: American Community Survey (ACS)). This is the county median income, distinct from the Housing and Urban Development Area Family Median Income (AMI) for Snohomish County, part of the Seattle Bellevue Metro Area. For affordability analysis, the Housing and Urban Development Area Family Median Income (AMI) for Snohomish County value is used, which is $113,300 for 2020 (Source: Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County Report, Pg 33) Income level definitions in RCW 36.70A.030: Extremely low income: 0-30% of AMI Very Low Income: 30-50% of AMI Low Income: 50-80% of AMI Moderate income: 80-120% of AMI Equitable Housing Policy Median Household Income ($) C 0 Q 1 - 10000 10001-75000 - 75001 - 100000 _ 100001 - 158750 0 0.5 1 N i Wes I Graph. u o(land USFWS Figure 11 Median Houshold Income (at Census block group level) Source: US Census The goal of the Comprehensive Plan update is to set conditions in place to encourage the market to develop housing that is affordable to all members of the community. Achieving equity in housing is crucial for creating inclusive and diverse communities. Existing comprehensive plan policies within the Housing element include equity supportive strategies such as allocating a density bonus for low-income senior housing, low-cost housing type provisions, and housing financing strategies. Based on guidance from House Bill 1220 and extending the City's focus on equitable distribution of housing and jobs, an updated Housing element may more intentionally address racially disparate impacts, exclusion, and displacement risk in housing through policies and regulations. The housing analysis will be updated with a description of household diversity, affordable housing concerns, household income trends, and more detail regarding housing type and size diversity. 16 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 31 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a Economic Development Commuting and Employment Patterns In 2020, 92% of employed Edmonds residents commuted elsewhere for their jobs. Historically, a significant part of economic development in Edmonds has been to provide residents with a great community so they can access jobs located elsewhere. Jobs in Edmonds are concentrated in the Medical Activity Center/Swedish Medical Center, Downtown, Highway 99, and other locations. Out of—19,300 employed residents of Edmonds, 17,900 commute out of Edmonds. Only 1400 both live and work in Edmonds. 11,800 people commute to Edmonds for their jobs. Employment Sectors in Edmonds vs Comparison Cities Location of Jobs S-342 Jobs/Sq.Mile 343-1,3S6 Jobs/Sq.Mile 1,357.3,044 Jobs/Sq.Mile 3,045-S,409 Jobs/Sq.Mile S,410-8,449 Jobs/Sq.Mile Figure 12 Location of Jobs in Edmonds Source: US Census, LEHD On The Map, 2021 Healthcare and social assistance are the largest source of jobs for Edmonds' employees and residents. Manufacturing is the mostly absent sector. Industry Category Edmonds vs Both el I & Woodinville Health care and education 2.9% Construction 2-2% Edmonds has Finance, insurance, and real estate 1-9% more jobs than Arts, recreation, accommodation and food services 1.6% comparison cities. Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 0-8% Retail trade 0.7% Other services 0.1% Public administration 0.0% Agriculture, forestry, and mining -0.1% Wholesale trade -0.5% Information (including technology) -1.8% Edmonds has Manufacturing -2-8% fewer jobs than Professional, scientific, management, & other services -5.0;= comparison cities. Figure 13 Employment sectors in Edmonds vs Bothell and Woodinville Source: US Census and American Community Survey Data via PSRC Community Profiles. 17 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 32 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo A second "tier" of industries provides a significant number of jobs for Edmonds residents and employees: • Retail • Professional, Scientific and Technical Services • Accommodation and Food Service (more commute in to do this) • Education Working from Home Statistics The COVID pandemic has changed where Americans work. Work from home rates vary widely across the country. Large metro areas with high employment rates in professional and technology fields, such as Puget Sound, Portland, and the San Francisco Bay Area, have high rates of remote work. In contrast, smaller cities and rural areas have low rates of remote work. Before the pandemic, around 5 percent of the nation's workforce worked from home on a given day. As the pandemic ended, that number settled to about 25 to 30 percent —five times the pre -pandemic amount. In 2022, data from the American Community Survey (ACS) / U.S. Census Bureau indicated that 25.3% of workers in the Edmonds area were working from home or remotely. Share of Workers Age 16 + who Worked Remotely in 2022 < 6.9;i 6.9%-9.9% 0 9.9%-13.2% E 13.2%-17.1 % 0 17.1 %-21.9% M 21.9%-28.8% Figure 14 Share of Remote workers Age+16 in 2022 Source. Economic Innovation Group, American Community Survey (A CS) - U.S. Census Bureau, https://eig.org/remote-work-in-20221 18 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 33 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Impact on Land Use and Economic Development Policy: • With more people working from home, there may be a renewed focus on local community spaces and services, revitalizing neighborhood centers and local businesses. There could be an increased emphasis on local retail, neighborhood amenities, and delivery services to serve residents working from home. • The Comprehensive Plan can adopt flexible land use policies to accommodate the changing work dynamics, e.g., mixed -use developments can create co -working spaces within residential areas. Area Profiles The Consultant team assessed a set of neighborhoods and conducted a series of Neighborhood Community meetings to understand the opportunities and challenges in each area. These discussions help to inform plan alternatives and will underpin future policy development. The profiles below are not intended to be comprehensive of the Community Meetings. All Community Meeting Presentations are available on the City of Edmonds website, including "key themes." A. Downtown Key characteristics: • Mixed Use Core • Shifting grid of streets, oriented to waterfront • Variety of lot sizes & historic properties • Ferry traffic and the railway act as barriers to accessing the waterfront Dayton Ave: Looking west 19 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 34 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a r,.w ....� ..�� IF Centerfor -A the Arts .y�y -. Arts Corridor Civic Playfield Municipal. Complex \ ' Salish I Main Street - Theater/ Library -Crossing Dayton St - Harbor Treatment Plant. Square c \ \ a � L Marsh _ F ; City Park �r 4th Avenue South Streetscape mmowjj.&, F1 20 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 35 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Opportunities Challenges Dayton Ave is a critical connection between the Ferry Traffic and Railroad are barriers to the Waterfront, Downtown, and the transit station. Waterfront. Explore opportunities for streetscape design and infill development. Edmonds downtown is one of the two economic The community's input is conservative on centers of the city. It has the capacity to support facilitating change to downtown: Build on what more economic activity and hence support local is here already, improve what exists, and infill Businesses. Explore the potential for appropriate with new opportunities that maintain existing policies, e.g. modest, strategic height, or density character. bonuses in exchange for desired land uses and public benefits/amenities. How do we create a "Sense of Place" and Vibrancy without change? B. Waterfront The Port of Edmonds is in the southern portion of the city's waterfront. The Port owns and manages 33 upland acres and a small boat harbor and marina, with space for 1,000 boats (approximately 11 acres). Various services and marine -related businesses are located on the Port's properties. Waterfront Today: There are multiple projects planned around the waterfront and the Marina. A brief status update for the projects is summarized below. 21 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 36 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a OEdmonds Crossing New Ferry Terminal Project Cancelled ©Marsh Restoration Dependent on Unocal Property Clean Up © Transfer of Unocal Property Site clean up almost complete OMissing Pedestrian Walkway link Still under litigation ©Bulkhead Reconstruction Construction estimated to begin in 2025 OSound Transit Station Access Projects relayed O BNSF Railway Double Tracking Part of multi year capital investment plan. Timeline unknown QMarina Beach Park improvements Design ano construction occurring 2024 - 2026 (independent Masterplan) With the removal of the Edmonds Crossing project, the comprehensive plan update will include a `vision for the waterfront', including potential changes to land use designation. The Waterfront can be divided into t Area 1: Ferry Terminal Zone Area 2: Salish Crossing & Harbor Square Area 3: Marina & Waterfront Promenade Area 4: Edmonds Marsh 22 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 37 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Area Opportunities Challenges Area 1 • Crafting a new vision for the Ferry • Mitigating Ferry Traffic impacts Ferry Terminal Area Terminal • Improve Public Access to the Waterfront Zone Area 2 • Dayton Street, with pedestrian • Publicly owned parcels with transit and improvements, can be developed as a key parking uses Salish link between Waterfront and Downtown •Strong opposition to increases in height Crossing & . Infill development along Dayton St. allowances reduces the likelihood of Harbor Square private sector investment that can help • More Uses for Salish Crossing Parcel pay for infrastructure upgrades • Existing uses within Harbor Square can be preserved; explore additional uses to support waterfront activity Area 3 • Repair the Marina Seawall and Replace • Regulation barriers to new commercial the Portwalk with a Sustainably development Marina & Designed Surface. (Current Port Waterfront Initiatives) Promenade • Increase Public Enjoyment and Usability of Port Property. Area 4 • Protect & Enhance the Marsh for Future • Transfer of Unocal Property to the City Generations of Edmonds Edmonds . Create Flood Protection Measures to get • Daylighting of Willow Creek Channel Marsh ahead of future sea level rise for Salmon Habitat • Initiate Environmental Restoration • Establish Funds for Marsh Restoration Educational Opportunities C. Westgate Key Characteristics: • Established retail center at the crossroads of 100t1i Ave /Edmonds Way • Central location between Downtown and SR-99 • Serves South Edmonds neighborhoods (instead of traveling Downtown or 1-99) • On Route to and from the ferry terminal • Served by Bus transit 23 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 38 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Opportunities Challenges Explore adding new housing — adjust design Car -oriented, traffic impacts, need for traffic standards to support building forms that can calming measures. Improved pedestrian better integrate with the public realm and networks around the intersection revitalize the neighborhood Explore means encouraging more visible and Steep slopes form a natural boundary around accessible public spaces, e.g., pocket parks, the commercial center, act as a limit on lighting, and landscaping. Consider expansion streetscape and prioritize placing the public realm "up front" at the street edge. Explore the potential for new civic spaces, such as a community center, to act as a broader neighborhood catalyst. D. Five Corners Key Characteristics: • Five -way intersection connects neighborhoods, intersection with iconic roundabout. • Local restaurants, cafes, and services — unique and community -oriented spaces. • Adjacent multi -family. • Node located west of the I-99 corridor, served by bus transit. • Connects to Main Street leading to Downtown. • Serves central Edmonds neighborhoods. 24 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 39 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Opportunities Challenges Create new public spaces, e.g. explore the Need for traffic calming measures. Improved reconfiguration of the 5-corners intersection. pedestrian networks around the main intersection Enhance multi -modal transportation and Concern for universal access, which is extend bike routes. Pedestrian amenities: currently inconsistent throughout the center widen sidewalks and crosswalks; bring forward the natural environment with connections to green spaces and trails. Explore means to ensure future development Surface parking areas detract from the can be oriented to the street edge and place character parking behind. Explore means to attract anchor businesses; increase types of businesses and destinations, e.g. east of roundabout along 212, capturing students from high school Explore select urban development to give Five -Corners a destination and create a "sense of place" E. Firdale Village Key Characteristics: • Originally established in 1966 as an arts center, Firdale Village Shopping Plaza features over 25 businesses operating out of a colonial -style building. • Phoenix Theater and surrounding businesses provide a foundation of social infrastructure and neighborhood culture; Existing buildings offer a unique character. • Serves south Edmonds neighborhoods (instead of traveling Downtown or 1-99); Served by bus transit. 25 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 40 Draft Existing Conditions Memo 7.A.a • Adjacent multi -family residential development. Opportunities Challenges Connect to existing residential land uses with Need for traffic calming measures: improved pedestrian pathways, pedestrian -friendly pedestrian networks, missing sidewalks, attributes on streets stairways. Explore selective housing (re)development, Constrained by steep slopes at one end with some small-scale commercial use at Firdale Village and in selective areas of North Firdale Consider ways to reconfigure/redevelop Missing opportunities to stop and stay, surface parking to create new public space including coffee shops, gathering spaces, or and amenities more cultural destinations Explore selective locations to add affordable housing, mixed -use, and missing middle housing F. North Bowl Key Characteristics • Acts as a gateway location to North Bowl & Seaview residential neighborhoods • Convenient stop with local restaurants, shops, & gas station • Adjacent to Edmonds Elementary School • Views of Puget Sound, Sunlight, with southwest exposure • Bus transit, close drive to Downtown 26 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 41 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Opportunities Challenges Explore policies that "connect" North Bowl Need for traffic calming measures. Improved to existing residential (e.g. pedestrian pedestrian networks around the main pathways) intersection Support community health through Constrained by steep slopes at one end preservation/expanding green space; explore dual use of playfield Explore adding selective density, low-rise Stormwater management, downhill apartments, and other ground -oriented conditions, concern around landslides housing to improve housing equity in the City of Edmonds and support local business Create a new sense of place for the neighborhood along Puget Drive, leverage Elementary School G. Perrinville 27 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 42 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Key Characteristics • Newer commercial development in Lynnwood • Unique community character • Steep slopes and forested areas naturally limit this area • Local bus service Opportunities Challenges Build on Perrinville's unique environment to Unsafe pedestrian crossings make a walkable street edge Explore opportunities to add housing choices leveraging the good accessibility to commercial uses in Lynnwood. Highway 99 Subarea Plan Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential neighborhoods. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City undertook a subarea planning process, resulting in the adoption of a Highway 99 Subarea Plan. Supported by an extensive public participation process, this plan refined the district concepts for the corridor and provided more in-depth plans for transportation and the built environment, especially its design and relationships to surrounding residential areas. At the time of adoption in 2017, the Subarea Plan was supported by the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO)3. 3 A planned action involves detailed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review and preparation of EIS documents in conjunction with sub -area plans, consistent with RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164 through WAC 197-11- 172. Such up -front analysis of impacts and mitigation measures then facilitates environmental review of subsequent individual development projects. Source: https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/planning/land-use-administration/planned-action 28 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 43 7.A.a Draft Existing Conditions Memo Future development proposals that are consistent with an adopted planned action ordinance and meet the conditions of the PAO (and will not have impacts that exceed those included in the FEIS) complete a SEPA checklist and are not subject to SEPA appeals when consistent with the planned action ordinance, including specified mitigation measures. However, the PAO was rescinded by the City Council in November 2023. The consultant team has summarized the existing conditions for the subarea plan in the attached appendix. Comprehensive Plan's Influence on Highway 99 Subarea Plan As per the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, the Subarea Plan will be referenced with no significant land use changes to the area within the boundary. However, the plan will explore gaps and potential policy tools to help solve concerns identified by the community for areas adjacent to the subarea plan boundary. 29 PERKINS EASTMAN EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAFT MEMO - 02-08-2024 Packet Pg. 44 7.A.b PERKINS - EASTMAN MEMO McLaughlin, Susan <susan.mclaughlin@edmondswa.gov> Perkins Eastman Architects DPC Fate Project Name 2/8/2024 Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update Subject Draft Land Capacity Analysis Methodology From Perkins Eastman s.malu@p@perkinseastman.com To Susan McLaughlin City of Edmonds, Planning & Development Director susan.mclaughlin@edmondswa.gov cc: Jeff Levy, Navyusha Pentakota, Todd Tatum Attachments: None This memo outlines the consultant team's proposed method and assumptions that will be used to develop the City of Edmonds' Land Capacity Analysis' (LCA) for the Everyone Edmonds 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update. The method responds to the GMA targets for new jobs and housing and assumes minimum compliance with recently adopted Washington State legislation addressing the region's acute housing shortage: • House Bill 1110 (Increasing middle housing in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family residential detached housing) • House Bill 1337 (Expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units) • House Bill 1220 (Supporting emergency shelters and housing through local planning and development regulations.) This bill updates the housing goals of the Growth Management Act to include planning for and accommodating affordable housing. It requires jurisdictions to address moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income housing in the housing element of the comprehensive plan. It also requires jurisdictions to address racially disparate impacts and displacement in the housing element of the comprehensive plan Sections 1 and 2 of this Memo describe housing requirements. Employment targets are discussed in section 3. 1 Washington State defines the LCA as "a comparison between the collective effects of all development regulations operating on development and the assumed densities established in the land use element." The LCA is how the city measures the number of housing and jobs that would be accommodated by a growth alternative. Packet Pg. 45 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt The Memo is organized as follows: 1.0 Growth Management -Context ................................................................................................2 1.1 City of Edmonds Housing Targets..........................................................................................3 2.0 Housing Capacity Calculations - Closingthe Gap..............................................................6 2. 1 Lower Density Residential Areas............................................................................................7 2.2 Low -Rise and Mid -rise Multi -family Areas..............................................................................8 3.0 Jobs Capacity Overview..............................................................................................................9 3.1 Jobs Capacity and Land Use..................................................................................................10 3.2 Jobs Capacity and Remote and Hybrid Work.....................................................................10 1.0 Growth Management - Context The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70a) was created to contain urban growth and encourage sustainable development patterns. The stature growth is accommodated within the designated urban growth boundary; the State assigns population and job targets to counties, which are assigned to cities Cities must plan for adequate capacity to meet these targets. The Puget Sound Region is growing rapidly, and housingsupply has not kept pace with demand. This has led to a housing affordability crisis, displacement, homelessness, and hardship for many. Historic patterns of racial exclusion and inequity have also aggravated the crisis.Z,3 To address this, the WA state legislature passed a suite of bills that togetherreduce obstaclesto housing production — with a renewed focus on enabling the types of housing that tend to be more affordable.' These bills both modify the GMA and work in tandem with it. Each city must provide their fair share of housing and jobs capacity to meet the region'sgoal. Municipal Governments are now workingto understand how to apply these bills to their Comprehensive Plan updates. HB 1220 substantially amends the housing -related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA). It strengthened the GMA housing goal from "Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population" to "Plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state." It is also important to frame the context for growth. The Comprehensive Plan process is an opportunity to tailor how and where growth occurs to maximize community benefit, foster economic development and to increase quality of life. Tailored growth is critical to achieving the vision for Everyone's Edmonds and the actions outlined in the Edmonds' Climate Action Plan. Additional investment in housing choices and mixed land uses can make healthy lifestyles more feasible by bringing supporting services and 2 https://www.psrc.org/about-us/media-hub/new-report-shows-housing-region-continues-cost-too- much 3 https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/planning/housing/affordable-housing-background 4 https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/july-2023/major-changes-to-washington-housing-laws Packet Pg. 46 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt amenities closer to home and funding street, sidewalk, and park improvements to allow for walking and biking. Growth is also critical foreconomic development, supporting a thriving arts scene and increasing the number and health of local businesses. Additional tax revenue and impact fees can allow for more significant investments in city services. By increasing housing choice and affordability, growth can foster a more diverse and inclusive community. The Comprehensive Plan Goal is to distribute employment and housing equitably. In Edmonds, the City must consider applying this change to its ongoing assumptions about its existing capacity and the affordability level of its housing types — particularly in its single-family residential land use areas. 1.1 City of Edmonds Housing Targets Snohomish County's HO-5 Report (adopted May 2023)5 relates to the City of Edmonds' housing targets Edmonds has 19,000 housing units and a future land supply established in 2021 of 5,148 (see Figure 1).1 Future Land Supply Status Buildable Acres Single- Family Townhouses Multi- Family Senior Apartments Total Pending 17 49 15 561 0 625 Vacant 44 115 7 422 31 575 Partially Used 21 62 0 0 0 62 Redevelopable 231 -24 63 3,508 340 3,887 City 313 201 84 4,491 3711 5148 Figure 1. Source: The Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County report 2023 (HO 5 Report) In this planning cycle, to accommodate population growth, the City must increase its unit capacity by 3,921 for 9,069 housing units. These 9,069 units must be distributed according to the requirements and affordability levels designated in HB 1220 (see Figure 2). For each Snohomish County City, the HO-5 report provides a similar graph. Seven classifications are expressed as a percentage of the median income a household would have to make for housing to be affordable. Housing is considered "Affordable" when a family spends less than 30% of their income on rent or a mortgage. The units of housing that Edmonds must plan at each classification's affordability level are designated atthe top of the column. For more information, reference the HO-5 report, Section 4. a Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County Report prepared pursuant to Countywide Planning Policy HO-5 by The Planning Advisory Committee of Snohomish County Tomorrow May 2023 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/6039/Housing-Characteristics-and-Needs-Report 6 Snohomish County Buildable Lands Report (2021) see p. 9 httos://snohomishcountvwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/84919/Letter-to-Dept-of-Commerce--Snohomish- County-Buildable-Lands-Report?bid Id= Packet Pg. 47 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt The Department of Commerce translates these housing classification levels into building types. The Department of Commerce guidance also considers how these building types are impacted by the underlying cost of land with separate tables for "moderate cost communities" and "higher cost communities," helping to address disparities at the regional scale. The City of Edmonds falls into the "higher cost community" category due to the high average sale price for a "Moderate Density unit" (townhomes, duplex, triplex, quad) unit at> 120% AMI. Fifty of the most recent "Moderate Density" unit sales in Edmonds average an estimated $720,000, with no sales below $590,000.7 According to the Department of Commerce recommended Fannie Mae calculator, these sale prices would need to be below $400,000 to correspond to a rent or mortgage payment considered affordable at <120% AMI. Figure 3 describes housing types applicable to each income classification. The column titled "Zone Category" definesthe housing type or categories. In contrast, the column titled "Assumed Affordability Level for Capacity Analysis" describes the assumed affordability level of that housingtype to be used in a City's capacity assessment. Note that two rows do not currently apply to Edmonds. Per HB 1110, "Detached Single Family Homes;" in Edmonds are too populous to plan for this density level as a maximum within its residential areas. The second is High-Rise/Tower because Edmonds highest building height is 75' along Highway 99 (corresponding to Mid -Rise Multi -family). Method C: 2020-2044 Housing Allocations by Income, City of Edmonds (Apr-13-2023 PAC) 3 000 2.500 2000 1,500 1479 1000 500 142 126 0 0-30% Non-PSH 0-30% PSH >30-50% >So-so% >80-100% >100-120% >120% Percent Distribution: 21% 12% 1 27% 1 16% 22% 1 2% 1 1% (of2010-2044 Change) 32% Percent Distribution: 2% 1 0% 1 8% 1 18% 13% 1 20% 40% (of 2020 Housing Stock) 2% Figure 2. 2023 Housing Characteristics and Needs ReportAppendix G breaks down Edmonds' total housing capacity requirement 9,069 by affordability classification. See: 7 Costs are sourced from townhomes sold in Edmonds between March 2022 and January 2024, Redfin and realtors based in Edmonds with 47 data points. Metric is based on Department of Commerce guidance to reference the rents orsale prices of newly developed homes. Although these costs relative to area median income may decrease overthe 20-year horizon, this is considered by the Department of Commerce to be outside the scope of a Land Capacity Analysis. Vouchers and other ways to subsidize housing, although effectively increasing housing affordability, are also outside the scope of the Land Capacity Analysis. Packet Pg. 48 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt https.11snohomishcountywo. goy/DocumentCenter/View/108870/HO-5-Report--Combin ed-Appendices page G-6. Low Density Detached single family homes Higher income Not feasible at Higher income (>120% (>120%AMI) scale AMI) Moderate Density Townhomes, duplex, triplex, Higher income Not typically feasible Higher income (>120 % quadplex (>120 % AMI) at scale* AMI) Low -Rise Multifamily Walk-up apartments, condominiums Moderate Extremely low, Very income (>80- low, and Low-income Low income (0-80% (2-3-floors) 120 % AMI) (0-80 % AMI) AMI) and PSH Moderate Extremely low, Very Low income (0-80% Mid -Rise Multifamily Apartments, condominiums income (>80- low, and Low-income AMI) and PSH 120%AMI) (0-80%AMI) High-Rise/Tower Apartments, condominiums Higher income Moderate income Moderate income (>120%AMI) (>80-120%AMI) (>80-120%AMI) ADUs (all zones) ADUs on developed residential lots Moderate income (>80- N/A Moderate income (>80-120 % AMI) 120% AMI) Figure3. Department of Commerce Guidebook for Applying HB 1220 - Translating housing type to affordability level (for high cost communities) see: https.11www.commerce.wa.gov/serving- communitieslgrowth-mcinagementlgrowth-mancig men t-topics/planning-for-housing/upd atin q-gma- housing-elements/ Edmonds' designation as a "high -cost community" impacts the required allocation for types of housing units. When matched to income brackets shown in Figure 2, the housing capacity Edmonds must plan for is: • 6,814 units at the Low 0-80% AMI Income level - Low -Rise or Mid -Rise Multi -family, e.g. walk-up apartment buildings — this is the largest category of need in Edmonds. • 2,129 units at the Moderate <80-120%AMI Income level — these may be ADUs. • 126 units at the High -Income level - these may be Moderate Density (duplex, quad, triplex) Edmonds current supply comprises 5,148 units, of which 201 units are single-family detached, 84 units are Moderate Density (e.g., duplex, triplex, quad), and 4,862 units are Low-rise or Mid -Rise Multi -family (walk-up apartments), Note that ADUs were not assessed by the BLR.$ During the 2024 update cycle, the City of Edmonds must provide a net capacity change of the following as shown in Figure 4: • A net increase of at least 1,952 units in the low- or Mid -rise multi -family apartment category. • A net increase of at least 2,129 ADUs, or that are in the Low-rise or Mid -rise multi -family apartment category. 8 Buildable Lands Studies have not assessed the feasibility of ADUs, making this capacity that is effectively unaccounted for. As the City'sgrowth targets reference and build from the County's BLS, the Consultant team proposes to count all ADU capacity created through implementing HB 1337 legislation toward the ADU target. Packet Pg. 49 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt A net increase of at least 42 units that are Moderate density, ADUs, or in the Low-rise or Mid - rise multi -family apartment category. 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 Low -Mid Rise Apmts, Condos ■ Required Units 2129 126 ADUs Existing Capacity (BLR) Figure 4 Net capacity change by Housing type 2.0 Housing Capacity Calculations — Closing the Gap Townhornes, Duplex, Triplex, Quadplex Units To be added* There are two categories of land for which a net change in capacity will be calculated. The first is Edmonds' single-family/low-density Residential land use areas making up much of the City's land area, and the second is its denser multi -family and mixed -use land use areas. Under HB 1110 and 1337, single-family residential/low-density Residential land use area capacity assumptions must shift. Effectively, the State no longer allows one -family detached zoning. As such, Edmonds' single-family residential/low-density residential land use areas may be assumed to have the ability to (re)develop to any one of the following density scenarios: • two additional ADUs in attached or detached configurations • two units in any configuration • four units in any configuration if one unit is affordable, i.e., rented or purchase price restricted and limited to lower income tenants or purchasers These (re)development scenarios are not additive (i.e., a parcel need not have a minimum entitlement of two units in any configuration plus two ADUs). Rather, we assume each parcel has the potential to (re)develop to the minimum provisions of each Bill, but at a "realistic level" of participation by applying a) feasibility/market factors and b) a process that designates and screens out parcels unlikely to have redevelopment potential. A reduction factor has been included to account for potential "double counting" resulting from the interaction between the two calculation methods. Packet Pg. 50 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt Findings' related to local land value, recent real estate transactions, and likelihood/thresholds for (re)developmentguide assumptions aboutwhich and how many of each of the above (re)development scenarios are applicable and can contribute to assumed capacity. The Comprehensive Plan Action Alternatives and Draft Housing Element, now in process, will further modify these assumptions and the City's policy approach to promote particular types of housing growth. A policy framework that identifies and removes barriers to realizing the Land Capacity Analysis is also required per HB 1220. HB 1110 also provides that four units in any configuration are allowable by right in a low -density residential zone within a 1/4 mile of a defined "major transit stop." The City of Edmonds has two SWIFT BRT Stops on Hwy 99 and a Sounder Rail Station that qualify. Edmonds Sounder Rail Station area contains no parcels that would be affected, and the Hwy 99 stop area includes 70 parcels that would be affected. 2. 1 Lower Density Residential Areas Method and Assumptions for calculating a new capacity — ADUs: 1. Identify all single-family residential land use designated parcels. 2. Conduct Screening based on the Buildable Land Report (BLR) and Department of Commerce Guidance: o Remove environmentally critical areas (as designated in 2021 Snohomish County BLR). o Remove publicly owned and tax-exempt parcels (as identified in BLR, such as schools, parks, and churches). 3. Conduct high-level feasibility screening; remove parcels with less than 6,000 SF11 of buildable area remaining after deducting environmentally critical areas. 4. Apply capacity of two (2) ADUs on remaining parcels (minimum allowed per HB 1337). 5. Reduce the capacity of resultant ADUs by 90% by applying the 10% maximum "participation rate." The Department of Commerce has set this rate and accounts for feasibility considerations not already captured by this method, as well as a reasonable upper limit of the ratio of property owners who would be interested in redevelopment. Method and Assumptions for calculating a new capacity assumption - Moderate Density (duplex, triplex, quad) capacity: 1. Identify Single Family land use areas. 2. Conduct Screening based on BLR and Department of Commerce Guidance: o Remove environmentally critical areas (as designated in 2021 Snohomish County BLR) o Remove publicly owned and tax-exempt parcels (as identified in BLR, such as schools, parks, and churches) 3. Conduct feasibility screening: Remove parcels with less than 4,000 SF of buildable area 9 Forum Placemaking (consultant) market research 10 Assumed effective lot area needed to add two ADUs to a parcel with an existing principal structure, retaining reasonable lot coverage and tree retention restrictions. Lot area needed to add one ADU is assumed to be within the margin of the participation rate, and how specific development regulations would affect feasibility. Packet Pg. 51 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt remaining" 4. Remove parcels with an existing land value exceeding $450,000.12 5. Apply capacity of two (2) units for each remaining parcel (e.g. duplex). 6. Subtract existing units.13 7. Reduce capacity by 5%14. This factor accounts for any unique interactions between site conditions, market, and development regulations that hinder site feasibility. 2.2 Low -Rise and Mid-rise15 Multi -family Areas The following outlines the method to calculate a net capacity change within existing Multi -family and Mixed -Use areas. The method distinguishes between areas that are proposed for change in Action Alternatives and Low-rise and Mid -Rise multi -family areas that will not be affected by Action Alternatives. The methodology follows these general steps: • For parcels without change in a proposed land use alternative, apply capacity assumptions in the BLR. For parcels where a change is proposed, and there is already current capacity assumed in the BLR, identify net capacity changes by removing existing capacity and adding "ideal proposed capacity" building from market research related to the new land use designation (see tables 2 and 3 following). A "net capacity" change will count toward closing the capacity gap. For parcels where a change is proposed and no current capacity is assumed in the BLR, confirm if the change would make redevelopment feasible. If so, assume an "ideal proposed capacity." If not, use the current BLR assumption of zero capacity. Edmonds' Market Studies have been conducted to provide the following development feasibility thresholds and yields associated with Low-rise and Mid -rise multi -family development. Figure 5 below shows the assumed density yield associated with multi -family (re)development by building height. Height limit can be used to approximate density yield on a D/U basis. Figure 6 shows assumed thresholds forthe maximum parcel purchase price that could be feasibly re -developed to the associated height. Figure 5 — Assumed DU/Acre by Height _ Floors DU/Ac. "Assumed minimum area to achieve a redevelopment of the principal structure to duplex, accounting for reasonable lot coverage and tree retention restrictions. 12 Parcels over $450,000 are screened from the capacity calculation. These parcels are assumed to be beyond the threshold forfeasibility, e.g. land cost is too expensive to allow for redevelopment to duplex per consultant economic research. 13 This step assumesthe ability to create a duplex by either removing an existing single-family home and building a duplex or expanding or dividing an existing single-family home. 14 Consultant's professional judgment 15 Low-rise and Mid -rise classification for the Apartments and condos is an intensity classification, not construction type. Packet Pg. 52 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt 3 36 4 70 5 109 6 140 (Source: Consultant Market Economic Research, Forum Placemaking). Figure 6— Feasibility Threshold Floors $/SF 3 <$34 4 <$57 5 <$80 6 <$103 (Source: Consultant Market Economic Research, Forum Placemaking) Low-rise and Mid -rise Multi -family Method and Assumptions: 1. Identify Eligible Land Use Areas: o Currently, multi -family or mixed -use properties are being redesignated in away to impact future capacity significantly. o Land use area not currently designated multi-family/mixed-use, redesignated to an eligible multi -family and mixed -use type. 2. Subtract capacity associated with proposed land use designation changes may reduce development capacity from what is assumed by the BLR. 3. Conduct screening: o Remove environmentally critical areas (as designated in 2021 Snohomish County BLR). o Remove publicly owned and tax-exempt parcels (identified in BLR, not countable toward capacity per BLR and Department of Commerce guidance). 4. For areas with development potential identified per the BLR, apply density yield assumptions corresponding to the proposed height limit (Figure 5). 5. For areas designated as not re -developable per the BLR, apply a threshold test to confirm if the parcel may become re -developable under the new designation (Figure 6). If it becomes re - developable, apply density yield assumptions (Figure 5). 3.0 Jobs Capacity Overview Edmonds must provide a total capacity of 3,058jobs. The Snohomish County Tomorrow steering committee set the growth target and now exists in the Snohomish County Code. The city must provide capacity to meet this target to comply with state growth management statutes. Per the Snohomish County Buildable Lands Study, Edmonds has an existing capacity for 2,548jobs. Therefore, Edmonds must show a net addition in capacity for 510 jobs for the 2024-2044 planning period. A combination of two factors will meet this net new capacity. The first is calculating the change in capacity associated with proposed land use changes. This is discussed in section 3.1. The second is calculating the difference in capacity not associated with land use — that is, adequate capacity associated with workingfrom home. This is discussed in section 3.2. Due to the large job capacity created this way, land use policy decisions regarding employment (includingthe future land use map from which zoning Packet Pg. 53 7.A.b PERKI NS EASTMAt will be derived) will be driven by the city's economic development goals rather than meeting capacity requirements. The actual capacity change of a proposed future land use alternative will be calculated by combining the net capacity change from future land use changes described in section 3.1 and the remote and hybrid work strategy described in section 3.2. 3.1 Jobs Capacity and Land Use The method for calculating job capacity, much like the method for calculating housing capacity, starts with assumed capacity per the Buildable Lands Report (BLR). Then, for parcels where a change in future land use is identified, a change in net jobs capacity is calculated for those parcels if they are considered (re)developable. For more information on how a parcel is considered (re)developable and therefore countable toward capacity, please see section 2.2 of this memo. Ground floor retail is assumed to accommodate 10jobs per acre for capacity associated with low-rise and mid -rise re -development. This figure is based on the yield of recent local mixed -use developments. 3.2 Jobs Capacity and Remote and Hybrid Work Supporting work from home is a critical part of Edmonds' growth strategy, accomplishing multiple objectives, including encouraging sustainable transportation, supporting local businesses, and growing vibrant neighborhood centers. As local amenities and quality of life increase, a segment of Edmonds residents will continue to choose hybrid and remote work in the coming decades. There are twofactors that contribute to employment capacity created through remote work. The first is employment capacity effectively created — and filled - by remote workers as new residents move to Edmonds. The second is current work from home capacity that has not yet been accounted for in growth planning. The population of Edmonds is expected to grow by more than 13,000 between 2020 and 2044. Edmonds labor participation rate is assumed to be 60%, similar to the current statewide average of 65% (It is assumed to be lower due to the relatively large proportion of retirees). This implies that the number of employed Edmonds residents is expected to grow by more than 7,800 over the next two decades. Considering the current trends, many new residents will work from home. Figure 8: Employment growth by demographic trends Population growth, 2020-2044 13,113 Labor Participation Rate 60% Growth in the number of employed Edmonds Residents, 2020- 2044 7,868 Source: Labor Participation Rate: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, https.Ilfred.stlouisfed. orq/seriesILBSNSA53 Packet Pg. 54 7.A.b Work from home rates vary widely across the country. Large metro areas with high employment rates in professional and technology fields, such as Puget Sound, Portland, and the San Francisco Bay Area, have high rates of remote work. In contrast, smaller cities and rural areas have low rates of remote work. Figure 9: Share of workers age 16- Source: Economic Innovation Grou - U.S. Census Bureau; https.Ileig.( PERKI NS EASTMAt <6.9% 6.9%-9.9% N 9.9%-13.2% N 13.2%-17.1% 0 17.1%-21.9% N 21.9%-28.8% 2:29.8% f VSn ounty Edmonds, Mountlake s PUMA: -hare WFH: 25.346974142255597% L In 2022, data from the American Community Survey (ACS) / U.S. Census Bureau indicated that 25.3% of workers in the Edmonds area were working from home or working remotely. Assuming contingencies and changes in trends, we assume that work from home rates in the future (2044) will be about 20%, down from 25% today. According to the Economic Innovation Group, "[ACS] data shows remote work is stable over the last year [2021 to 20221, and if anything, has increased slightly. There is no sign that return -to -office is gaining steam on a national scale." Packet Pg. 55 CONCEPTUAL GROWTH ALTERNATIVES March 6, 2024 7.A.c y Packet Pg. 57 Creating 15-minute neighborhoods Most daily necessities and services can be easily reached by a 15-minute walk, bike ride, or public transit ride. It emphasizes mixed land use, pedestrian -friendly infrastructure, and efficient public transportation systems to create vibrant and livable urban environments. To support mobility for people, not just vehicles; the city is moving towards implementing Multi -modal Level of Service (M M LOS). By incorporating MMLOS, Edmonds can better prioritize investments in transportation infrastructure, promote sustainable and equitable transportation options, and enhance the overall quality of life for residents and visitors • Offices Walk/ bike facilities Daily Needs, Amenities s v � Outdoor faci I ities Schools Open Spaces Businesses Activity spaces Community spaces for events & gathering 7.A.c Services ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I I Packet Pg. 58 _ CU a m N _ CL E 0 tU N d CU L a� a 3 0 c� d m J x �a 0 M c N s a c E a E "Centers" 8 • vision • PI-, C r% I r% ^ ll T I r% r% r "Centers" Existing Attributes 1. Potential for redevelopment (underutilized) to meet community goals + enhance public realm 2. Location has retail and other commercial businesses. 3. Moderate scale existing multifamily residential land uses 4. Potential for good multimodal access with existing transit service "Hubs" Existing Attributes 1. Potential for redevelopment (underutilized) to meet community goals + enhance public realm 2. Smaller scale, includes some mixed land uses, e.g. retail or commercial businesses 3. May include low rise apartments or missing middle housing 4. Potential for good multimodal access with ...•••. Bus Transit Routes existing transit service Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Hub ---------------------------------------------- Perrinville� :; North Bowl ,E 3• ........ ................(�. Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Cent r Five Corners Westgate .�'......�:'���'•.. Firdale North (%; Firdale Village East Seaviei TEMP Highwa Subare Discussed at Neighborhood meetings in December 2023. Packet Pg. 59 5 EDMN, Growth Alternatives will: Prntntvr Explore adjustments to land use designations to introduce 3-4 floors mixed use, mid -rise residential as appropriate. Explore Five floor mixed -use with incentives. Low Scale M ulti- family Apartments or condominiums (2-3 floors) Low Scale Apartments or condominiums (w/ Mixed -Use retail/commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations) (3-4 floors) Mid Scale M ixed- Apartments or condominiums w/ Use retail/commercial/offices ground floor in select locations (4-5 floors) 9, r-I -� 0& JIW- r P7 L 7.A.c ------------------------------------------ City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 60 a m .N c a� L Q- °aL s EDM�N P rntntvr Growth Alternatives will: Explore land use changes to enable a more diverse land use mix, with some smaller scale retail, and residential 3 floors. • Explore four floors mixed -use with incentives. Low Scale Multi- Apartments or condominiums (2-3 floors) family Low Scale M ixed-Use Apartments or condominiums (w/ retail/commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations) (3-4 floors) MIC 7.A.c ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 61 7.A.c Q Packet Pg. 62 °aL s EDM�N r-I 11 11 7.A.c w City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 63 -E EVERY�N r Vision PI 40 Ah An This alternative is non -compliant with Washington State Growth Management Act requirements. Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Transit Routes Bus Stop • •� High Capacity BRT Route — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center _ R IL .y _ Olyp*k V � LO E O U to > L rt+ s 3� O 0 d qq J Main St. r: M 212th St. e � a M _ 2Mh A C i = m � � 2L Highway Q e 22sth sr Subarea c - II E v Q Packet Pg. 64 Alternative AVVisio, • PI 'oceFocused Grc Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Neighborhood Center Mid -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ 4-5 Floors commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations Neighborhood Hub Low -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ 2-3 Floors commercial/ offices on ground floor in select locations Medical District Expansion 4-5 Floors 15 Minute Neighborhoods Most daily necessities and services can be easily -3/4 Mile reached by a 15-minute walk, bike ride, or transit from any point in the neighborhood. Transit Oriented Housing pyn,picView D►.; ............., .,. Downtown/ Waterfront Medical District Activity Center, Expansion --- ---------- Five Corners Main Stti.,, .. ..i . .. _ q .• 22mh St. -- Westgate h St.'. Transit Routes connecting the Centers and Hubs . --—————————————— — — — — —— 4 Bus Stop } ■■y • High Capacity BRT Route Firdale Village I 7.A.c a m N c Q a E 0 U a Q Q s . w. . 3• C7 �,• J • � 2 Highwa ' Subarei y 0 Q E U -- a 1 Packet Pg. 65 7 ernative 7.A.c EDMONpS Distributed Growth a m Neighborhood Residential01ypic view a) (Housing Bills Compliance) Perrinvillef m a Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, E 0 quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, U cottage style and courtyard apartments -- v, North Bowl W Neighborhood Center East Seavie, L '. 11 .. it Mid -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ 3-4 Floors „6t,� = '111a .. a commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations s ; Downtown/ 3 Neighborhood Hub Waterfront Medical District ;' 0 Activity Center �.: Expansion Low -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ 3-4 Floors - �': ------- commercial/ offices on ground floor in select locations ^' Five Corners J nwinsrti.. ........ ...,..i■ Medical District Expansion 3-4 Floors ". ............. 15 Minute Neighborhoods M Highwa Most daily necessities and services can be easily 22Mhn subaree '-3/4 Mile reached by a 15-minute walk, bike ride, or transit from E any point in the neighborhood. Westgate Q Transit Oriented Housing hn• E Transit Routes connecting the Centers and Hubs - Q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Bus Stop Firdale North ' + • High Capacity BRT Route ... Packet Pg. 66 Firdale Village °aL s EDM�N 7.A.c e Afti� \ ■ rAft I A& A: Focused Growth Areas of Change Majority of residential capacity is allocated to create vibrant, mixed use "Neighborhood Centers." Neighborhood Commercial shifts to Mixed -Use Residential. Centers expand in areas of limited impact. • Introduce opportunity for targeted capacity to create smaller mixed residential Neighborhood Hubs at a moderate scale 01I1[W B: Distributed Growth • Moderate increase in capacity in Neighborhood Centers, centers do not expand. • Growth is distributed more broadly within the City. Moderate increase in capacity in Neighborhood hubs Housing Typologies • Mixed -Use Residential introduce max 5 Mixed -Use Residential introduce max 4 floors (4 floors base with 1 bonus floor) floors (3 floors base with 1 bonus floor) within all identified Neighborhood Centers within Neighborhood Centers • Mixed -Use and Multi -family (2-3 floors) Mixed -Use and Multi -family (3-4 floors) within Neighborhood Hubs within Neighborhood Hubs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 67 ���� 5 EDM0N, 0ATAIS [OR 1 N IZAM I I I:I I@ F:11 \TLVZOS I I I [in = Areas of Change Alt A. Focused Growth (units) Centers 1600 Hubs 200 Medical Center Expansion 1000-1200 TOTAL 2700-3000 Pcrrinwillc R% Fact RMnIAG\A/ Firda North Bo East Seavi( 18% Perrinville, 11% Firdale North, 15% North Alt B: Distributed Growth (units) 1000-1200 2700-3000 7.A.c Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Metrics are approximate, conceptual onlyand subject to change with further study. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan update I I Packet Pg. 68 E 0 U °aL s EDM�N, 1. Be consistent with the GMA, PSRC Vision 2050, and Snohomish County countywide planning policies 2. Implement State Housing Bills 3. Create opportunities for the City to achieve Community's vision Am • Edmonds is a charming and welcoming city offering outstanding quality of life for all with vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe streets, parks, and a thriving arts scene shaped in a way to promote healthy lifestyles, climate resiliency, and access to the natural beauty of our community." 7.A.c ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 69 7.A.c y Packet Pg. 70 °aL s EDMON Ir�1Ti11'�1req Opportunityto leverage Edmonds Creative Arts District status: • Incentivize "Live -work" land uses along Dayton Street and Arts Corridor. • Live -work spaces can vary in scale from mixed - use developments with residential units above ground -floor shops to smaller home offices or studios. • They are proposed to be flexible to accommodate a range of business types, including creative industries, professional services, and artisanal production. Single Family Residential Multi -family Housing Commercial W, Downtown Core Retail Arts Corridor Bus Stop ■MP City Park I Arts Corridor Live -work 7.A.c (3 Floors) Multi-famil, (3 Floors) a m Civic Field N W L Edmonds Library Q and Francis Anderson p Center () Main St. Dayton St.. Dayton St. Live -work (3 Floors) Multi -family (3 Floors) Packet Pg. 71 1 °aL s EDMON Ir�1Ti11'�1req Opportunityto support Downtown's vibrancy • Downtown population supports a variety of businesses and services, including shops, restaurants, and cultural institutions. • Edmonds' downtown is already a 15-minute neighborhood. By adding more multi -family adjacent to existing multi -family uses, more residents can easily access amenities and services, leading to improved public health outcomes and a higher quality of life. • The plan is exploring expansion of multi -family land uses near City Park and along Wh Avenue. Single Family Residential Multi -family Housing Commercial W, Downtown Core Retail Arts Corridor Bus Stop ■MP City Park I Arts Corridor Live -work 7.A.c (3 Floors) Multi-famil, (3 Floors) a m Civic Field N W L Edmonds Library Q and Francis Anderson p Center () Main St. Dayton St.. Dayton St. Live -work (3 Floors) Multi -family (3 Floors) Packet Pg. 72 1 • I •I• Oro rW I Opportunityto encourage better transitions into residential neighborhoods • Explore a strategy of shifting heights within the subarea plan boundary to enable a transition zone. • It entails increasing the heights allowance for the land parcels adjacent to Highway 99 from 75' to 85' and reducing the maximum heights for the parcels beyond Highway 99 adjacency to 55'. • This will not impact the net growth capacity of Highway 99 subarea but create better design outcomes for the residential areas next to the subarea. Highway 99 Subarea Plan Boundary Max Ht - 75' Transit Oriented Housing 4 Housing units on parcels within 1/4 mile radius of BRT Stop 212th St. Variable heights ~-J within subarea ` boundary to create / transition zone r x I 1 r—a I � • I j I 1 I I I l O Packet Pg. 73 VERY�NE'S E � r r .. . Vision PI No Action Neighborhood Residential i (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments I { Existing: 3 - 4 floors I A. • e A _ Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School • Bus Stops Alt A: Focused Growth 22BI IN 7.A.c C . a Alt 6: Distributed Growth Q. E O U C1 EXPANSION: Enable 4 floors mixed -use Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --———————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I I Packet Pg. 74 -E EVERY�N r Plan Nei .Vision . No Action Neighborhood Residential i (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments �: Alt A: Focused Growth Existing: 3 floors (25'+) \ all Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops Enable 5 floors :AR911 2 [: Alt 6: Distributed Growth Enable 4 floors 7.A.c E O U 212thSt. 212thSt. . 212th St. dl owr ] C EXPANSION: Enable 3 EXPANSION: Enable 4 _ £ floors multi -family / floors multi -family mixed- s mixed -use use i Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and < subject to change with further study. • — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update Packet Pg. 75 1 -E EVERY�N r r � . vision � F� "ndical Ll No Action Neighborhood Residential i (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Existing: 3 floors (25'+) Medical Uses Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops ore I a R"01 10 Alt A: Focused Growth EXPANSION: Enable _ Fnahle 5 floors Alt 6: Distributed Growth EXPANSION: Enable 4 floors mixed -use FYI 7.A.c Enable 4 floors IF " VW a:- CL E O U L 220th St. IOfh St. E L ESPERANCEJ _T - I CU V r EXPANSION :Enable EXPANSION :Enable a 3 floors multi -family 4 floors mixed -use --------------------------------------------------------- Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update Packet Pg. 76 subject to change with further study. 7.A.c EDM00 DD -Sr No Action Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments k Existing: 3 floors (25'+) Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School • Bus Stops 14001014 Alt A: Focused Growth Enable 3 floors multi -family / mixed -use a ri i A �. FIRDALE VILLAGE: Enable 5 floors 0 Enable 4 floors multi -family / mixed -use a FIRDALE VILLAGE: Enable 5 floors •[:1[: IL m — Alt 6: Distributed Growth U) a E O U N d EXPANSION: Enable 3 floors multi -family - -- -; Q s 3 0 C7 m J L to x 0 M C d E -- _ t V Q r•+ C O E s �a w r Q ---------------------------------------------------------- Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update Packet Pg. 77 subject to change with further study. -E EVERY�N r r � vlslon ri No Action FNeighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments I. Existing: 3 floors (25'+) vl� 196th St. L:! Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School — - — Bus Stops i7i►C�Tii7owl 70 Alt A: Focused Growth Enable 3 floors multi -family / mixed -use = E� Alt 6: Distributed Growth Enable 4 floors multi -family / mixed use V Q E v a 7.A.c E O U 196th St. / :3 `--- $ Q L i r EXPANSION: Enable 3 floors d multi -family / mixed -use r Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. • — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 78 5 ODMON a 10121 0I0] 1210ISIS No Action FNeighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops e7M Alt A: Focused Growth Enable 3 floors multi -family / mixed -use 0 d .Q E Ah Alt 6: Distributed Growth Enable 4 floors mixed-,1- a 7.A.c Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --—————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 79 G L 5 EDMONp a101210I0]0210ISIO No Action FNeighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Existing: 3 floors (25'+) Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops emW: Alt A: Focused Growth Fnahla '3 flnnrc miilti-family / :r:ILYi1Alk : 7.A.c w (Temp) a m Alt B: Distributed Growth - Enable 4 floors m 196th St. Enable 3 floors multi -family E mixed -use r Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 80 5 EDMOND i.rpI,.Fl Capz Areas of Change Centers Hubs Medical Center Expansion TOTAL Firda North Bo •1111•Y. Alt A: Focused Growth (units) me� ' 1000-1200 2700-3000 Pcrrinwilic R% Fact RMnIAG\A/ Alt A: Focused Growth • East Seavi( 18% Perrinville, 11% Firdale North, 15% North Alt B: Distributed Growth (units) 1000-1200 2700-3000 Alt B: Distributed Growth 7.A.c ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Metrics are approximate, conceptual onlyand subject to change with further study. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan update I I Packet Pg. 81 QUESTIONS ? COMMENTS?. Email us @ everyonesedmonds@edmondswa.gov For more updates, visit edmondswa.gov/everyonesedmonds 10.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/27/2024 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 N/A Attachments: March 27 Extended Agenda updated Packet Pg. 83 10.A.a Planning Board Extended Agenda - March 27, 2024 O ci —�i 6 rl V N LL V ci LL 0o N C L ko G M ci G r� N Q O ci Q V N C L oo G N N N ci —3i 6 N -3i O ci V N Q V ci Q oo N 'n ci ci fn u1 N O a) O ro N > O Z A ci > O Z r� N u Ul 0 ci ci u 01 LA N Comprehensive Plan High Level Alternatives D/R D/R Joint Discussion w/EDC D/R Final Review Draft Alternatives D/R Transportation and Land Use D/R Draft Preferred Plan and Policy D/R Final Plan and Policy I I D/R Code Updates Critical Aquifer Recharge D/R Tree Code Update D/R Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (HB 1337 - mid 2025) D/R D/R PH D/R 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 Middle Housing (HB 1110 - mid 2025) 1 Design standards and processes (HB 1293 - mid 2025), including multfamily design standards 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 B- Briefing/Q&A R- Report with no briefing/presentation Regular meeting cancelled Future Items MumNeighborhood Center Plans Code Modernization Projects: 1. Unified Development Code (late 2025) Comp Plan Implementation Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Packet Pg. 84